Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

The noise makers in the civil rights movement increased racial strife, not decreased it. It was the clear headed thinking moralists like Martin Luther King who made the real progress.

Marching in big demonstrations with giant inflatable penises isn't going to win anyone over to one's side.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Big demonstrations have their purpose. They bring peoples attention to the fact that there is a problem. In the case of homosexuals it shatters people's belief that it the gay community is a small number of people not worthy of being accommodated.

When you see millions of people get together in order to make a point it’s quite shaking. Do you remember all that business with the Mexican demonstrations a few months ago? They showed up in force in almost every big city. They scared the crap out of the politicians.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Or just annoy everyone else and block traffic.

Mexico is going to hell. The whole political structure is collapsing into anarchy. Not exactly an example I would want to use for civil rights progress.;)

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

I wasn't talking about mexico i was talking about mexicans..... demonstrating in the us. ;)

Mexico has always had a screwed up government, but that is besides the point.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Just like those pesky Blacks. ;)

http://faculty.washington.edu/gregor...ghts_march.jpg

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Well, if it weren't for the politicians and the Church...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

But neither does one choose his/her sexual preference nor does one choose his/her natural hair color. It is a valid comparison.

And why should people hide their true hair color? Just so shallow society accepts 'em?Well, keepin' the mouth shut won't get them accepted anytime soon.Ya. Although they were "relaxed" with other things too, such as slavery, I think what you posted can be seen as a positive example.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Not an inflatable penis, obscene image, or porno poster in sight.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

You're shifting the burden of proof. You make the accusation, you prove it.

Likewise you can hide the fact that you are gay. But just like you're blonde underneath your brown hair-dye, you are homosexual under your gay facade.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

So?

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

No one is going to support someone who have a 10 foot tall blow up penis with them asking for equality. Running into churches and acting like idiots is not going to get you equality. What gays are doing now is the equivalent of the black panthers and Malcolm X in the 60's. They are not improving relations, only informing issues.

Yes you can. People hide the fact that they are murderers, rapists, and pedophiles for their entire life. That one politician who was doing stuff with pages was gay, but no one noticed until a few weeks ago.

Nail the closet shut.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

If being homosexual is who they are, so be it. You want these people to hide it and be miserable for the rest of their lives? You are who you are...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yes, but that does not give you the right to around and falunt it. I would go to jail if I went around saying I am proud to be white, and straight. But it is fine for someone to say they are proud to be black or gay....

Not everyone can be accepted into society and be popular, the world does not work that way.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Well, I suppose the rationalization for that is that the white man has not had to overcome adversity (yet anyways). Plus, we are a majority and not a minority, however that is besides the point...

It's not about popularity. It's about gaining respect from your fellow man. I don't really like gay pride parades myself, however I doubt that is their only means of protest.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yeah, but 'slave' was basically a class, just like 'criminal', or 'politician', or 'plumber'. people could be sold into slavery as a punishment, for serious crimes, and prisoners of war weren't Roman citizens anyway, so it was all right.

But the ancient Romans and greeks had catamites and 'taggers-on' in the sexual sense as well, and some of their 'companions' were male. They did try to keep hushed about it (a good decent Roman having a same-sex partner was frowned upon), but there wasnt the sort of debate and uproar that being gay has now.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Hitler was who he was.

I'm not disagreeing with you, that is just a very poor justification.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Comparing one nutjob to the millions homosexuals? That is very effective...:rolleyes:

How is it a poor justification?

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yeah, but Hitler being who he was didn't make World War 2 and the Holocaust inevitable - just more likely. It was everybody else who tipped Hitler into power and War - for example, the Allies and the Treaty of Versailles.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

I wasn't comparing, I was just applying your very same argument to something else.


Because you can use it as a justifcation for virtually anything; a murderer, a bank robber, someone with a psychological disorder etc etc

Note: I am not trying to compare homosexuals to any of these things, I am just applying your argument.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Well, since I don't believe in God, I think you are not who you are, but who you decide to be.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

So lets take a tally of the arguments. Feel free to quote me and add some more. Lets make a visual list of pros and cons so our original points don't become so skewed.

Pro Gay Rights:
*Let them be who are
*Its not a disease, its a status
*There are many countries around the world that have long histories of acceptance of homosexuals.
*There are millions of people who classify themselves as homosexual, so many that it is indeed commonplace.
*Any group has the right to perform legal assemblies.

Against Gay Rights
*Its unnatural
*Its against the bible
*Its a disease
*No man should have another mans manmeat thrust into him
*Beef says its a disease
*(Christian) Religion says marriage is between one man and one woman.
*Its just nasty from everyone’s point of view.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

What about my moderate position?

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

i live in the middle of San Francisco and about two blocks from the Castro so i think that two guys kissing is ok (but that does gross me out to)
so not letting gay people get married is fucken stupid thats like saying i can't kiss a girl at the age of 13 its just a stupid thing to waste time on.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yeah, that's about the black and white of it. The more moderate views are combinations of different views of these points.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Ok I got to get back in this for a sec. I've seen gays march on tv. And Many act Perverse sexual and like to flaunt they're homosexuality to those who don't want to see it. They dress up as women and dance around in thongs. Ewww. Talk about giving yourself a negative image... Anyways my boss was gay at my last job and I diddn't know until we became friends. Now I suspected of course. There's certain steriotypical mannorisms that do distinguish them from the straight community. And although steriotypical in nature most homosexuals do act this way. He was very mature about it and diddn't draw attention to it and I respected him for that. Once I found out and he seen I was ok to it he started to tell me how he thought here and there. I was suprised when I found out he thought everyone,including straights
should not spread their sexual buisness around, He thought it was stupid to teach anything about homosexuality in schools , because he said it probably just closes peoples minds more to the fact because they are being forced to listen in a place and at a time they don't want to. He said life expieriences are better. They help you understand better. Oh yea and he was against gay marriage. He said that it was a Hetrosexual custom and unless we agree they can do it too then homosexuals should respect that. I totally agree. I learned alot from him and he's still my friend even though I no longer work there.

P.S. Gay is a sexual preference right??? Well my question is: When did it turn into a complete personallity for so many? And why? I mean if a gay guy is taking a woman's role... well I don't know any women who act like alot of the ones i've seen... No offence. I'm not saying all queers act this way as I said before my old boss dosen't...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yeah, gays are just like other people - its not like if you're gay, you have to act gay. some are pretty cool, and some are complete dickheads.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Right just like any other person. I hate it when straight people say a bunch of perverse things and I gotta sit there and listen to it. Drives me nuts... Some people need to get Self-Control... Hey what happened to good ol' fashoned manners? :uhm: Oh yea Guys like Jerry Springer killed em...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

You mean, when did they get their own flag, their own way to talk and laugh and their own way to move? Hell if I know, and I quite frankly don't think it's doing anyone any good. It draws a line where there should not be one.

And gay "pride"? I support their movement all the way, but what's there to be proud of?

My own PS: Of course I'm not saying most or all gays are like that.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Their own identity. If you're not prud of who you are, you're not fully human. If you're afraid/ashamed of telling others who you are, then you can never be proud of who you are.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

But why act flamboyant and.... Perverted like some do??? There's your negative steriotyping. People label themselves others just call it as they see it...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

You miss the point. It's not saying it's a good thing to be homosexual, it's saying homosexuals deserve as much pride as anyone else, that they reserve the right to dignity just like a straight guy.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Only "perveted" to our closed minds. One hundred years ago (give or take a bit), it was "perverted" to show ones ankles, or to mention "trousers" in a shop or in public.

Now, that's not to say I think all "perversions" are "right". I believe that paedophilla for instance is a "perversion" that is "wrong", and I admit my mind is closed on that issue. But, there is not a single Right that we must all follow.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Um, peadophilia...right...

Gays are just people. It's like having red instead of brown or blond hair. And pride is something that everybody has in themselves - if you're not proud of yourself, what's the point in living?

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Paedophilia is different to homosexuality. This is maily because paedophilia hurts children- a child can never willingly and conciously agree to sexual relations with an adult. It is all forced and rape.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yeah, I know. Well, it wouldnt really be rape if the child didn't know about it - they haven't actually consented or refused, so up to the refusal point, i don't think it can be called rape. It's just cause they're too young to know that much better - any adult would scream and shout at the top of their voice. and maybe kick the offender where the sun doesn't shine :D

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

But still correct. You have a right to personal choice, but there are reasonable limits to it. Pedophiles are who they are too.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

There's a big difference between Hitler, pedophiles and gays. Gays don't "damage" others in a physical way.


I can sense a reply: "omgz they assrapes eachothers!!" :rolleyes:

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

So there's nothing wrong with pedophiles? After all, they don't physically damage children.;)

You completely fail at sarcasm.:rolleyes:

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Woa... just so it be known by using the word perversion I was refferring to the sexually influenced personallity. I did not intend to put gays on the same scale as sexual predators...:uhm: so if anyone took it that way I hope this clears up any misunderstandings...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

I was gonna use "hurt", but I thought it didn't fit that well. Anyway, pedophiles do physically damage children.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Well, there's no use saying it anymore, but thanks for the update.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

And mentally...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Not really mentally. A victim of a paedophile isn't mentally impaired afterwards. The word you're looking for is psychologically, or maybe emotionally.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Yes thats what I meant thanks.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Anyway, what do paedophiles have to do with gay people and their marriage rights? Like Beef said at the beginning of the thread, as long as they don't call it marriage, I'm fine with it.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Me too. I believe we neet to respect others traditions. We respect theirs. Why can't they respect ours? It's like telling Americans to start learning spanish because the mexicans speak it. We were here first we have defended our traditions and many don't want to give them up... Now if there was a vote by the public and they said it was ok... Well then I would have to live with that. Not that it would be hard to live with really ...I guess. Its like The people have spoken. you know?

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

well, democracy isn't completely fair either. Say your gay vote wins 51-49. What about the 49% who lose? that represents nearly half the population, who have just been sort of brushed aside. Even on a two-thirds majority, that's up to one third of the people whose opinions are not recognized because "of the greater consensus".

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

Just dropping in to address the "How would you feel if somebody stole the name one of your traditions":This argument seems to imply that homosexual marriage is some sort of "rip-off" of traditional marriage, and that it's not marriage at all but some sort of "copy" of it for homosexual use.

Well, I find it more like immigrants wanting to celebrate my country's Constitution Day on May 17th. They're not "making up their own holiday and slapping the name 'Norwegian Constitution Day' on it" - they're joining the existing holiday.

If Farah from Pakistan wants to celebrate May 17th, do I go "Norwegian Constitution Day is for Norwegians and has always been, so put that ****ing flag down, you dirty towel-head!"? Or do I respect that things change, and that you can't exclude someone just because they've traditionally been excluded? Guess three times.

Same with the homosexuals. No one's "stealing" the marriage system you mythologists so justly hijacked from the atheists back in the days (;)), they're just asking for inclusion in it.

Tough luck. What about all the angry people who didn't want integrated schools?

Homosexuals have traditions? That's new to me. Can you elaborate?

If you ask me, barring homosexuals from marriage is what would fit this analogy better. "Don't marry, the atheists do it". "Don't learn Mexican, it's for the Mexicans only". Or for that matter, "Norway for Norwegians".

Bollocks.

[Parody mode on]I'm fine with Chinese immigrants celebrating on May 17th. As long as they don't call it Norwegian Constitition Day, that is.[Parody mode off]

Strike the "maybe".

And, just to nit-pick, psychological damage and emotional damage do fall into the "mental' category.

But should there be a "gay identity"?

To me, it's like saying there should be a left-handed identity, or a blond identity. A "tall people flag" and a "blue-eyed community". Not every aspect of humanity needs to be divided into communities, given flags, and associated with certain ways to talk, walk, and act.

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

i WOULDN'T say perverted but the bahavior that the gay pride floats is just a perverted as the loose and explicit conduct at Mardi Gras....

Besides this isn't really about a hundred years ago...If we wne by those standards these people would be put to death...

Now we're just talking about the morals that are general acepted by the world that has to share air waves with visual and audio...Because not everything people do is appropriate so censors are nescessary....

And unfortuanlly noone is censoring those parades...

Re: Do you Jim take John to be your lawfully wedded something or other?
 

I believe "Freedom of assembly" is part of the First Amendment, along with the freedom of speech. Now, what were you saying about censoring parades?