|
|
| Author |
Message |
Obmar
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 1934
|
 Posted: 10/17/04 - 07:25 Post subject:
|
|
|
every argument with you comes down to semantics
hurt.. limit... whatever the hell man - you simply cannot concede a simple point ever
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Conqueso
Luke Warm
Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 388
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 09:36 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Silvermouse wrote: | I didn't read any of what you posted. I just searched near the end for a possible topic.
Anyway, nobody will ever allow a man to marry a 9 year-old boy. I can't believe you would even think this to be even a remote possibility. Let's compare the gay population of the world to that of pedophiles, polygamists and beastialiphiles (wtf). It's not the same.
Now let me ask you something. What is wrong with two men or two women f*****g? Can you think of any reason besides "it's gross"? If you answer with a Biblical reference, you automatically lose. |
Who said I was specifically talking about men and boys? That is only one facet of pedophiles. There are also women with girls, women with boys, and men with girls. Remember the case of the woman teacher with the boy here in the US and now they want to get married?
As for your last question, that deals with sodomy and not gay marriage. My arguments specifically deal with gay marriage and that it should not be supported because homosexuality is only a **** preference. It would be the same as allowing a man or woman to marry a harem because he/she likes multiple partners possibly at the same time or allowing the teacher and the boy to marry because the teacher likes boys versus men. If there is a problem with homosexuals and their dependents in the tax code, social security, etc then there are secular ways to fix those problems via changing the tax code, beneficiary designation, etc.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Desaitar
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 2641
Location: whore island
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 12:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Gay people are here to stay, and honestly, you aren't going to do shit about it. |
Exactly what I want. Thanks for support man )
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 12:37 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Conqueso wrote: |
Who said I was specifically talking about men and boys? That is only one facet of pedophiles. There are also women with girls, women with boys, and men with girls. Remember the case of the woman teacher with the boy here in the US and now they want to get married? |
That's well and good, but they'll need to wait until he's old enough. It doesn't change anything. A 9 year-old boy could think he's in love with an older man, but it doesn't change the fact that he has to wait until he's ~18 to marry him (or get a civil union).
| Conqueso wrote: | | As for your last question, that deals with sodomy and not gay marriage. My arguments specifically deal with gay marriage and that it should not be supported because homosexuality is only a **** preference. It would be the same as allowing a man or woman to marry a harem because he/she likes multiple partners possibly at the same time or allowing the teacher and the boy to marry because the teacher likes boys versus men. If there is a problem with homosexuals and their dependents in the tax code, social security, etc then there are secular ways to fix those problems via changing the tax code, beneficiary designation, etc. |
Being straight is a **** preference. I prefer women, therefore I am heterosexual, or "straight".
Someday, we won't have to have this conversation because gays will have equal rights and it will be a moot point. It's funny how people so vehemently try to stop them. Maybe if they had a relative who was gay and with a loving parner, they would understand.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Conqueso
Luke Warm
Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 388
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 12:43 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Being straight is a **** preference. I prefer women, therefore I am heterosexual, or "straight". |
That is because your definition of marriage solely relies on ****. Since marriage is a religious issue and is not solely based on the physical act of ****, "gay marriage" is not justifiable by **** preference. Marriage is a sacrament and can not be altered by the whims of certain people's **** appetites.
You also forget that those "evil religious people" have woken up and have a lot more voting power than you think. I am willing to address seculiar issues involving taxes, benefits, etc but I am steadfast when it comes to a religious issue.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 13:36 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Conqueso wrote: |
That is because your definition of marriage solely relies on ****. |
W-wait a minute. You just said that it was a sodomy issue.
| Conqueso wrote: | Since marriage is a religious issue and is not solely based on the physical act of ****, "gay marriage" is not justifiable by **** preference. Marriage is a sacrament and can not be altered by the whims of certain people's **** appetites.
You also forget that those "evil religious people" have woken up and have a lot more voting power than you think. I am willing to address seculiar issues involving taxes, benefits, etc but I am steadfast when it comes to a religious issue. |
I don't give a shit about marriage. Call them "Civil Unions" or whatever, but give them the exact same rights.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tiluvas
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 2355
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 13:44 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tiluvas wrote: | | http://hfp.puellula.org/Main.html |
BE4 U NO IT, THEYLL BE MARYING KIDS!!! SHEESH!!!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Conqueso
Luke Warm
Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 388
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 15:10 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | W-wait a minute. You just said that it was a sodomy issue. |
No, I said your definition of marriage is solely based on the physical act of **** when you threw in the heterosexual comment. A religious-based viewpoint about what marriage is goes a lot further beyond that and is not solely based on physical things such as **** or **** preference.
| Quote: | | I don't give a shit about marriage. Call them "Civil Unions" or whatever, but give them the exact same rights. |
Heh, then why the hell are we arguing? I wouldn't have turned "religious bible thumper" and saved a lot of rolling eyes of people just glancing through here. I've been saying change the blasted tax codes, beneficiary rules, etc if there were problems passing inheritance or benefits onto people that are not direct family members.
You laugh about the absurd examples but all it would take, if the precedent with the judges on gay marriage is followed, is for a single judge to strike down an age law or another law, saying it was discriminatory and that such behavior was acceptable. As I had mentioned earlier, when you start making certain areas of law grey by judges stepping beyond their roles into making litigation or interfering with religious issues, you start having all kinds of absurd situations pop up.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
SkilledShaman
Luke Warm
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 159
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 17:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Seperation of Church and State never existed and still doesn't. I'm voting for Kerry regardless. Gay Marriage should be the right of the couple.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
pyrgomache
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 1075
Location: Here
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 17:17 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
I didn't even know Cheney had a daughter until that debate, she was not at all a public figure OR a part of the campaign, and taking a cheap shot like that is just pathetic. FU kerry/edwards.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
SkilledShaman
Luke Warm
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 159
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 17:30 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
shut up pyro
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/17/04 - 17:35 Post subject:
|
|
|
| SkilledShaman wrote: | | shut up pyro |
hahahahaha
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
pyrgomache
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 1075
Location: Here
|
|
Posted: 10/21/04 - 01:08 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | | SkilledShaman wrote: | | shut up pyro |
hahahahaha
|
Jack...
shut the f**k up. Add something to the boards or leave. Don't be the next Maelstrom.
<thinks a second>
Too late.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/21/04 - 01:14 Post subject:
|
|
|
I do add to this board =)
And ...no
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
pyrgomache
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 1075
Location: Here
|
|
Posted: 10/21/04 - 01:16 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Jack Crow wrote: | I do add to this board =)
And ...no
|
Touche...with the lil ` thing on the e so its like...ehh not eee and sounds like tooSHAY or something.
Or something.
Maybe.
..
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 10/21/04 - 01:20 Post subject:
|
|
|
Fair enough =)
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Syke
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 2976
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
|
|
Posted: 10/21/04 - 19:34 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Conqueso wrote: | | It was the same time. No rules, no moral obligations, corruption, and anything was allowed. I find it rather humorous that liberals preach tolerance of other people's views, but I have learned over the years that they are only tolerant with views that are similar to their own. Liberals preach racial tolerance but categorize people into races. They preach free speech but deny those rights when the speech is against a liberal viewpoint. They preach peace but are unwilling to fight against those that deny it to others. They preach compassion but divide people into "us versus them" such as "us against religion", "poor versus rich", "women versus men", "black versus white", etc. They preach "save the environment" but do not allow clearing brush etc so mass acres of forest burn. In my opinion, I think liberals have finally become the thing that they abhor: They are intolerant. |
I just want to address this paragraph.
First of all, you're stereotyping. No. Second of all...what the f**k? men versun men, black versus white, etc....They preach "save the environment, but do not allow clearing brush etc so mass acres of forest burn?"
WOW...I don't remember doing any of that....ever. I consider myself liberal, and I honestly just don't remember any of this...I must have been f*****g FADED. But you know what...since I'm so liberal, I'm going to be open to your idea for a minute and try to understand where you're coming from.
In regards to the gay marriage issue, you say that "liberals" are stepping on other people's toes. At least, this is the implied message that I derived from your post... So basically you're saying they aren't open minded, simply because they feel that the views of the Christian religion should not stop gays from getting married. What rights of Christians do you take away when the government of the United States allows gays to get legally married? You're making their sacred vows and sacred union unholy now? Or is it just the gays that get married that are unholy? Are all Christians going to go to hell for a few gay marriages? What about abortion? Why is abortion legal in the United States, when it's clearly admonished in the Christian religion? Killing an unborn baby would be seen as one of the most extreme sins in the Christian religion, yet it's still legal here in the good old US of A. Is this part of the evil scheme that the "liberals" you mentioned are part of?
What I'm getting at is....how close minded is it to allow gays to get married in "unholy" matrimony, while hardly infringing on the rights of these religious people? The only thing that Christians want to do is keep their sacred unions sacred, it's a wholly religious issue. People can only be liberal up until a certain point. You can't expect a gay person to go..."OH! That Christian is going to feel icky about me and Chester getting married, so I think we'll just stay f**k buddies for life!" No...when someone feels that their right to do or be something is being squelched, they will voice their opinion and try to change the situation especially considering the fact that in America everyone is considered equal. It's when religious people voice their opinions that things tend to get sticky. If a gay person completely discounts Christian views, then he is not liberal. If the gay person tries to understand Christian views on gay marriage, and willfully follows the rules set down by the state and United States government, then he is liberal, but that doesn't change his opinion and I bet you 100 to 1 that he will continue fighting for his right to be married. The gay people that got married by those judges' admission are not liberal...they obviously don't care about the law or anyone elses view on how the gay marriage issue should be handled. Not every gay person, or straight person for that matter, is going to disobey the law like that, though. So I lead back into my first statement that your leading paragraph is hugely stereotypical, and based solely on a few small events that have taken place over the past couple of years. I think you should retract it.
I personally feel that they should have the right to get married. I used to go to a Lutheran high school, and a non-denominational Christian junior high, and in both I learned about how to turn the other cheek, and how to be open minded about others that didn't follow my religion. What I learned is this....Others choose their path, a life of sin, and I choose mine which is to follow the word of God. What they (homosexuals in this case) do will not affect me in any way shape or form, and my sacred union will still be held sacred in God's eyes as well as my own, regardless of whether the Government allows gay marriage or not. In this way, I will be open minded about gays, and gays will have the right to do as they please. They will do what they do regardless of the technical aspects of marriage and the Christian religion, so why not just let them if it's not affecting me? If EVERYONE bowed down to anyone else's opinions on things, no one would get anywhere. If Blacks bowed down to the whites in the south and agreed that they weren't humans and deserved to be slaves, simply because they wanted to be open minded, wouldn't that be f*****g retarded?
Same thing applies to this issue.
(and btw I'm non-religious at the moment, I was merely stating some things that I learned while studying the christian religion)
and P.S. Sorry if I'm being too verbose Nuldaan...But i like my conversations to be in the likeness of my own penis....long and hard.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Scrabler
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2660
Location: Mobile, AL
|
|
Posted: 10/21/04 - 19:46 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Marriage is a religious thing. They can get special civil unions created for all I care but they can't get "married".
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
