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.
1. It's never been proven that sexual orientation is an inborn trait. If this were the case, we should see identical twins both become gay. Studies show it doesn't happen. If it is not changeable, why do a lot of lesbians have history of male partners, or people flip flop between bisexual desires?
2. Fine, give them equal rights and benefits via a civil union. Why the need to redefine a tradition that is tied closely to religious beliefs?
3. Gay marriage will affect everyone in society. We will be accepting a new society that no longer regards the Bible as holy and true.
Question for you.
What determines someone to be right handed or left handed?
Answer;" their is no definitive answer as it has never been proven to be genetic or an inborn trait".
See where I am going with this? Also on the twins issue, there are cases of identical twins, where one is gay the other is not. Both raised in the same environment, the same way, would pretty much exclude the environment or childhood rearing theory.
We may never know what causes anyone to be gay or straight, but really who cares? What difference does it make?
Who ever said everyone in this country has to regard the Bible as holy and true? Especially since there is not much scientific proof saying so?
1. It's never been proven that sexual orientation is an inborn trait. If this were the case, we should see identical twins both become gay. Studies show it doesn't happen. If it is not changeable, why do a lot of lesbians have history of male partners, or people flip flop between bisexual desires?
2. Fine, give them equal rights and benefits via a civil union. Why the need to redefine a tradition that is tied closely to religious beliefs?
3. Gay marriage will affect everyone in society. We will be accepting a new society that no longer regards the Bible as holy and true.
1. It's not a simple choice either. At no point in my life did I just choose to be straight. It just kind of happens. As to why gay people have opposite sex partners, there could be a million reasons. Fear perhaps? People seem to think it's ok to judge gay people; it would certainly keep people from being open and desperately trying to be straight.
2. Why can't we redefine it? Because "I don't like it" isn't an actual reason.
3. You foolish man. The Bible isn't regarded by holy and true for everyone and that's been the case for centuries. There are Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and however many religions you can think of that care nothing of what the bible says. Society has always been this way. I know you probably think Jesus wrote the constitution as right wing propaganda seems to like to suggest, but this is historically inaccurate.
If Simon LeVay's conclusions were absolute, this would not be the very first time I'd have heard of him or his work.
Or maybe you were to young? You also have to consider the enormous disregard for any empirical information that comes about concerning such a volatile, cutting issue, particularly back in the 90's or earlier regarding this crucial fact. The phobic media was in denial, and also understands the potential tidal wave that it could instigate with such a story, and furthermore, you have to consider the critical consequences the phobes would have to deal with, if LeVay's facts were not dismissed despite all the evidence. If it were revealed that sexual orientation is not a choice, then homosexuals would be entitled to ALL the equal protections under the law nationally, everywhere, with ALL accommodations which they would be entitled to. If the facts are not ignored, or not revealed, then out of sight, out of mind, thus, it does not exist. While it was discussed years ago, there were critics, many of which who weren't even qualified, dismissed LeVays impressive credentials, and manipulated the facts. When the evidence was discussed by LeVay regarding the differences in the brains of heterosexuals and homosexuals, on talk shows or other news media programs, despite the evidence the critics would write it off as irrelevant, or exclaim that maybe there was something else in the subjects past that would cause a man to have a brain closer in structure to a females than a males. The truth of the matter was, the homophobic media didn't care whether sexual orientation was organic or not.
The media is still too powerful, and selective as to what they choose to pursue, and what they choose to ignore, and what they know they "need" to ignore. For example, it was OK to turn the Trayvon Martin case into a national spectacle, but what about all the other race related brutal attacks, and murders that took place, around the same time, many of these incidents which could have been played out even more dramatically. The media knows, that exposing the reality that gays are victims, sometimes to an extreme, is a bit more than the national news wants to take on, particularly with a conservative majority bent on such irrational hatred.
It's getting pretty old to insist sexual orientation is a choice anyway. Anybody with common sense can figure out, that nobody would choose to be gay. Furthermore, the case regarding botched circumcision sexual reassignment also proves my point.
One of the most useful aspects of a thread like this is how well it demonstrates to those who would otherwise deny it that there are many among them simply unwilling to live and let live in society, and instead remain intent on inflicting their own beliefs and values on others. There can be no denying, after a thousand posts, that there are indeed some people are intent on antisocial insistence on marginalizing and disenfranchising those people who don't subscribe to their own religion.
"Sex change operations" cannot change every cell with XY chromosomes into a cell with XX chromosomes, nor change every cell with XX chromosomes into a cell with XY chromosomes...
Okay. So?
Quote:
You should have every right in the country to refuse service to me on the grounds that you oppose me being married to a woman... or even if you want to discriminate a bit more... on the grounds that you oppose me being married to a fat woman. Hey, if you don't want my money because my wife is fat, that's your loss, not mine. And that's the way it ought to be from homosexuals. "If you don't want my money because my spouse is the same gender as I am, that's your loss, not mine!"...
This us already the case. A business owner can refuse service to any segment of the population he or she chooses, or refuse service arbitrarily to any individual that strikes them as someone they do not want to conduct business with for whatever reason.
Quote:
Why is my choice to oppose gay marriage less deserving of free-speech protection rights than liberals' choice to support gay marriage?
It's not less deserving, nor should it be. You can think or say what you want and conduct business (or not) with whomever you want.
The remainder of your post is simply more of the same tired, baseless remarks you have made and been discredited on scores of times on this thread already. Same sex marriage will lead to bestiality and the acceptance of pedophilia, the Bible is real whether you believe it or not and if you don't believe, your soul will be punished eternally, if we don't use The Bible as the absolute standard of morals in this nation, we are lost, and blahblahblah yaddayaddayadda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
One of the most useful aspects of a thread like this is how well it demonstrates to those who would otherwise deny it that there are many among them simply unwilling to live and let live in society, and instead remain intent on inflicting their own beliefs and values on others. There can be no denying, after a thousand posts, that there are indeed some people are intent on antisocial insistence on marginalizing and disenfranchising those people who don't subscribe to their own religion.
One of the most useful aspects of a thread like this is how well it demonstrates to those who would otherwise deny it that there are many among them simply unwilling to live and let live in society, and instead remain intent on inflicting their own beliefs and values on others. There can be no denying, after a thousand posts, that there are indeed some people are intent on antisocial insistence on marginalizing and disenfranchising those people who don't subscribe to their own religion.
Gay marriage is a moral question.. most people adhere to a moral value system... not religious at all.. Gay marriage is being pushed on society as being normal.. it is not.
Morals are now being attacked through legislation to accept gay marriage as being the norm.
It's pretty amazing people like yourself aren't embarrased by such ridiculous, and uneducated statements. Gay marriage has nothing to do with morality, it has to do with instinct. There is nothing immoral about human sexuality. Equating SSM to morality epitomizes the lack of understanding and ignorance surrounding SSM, often perpetuated by the hateful religous right, which is steadily losing. Furthermore, collectively, gays on average are far more moral than most straights. Unlike straight men, we do not coerce, and minipulate women into having pre-marital sex, which many times leads to having an unplanned child. Many of these children, often are raised in poverty, or without the same resources as children who are planned, within more stable relationships. Sadly, the majority of children born today are unplanned. Also, sexual assault, or rape within the gay community is virtually non-existent. Large urban areas within major cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Boston, DC, Houston, etc, which have large gay sections experience much lower crime rates on average. Gays are far less likely to commit any type of violent crimes. Also, consider what is happening in many large night clubs which cater to a straight clientel, much of which is a college crowd. Gay night clubs experience far less violence, and problems, than straight clubs.
One of the most useful aspects of a thread like this is how well it demonstrates to those who would otherwise deny it that there are many among them simply unwilling to live and let live in society, and instead remain intent on inflicting their own beliefs and values on others. There can be no denying, after a thousand posts, that there are indeed some people are intent on antisocial insistence on marginalizing and disenfranchising those people who don't subscribe to their own religion.
This is so true, it's almost poetic. I have no problem with religion, but really, we need to move past the days of 'my god is better than your god' that's plagued society for centuries. And one can easily say they don't think that way, but saying the Bible is an absolute standard and forcing people to listen to that is no different than saying 'what you believe is inferior to what I'm telling you to believe.' As this post said, live and let live. There are gay people, black people, Muslim people... the world is diverse and when our country says 'liberty and justice for all' I think that should mean more than just a certain group who claim this country theirs, majority or not.
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.
