Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-11-2013, 07:13 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,207,906 times
Reputation: 9895

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
By changing the very meaning of marriage, that's how. One man, one woman keep it simple.
So me getting married would change the definition of YOUR marriage?

 
Old 06-11-2013, 07:15 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,207,906 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun View Post
It's like fighting to get a change in Websters dictinary. It's a popularity contest. Man and Women is ingrained in society as being a associated with marriage. If popular opinion and the courts get to the point of accepting same sex couples as being called Wife and Wife or Man and Man or whatever they choose to call themselves it will change. Expecting a Hetero society to understand may never occur. Too many things to keep track of. In the case of a Hermaphidite it would be really confusing: I now pronounce you "Man/Wife and Wife/Man"?
Websters changed the definition back in 2009, along with many other dictionaries including Blacks legal dictionary.
 
Old 06-11-2013, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,207,906 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Thank you. This is my point changing thousands of years of civilization for a minority of confused people is silly.
I'm not the one who is confused by marriage, you guys seem to be the ones with two consenting adults getting married.
 
Old 06-11-2013, 07:26 PM
 
46,961 posts, read 25,990,037 times
Reputation: 29448
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
By changing the very meaning of marriage, that's how. One man, one woman keep it simple.
Gay marriage too complex? Is that the bill of goods you're peddling?
 
Old 06-11-2013, 07:34 PM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,733,220 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
As is, nature provided my sexual attraction to women along with the proper equipment for sex with women and both remain unchanged.
So then do you believe people are all born straight, or all born with a choice of attraction to either gender? Which is it?
 
Old 06-11-2013, 09:07 PM
 
Location: Deep Dirty South
5,189 posts, read 5,335,772 times
Reputation: 3863
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Being gay is abnormal by definition and by practice.
How? Why? What reason do you have to make this assertion?

Quote:
It's a dead end lifestyle literally and figuratively.
Why is the love of one person for another of less value if the two people happen to be of the same gender?

There are all kinds of heterosexual couples who can't conceive children, or never intend to have children. Are their relationships somehow less valid than those which produce offspring?

I know plenty of gay people who have very loving, committed realtionships. My sister and her partner have been together almost 20 years and raised a (perfectly well-adjusted, successful and, as it happens, quite heterosexual) boy together (he was my sister's partner's biological son.) They are movers and shakers in their community. My sister is a D.A. and her partner is provost of a large university in the midwest. Before they moved to their current location, she was the head of the chamber of commerce in another large Midwestern town.

To preclude adult, consensual couples from marrying based solely on their gender is the very definition of bigotry and discrimination.

But it matters little for those who endorse such discrimination and bigotry. Soon enough more states than not will allow same sex marriage. Eventually, they will be commonplace and nobody will consider them a big deal (aside from the bigots) and people who once opposed them will rightfully seem out of touch. Throwbacks to a time most people will look back on shamefully.
 
Old 06-11-2013, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,143 posts, read 10,711,121 times
Reputation: 9799
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Thank you. This is my point changing thousands of years of civilization for a minority of confused people is silly.
Thousands of years of civilization, eh? Funny, we must have read different history books. Let's take a look at this thousands of years, shall we?

+/- 2500 years ago, Egyptian and Mesopotamian cultures were accepting of homosexuality, and there is evidence that same-sex unions were allowed in both cultures.

+/- 2000 years ago, Roman culture accepted and even encouraged homosexual behavior. Same-sex unions were common enough that Cicero even documented the legal rights of an individual that was involved in a same-sex marriage.

+/- 1000 years to the present. European history is rife with same-sex relationships. In fact, it's actually rather amazing that the European royal houses managed to have any descendants whatsoever, with the number of royal princes and kings that preferred men to women in the sexual arena.

So, what's this thousands of years that you're talking about? The only thing that recognizing same-sex marriages could possibly "screw up" is the leftover remnants of the puritan ideology that was imported to the United States with the early colonists. Then again, these are the same people that used any woman who had an opinion as the center pole of a bonfire, so their moral values were suspect to begin with.

Btw, did you ever answer my question about divorce? If you did, I missed it, so I'll ask again: Do you rail against people who get divorced as vehemently as you rail against homosexuals? After all, your stated argument against same-sex marriage is that it would screw up the sanctity of marriage.
 
Old 06-11-2013, 09:27 PM
 
Location: USA
31,050 posts, read 22,077,427 times
Reputation: 19085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
So then do you believe people are all born straight, or all born with a choice of attraction to either gender? Which is it?
Some do choose to be with someone of the same sex exclusively. The "born that way" dogma that is pushed apparently doesn't fit everyone. The flip floppers are the ones that confuse most people. Married for years to someone of the opposite sex, Meridith Baxter is a good example, blame their Hetero phase on society, then out of the blue declare themselves Gay or Lesbian. Lately I have been seeing the flip floppers go from declaring theirselves Lesbian, like the OPs example to declaring theirselves Straight...whose on first situation?
 
Old 06-11-2013, 09:57 PM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,414 posts, read 10,492,645 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Thank you. This is my point changing thousands of years of civilization for a minority of confused people is silly.
The confused ones are people who try to live their lives from a 2000 year old book. Poor confused disillusioned people. Get a life Eddie and stop obsessing about gays.
 
Old 06-11-2013, 10:00 PM
 
Location: Deep Dirty South
5,189 posts, read 5,335,772 times
Reputation: 3863
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun View Post
Some do choose to be with someone of the same sex exclusively. The "born that way" dogma that is pushed apparently doesn't fit everyone. The flip floppers are the ones that confuse most people. Married for years to someone of the opposite sex, Meridith Baxter is a good example, blame their Hetero phase on society, then out of the blue declare themselves Gay or Lesbian. Lately I have been seeing the flip floppers go from declaring theirselves Lesbian, like the OPs example to declaring theirselves Straight...whose on first situation?
I do think it is more common for women to experiment sexually with other women. I have known a few gals who talked about things they did with other girls when they were younger, yet they have a strong preference for men and all their serious relationships have been with men. Most of these women have told me they never really think about or desire to be sexual with another woman, but that it could happen under the right circumstances.

I've never felt that way about any guy I've known, and I don't know many "straight" guys who have either. Or perhaps some just won't admit it.

Conversely, my sister's partner had never had any intamacy with or relationships with another woman until she met my sister. She has said that she had never thought she'd be with a woman, but when she met my sister, she met her soul mate and it just happened to be a female.

At the same time, my sister gives off a very masculine energy, for sure. That may well have something to do with it in that particular situation.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:29 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top