Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By your own definition, you do not. You stated that the word homophobic encompassed far more than distaste. I do not feel that homosexuality will lead to the downfall of anything. I said nothing about children. I said homosexuality simply turns me of. Do you have anything that sexually turns you off? Is that then a "phobia"? The word phobia has certain connotations and you damn well know it. You've simply come up with another hate word, just as you accepting, open-minded types always do.
Your attitude is one of conformity and the lack of willingness to allow any diversity of thought at all... unless that though is in agreement with you. That sounds far more childish to me. And as always... your GRAND finale, as it always is with you open-minded thinker types, is to insult others. That's all you have. Insults. Other than that, only an crisping, brittle, empty shell blows across the desolate, parched desert landscapes within.
It's really unfortunate but some of the gay movement have minds as closed as those they oppose, and are just as willing to deny others the rights they demand for themselves as those who are opposed to gays and gay marriage. Then again, that's a problem with many movements, which in their righteousness collectively decide that those that oppose them do not deserve the consideration that they demand for themselves.
Sometimes it really makes me worry for the future of this country. Luckily those persons tend to be very much a minority, if a vocal one. Luckily, most of the gay community that I am familiar with simply want to be able to live their lives as they choose and are not out to dictate other people's lives or thought patterns. That why I think ultimately they will be granted marriage rights. Pretty sure the "professional protester" types will not be satisfied with people having the ability to opt-out due to their beliefs or whatever, but that's going to be life.
It's really unfortunate but some of the gay movement have minds as closed as those they oppose, and are just as willing to deny others the rights they demand for themselves as those who are opposed to gays and gay marriage. Then again, that's a problem with many movements, which in their righteousness collectively decide that those that oppose them do not deserve the consideration that they demand for themselves.
I haven't been following the thread recently so I apologize if you've already answered this, but what rights do you feel some in the gay movement are seeking for themselves yet while at the same time seeking to deny to anti-gay bigots? And which people or factions in the gay movement are seeking this type of discrimination?
It's really unfortunate but some of the gay movement have minds as closed as those they oppose, and are just as willing to deny others the rights they demand for themselves as those who are opposed to gays and gay marriage. Then again, that's a problem with many movements, which in their righteousness collectively decide that those that oppose them do not deserve the consideration that they demand for themselves.
I agree with you completely. And that is what my hyperbolic rant was pointing out. But some people can't find a message if it jumps out of the page and bites them on the nose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by npaladin2000
Sometimes it really makes me worry for the future of this country. Luckily those persons tend to be very much a minority, if a vocal one. Luckily, most of the gay community that I am familiar with simply want to be able to live their lives as they choose and are not out to dictate other people's lives or thought patterns. That why I think ultimately they will be granted marriage rights. Pretty sure the "professional protester" types will not be satisfied with people having the ability to opt-out due to their beliefs or whatever, but that's going to be life.
As I stated, I oppose all marriage in any form, when sanctioned by the state.
But I agree with you in principle. As I mentioned earlier, the act of homosexuality turns me off. But, I in no way hold any ill feelings toward gay people. Everyone should be allowed to seek their own destiny whether I or anyone else agrees with them, disagrees with them, or is turned on or off by their actions. I simply believe in "live and let live." But that is NEVER enough for an activist. An activist wants to take a cause, wave it as a banner in everyones' faces, and then jam that banner down everyones' throats. They are not content to live and let live. They insist that the way they live be displayed like Kim Kardashian's ass.
It's just my belief that civil rights is not a high school popularity contest. The majority should never have the right to take away the rights of a minority. At one point in time same-sex couple in California could get legally married, correct? When it comes to civil rights, I do not believe in "the tyranny of the majority." Civil marriage is a civil right.
Wrong. California has never legislated through its Assembly or Senate, nor through the initiative process, the legality of same sex marriage. If any are taking place, it because of court orders, which have overturned the will of the people.
I haven't been following the thread recently so I apologize if you've already answered this, but what rights do you feel some in the gay movement are seeking for themselves yet while at the same time seeking to deny them to anti-gay bigots? And which people or factions in the gay movement are seeking this type of discrimination?
Apparently all gays out there are mere victims of their biology and those persons out there who have changed orientation are merely lying to themselves and everyone they know, etc etc.
Not getting into the part where a small percentage (probably 0.001%) would actually try to sue NY Jew and force him to violate his (screwed up) beliefs and participate in their marriage ceremony. There are probably some of those too, but as I mentioned, they wouldn't get very far in court when he refused.
It's unfortunate but there's always a "militant" faction on both sides of an issue that's disproportionately loud for their small numbers, and disproportionately unreasonable in their demands. Luckily, real life generally ignores them. Which is why they show up on the Internet instead.
You are not looking to protect rights, you are striving to prevent us from getting our rights, rights that you get automatically for just being straight. It is who, not whom.
Another mischaracterization.
What rights are you being denied, and how am I depriving you of them?
The gay army can never adequately answer this question, because doing so requires an entire abandonment of logic and common sense.
Clark Park is not wrong. At one point same-sex couples in California could get legally married. Specifically, they could from June 16, 2008 until November 5, 2008. The roughly 36,000 gay Californians who got married during that period are in fact still legally married.
Apparently all gays out there are mere victims of their biology and those persons out there who have changed orientation are merely lying to themselves and everyone they know, etc etc.
Not getting into the part where a small percentage (probably 0.001%) would actually try to sue NY Jew and force him to violate his (screwed up) beliefs and participate in their marriage ceremony. There are probably some of those too, but as I mentioned, they wouldn't get very far in court when he refused.
It's unfortunate but there's always a "militant" faction on both sides of an issue that's disproportionately loud for their small numbers, and disproportionately unreasonable in their demands. Luckily, real life generally ignores them. Which is why they show up on the Internet instead.
Huh? That really didn't address my question regarding the claim you made. Again, what rights do you feel some in the gay movement are seeking for themselves yet while at the same time seeking to deny them to anti-gay bigots, and which people or factions in the gay movement are seeking this type of discrimination?
Ok so what is your beef then? You want to hammer home the point that HIV/AIDS afflicts gay men more proportianetly than straights? Check you are right. My point is, in absolute terms, more straight people worldwide are afflicted with the disease than gays - it's a numbers game. So as other posters have mentioned - it is a human disease. I can't believe you would disagree with this!!??
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew
you added a key word I don't think anybody in world would agree to
I'm not watering things down you didn't understand what I said the first times
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
