Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to Anti-stance: Yeah, and you can't wear polyblend shirts or let your wife in the house when she is having her period. Come to think of it, both of those are really good pieces of advice.
Now that was funny.
Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to Anti-stance: Yeah, and you can't wear polyblend shirts or let your wife in the house when she is having her period. Come to think of it, both of those are really good pieces of advice.
Now that was funny.
My two cents on gay marriage opponents and homophobia in general:
"Reaction Formation"
See also: Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Glenn Murphy Jr., etc.
bludroptop wrote: My two cents on gay marriage opponents and homophobia in general: "Reaction Formation" See also: Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Glenn Murphy Jr., etc.
Exactly
Anyone questioning the timing of the President's announcement, politicians going to politic.
MG Bryan wrote:Otto Maddox wrote:You do, however, choose whether and how you act on it.KATYB wrote:I just look at women and I am really attracted to them. I look at guys. Nothing. I don't even remember making the choice to have my brain wired this way.MG Bryan wrote:yes i know. tho ill disagree on the choice part. but so many wanna hate the person for being true to themselves.KATYB wrote: what i wanna know is what ever happened to above all else love thy brother? im sorry i just dont get how all these so called christians who hate on lgbt people use religion to hate on us when its said they should love us and that it is not thier job to judge. sincerly- A lesbien transwomen who also happens to be a christian.It's entirely possible to disagree with a choice without hating the person that makes it.
Choose to go against an act of nature*?
*The act of nature here being the way your brain is wired.
mtn wrote:MG Bryan wrote:Choose to go against an act of nature*? *The act of nature here being the way your brain is wired.Otto Maddox wrote:You do, however, choose whether and how you act on it.KATYB wrote:I just look at women and I am really attracted to them. I look at guys. Nothing. I don't even remember making the choice to have my brain wired this way.MG Bryan wrote:yes i know. tho ill disagree on the choice part. but so many wanna hate the person for being true to themselves.KATYB wrote: what i wanna know is what ever happened to above all else love thy brother? im sorry i just dont get how all these so called christians who hate on lgbt people use religion to hate on us when its said they should love us and that it is not thier job to judge. sincerly- A lesbien transwomen who also happens to be a christian.It's entirely possible to disagree with a choice without hating the person that makes it.
You choose whether you're sexually active or not. Just as Christianity expects single, straight people to abstain from sexual relationships, it expects homosexuals to do the same. Pretty simple concept.
It's a simple concept - just one that is based in a (from this viewpoint, anyway) relatively arbitrary, non-constructive religious tenet (that is not unique to Christianity, as pointed out above).
This is not about lying or killing or stealing or philandering. It's not even about promiscuity. It's arbitrary and based on fear of difference, nothing more.
Out of curiosity, is anyone who is not opposed to gay marriage opposed to polygamy? How about incest, assuming both parties are adults and willing participants?
MG Bryan wrote: You choose whether you're sexually active or not. Just as Christianity expects single, straight people to abstain from sexual relationships, it expects homosexuals to do the same. Pretty simple concept.
So it is completely null and void in this discussion, what with that whole separation of church and state thing.
I really need to stop posting in these threads.
poopshovel wrote: Out of curiosity, is anyone who is not opposed to gay marriage opposed to polygamy? How about incest, assuming both parties are adults and willing participants?
I am not opposed to gay marriage; I am opposed to polygamy.
mtn wrote:poopshovel wrote: Out of curiosity, is anyone who is not opposed to gay marriage opposed to polygamy? How about incest, assuming both parties are adults and willing participants?I am not opposed to gay marriage; I am opposed to polygamy.
Go on.
poopshovel wrote: Out of curiosity, is anyone who is not opposed to gay marriage opposed to polygamy? How about incest, assuming both parties are adults and willing participants?
Incest is easy from a scientific standpoint to be against- inbreeding is bad thing. Just see how many problems breed dogs have.
polygamy- if everyone agreed that a marriage can be more than two people.... But no, I'm not for that.
I know you are trying to form this in a moral way, but I see it as a "rights" basis- if we want to ban any rights that married people have among themselves- visitation, property, criminal (silence)- etc- then it's not a big deal. But since we grant a couple certain rights, then how can you restrict what that couple is?
How about the reverse- we keep harp on the "natural" argument against gay marriage, since it can't produce offspring. What about couples who are not capable of having kids- is that not just as "wrong"?
mtn wrote:MG Bryan wrote: You choose whether you're sexually active or not. Just as Christianity expects single, straight people to abstain from sexual relationships, it expects homosexuals to do the same. Pretty simple concept.So it is completely null and void in this discussion, what with that whole separation of church and state thing. I really need to stop posting in these threads.
Perhaps reading the whole thread and understanding the context of what you're replying to would be a good thing, no?
I do agree that maybe it's time to be done with this thread though.
RX Reven' wrote: Hi Xceler8x, As my tirades on this board clearly indicate, I’m way off to the right when it comes to fiscal conservatism. However, I feel no compulsion to dictate what types of relationships consenting adults choose to enter. I’ll take it a step further and say that I consider it arrogant to even have an opinion…it simply isn’t anybody’s business. Please note that z31manic holds the same position. So, while we’re talking about stuff that’s funny, isn’t it funny that the same party that proclaims itself the champion of tolerance and the defender of individualism has so many constituents that are actually highly judgmental and are very prone to forming stereotyping. “Look out, dem der conservatives want to tell you what you can do in bed” Actually, the only thing I’ll ever do is come to your assistance should anyone else ever try to tell you what you can do.
Sorry you took that point from what I wrote. Maybe I should've said "The majority of political candidates and office holders who are Republican..." instead of stating "conservatives". I wasn't trying to judge you or call out anyone in particular. I was using the term conservative to mean socially conservative voters and politicians. I'll try to be more politically correct next time. 
Now that we've cleared that up...I find it interesting that you took offense but still didn't address the hypocritical stance. IMO it's a ridiculous opinion to hold and one that seems to run completely through conservative political parties such as Republicans and Tea partiers. My example of how widespread this is - take a look at any political person who's Republican or Tea party. They publicly state they want smaller government but most all of them oppose gay marriage and are anti-abortion. If they aren't homosexual and aren't pregnant, what business is it of theirs?
Also, I think it's great that you're ok with this. I agree with yourself and Z31maniac. I don't care how you marry. Just do it already and lets talk about more important things.
Pretty funny that there are some people with short memories on here...
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/video-of-the-day-dick-cheney-endorsing-gay-marriage-in-2009/256961/
In reply to Xceler8x: Marriage is a CHURCH institution, not STATE (or federal, for that matter). The tax collectors at the state level saw it as a way to collect more monies, with marriage licenses and such. Now, when you say you want separation of church and state...
Marriage is not a church institution. My marriage and wedding did not involve a church or church-affiliated official in any way, shape or form.
I've coached girls basketball for 15 years. The amount of girls that I've coached that have been gay has gone from none to almost the whole team in that time. It's become quite the "in" thing to be "out".
5 pages of pretty much complete agreement in favor of gay marriage. Is this a good cross section of theNorth American population, or are all the hardcore Republican/right wing/conservatives weeded out at GRM when they try to register?
racerfink wrote: I've coached girls basketball for 15 years. The amount of girls that I've coached that have been gay has gone from none to almost the whole team in that time. It's become quite the "in" thing to be "out".
Assuming college age, would you care to share some stories? 
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: High school
poopshovel wrote: Out of curiosity, is anyone who is not opposed to gay marriage opposed to polygamy? How about incest, assuming both parties are adults and willing participants?
I'm not opposed to polygamy at all.
I am opposed to incest for a variety of reasons:
1) Genetically it's an extremely bad idea. Bad enough to legislate against.
2) Even with the possibility of gene-damaged spawn removed from the equation (say, via sterilization), it is psychically very harmful too. That's because of the inherent pressures of adding the 'blood-relation family' dynamics on top of the 'consenting adults' dynamics - and that's just among siblings, who may have relatively equal status within a relationship. Once you get to parent/child incest, the dynamics are so unequal that there is no way it cannot be damaging to at least one party, if not both.
^EDIT: you make some excellent points against two, but it's still hard to argue against something that doesn't affect ME.
poopshovel wrote: Out of curiosity, is anyone who is not opposed to gay marriage opposed to polygamy? How about incest, assuming both parties are adults and willing participants?
I have no interest in either, but again, if it doesn't harm anyone else's right to life, liberty, and their property...................
In reply to dculberson: It most certainly IS a church institution. It was started by the church, and then the government got their greedy little hands on it.
It would be much easier to call it something else, for the purposes of the Gay and Lesbian community, and give it all the same rights as marriage, but just don't call it marriage.
racerfink wrote: In reply to dculberson: It most certainly IS a church institution. It was started by the church, and then the government got their greedy little hands on it. It would be much easier to call it something else, for the purposes of the Gay and Lesbian community, and give it all the same rights as marriage, but just don't call it marriage.
So does that mean the secular recognization of my wife and I's union should be called something else because we are not religious?
Why the big hang up on "what" it's called?
You'll need to log in to post.
