UPSB v3
Serious Discussion / Prop 8
-
Date: Fri, Oct 24 2008 06:09:25
I prefer to hear things and then make my arguement so I'll be back here tomorrow.
Go. -
Date: Fri, Oct 24 2008 06:23:30
What is Prop 8? Well i din;t know this is what everone was talking about in the shoutbox...
-
Date: Fri, Oct 24 2008 06:32:58
Proposition 8 is terrible.
Gays should be allowed to marry all the same as heterosexual couples.
If someone disagrees with this because of their religion, that's they're deal, but it should not be brought into government. We have a seperation of church and state for a reason. Not everyone believes the same thing.
And no where in our constitution does it say that gay couples cannot be married.
It's ignorant people saying that they can't be married. -
Date: Fri, Oct 24 2008 07:05:17
[Someone fucked up this post, so it has now been removed]
-
Date: Fri, Oct 24 2008 15:07:58
-
Date: Fri, Oct 24 2008 15:48:28
But if it does pass it will be taken to the supreme court... I'm not really worried.
-
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 04:05:47
Marriage is a man and woman and that's that. We aren't saying gays can't be together (which is still messed up haha = P ) but marriage should only be a man and woman.
-
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 04:08:00QUOTE (11Thrasher11 @ Oct 24 2008, 09:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Marriage is a man and woman and that's that. We aren't saying gays can't be together (which is still messed up haha = P ) but marriage should only be a man and woman.
What is saying that marriage is specifically between a man and a woman, I want quotes and viable sources. -
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 04:14:12QUOTE (11Thrasher11 @ Oct 24 2008, 09:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Marriage is a man and woman and that's that. We aren't saying gays can't be together (which is still messed up haha = P ) but marriage should only be a man and woman.
Why is gay sex marriages messed up? Just because young adults tend to change words such as "gay' into a term used for insult, does not actually change the most common meaning of "gay". If a man likes another man and decide to marry him, it's cool for me. What ever floats your boat.
-
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 06:27:36
Well see morally Homosexuality is wrong (As a bisexual, I'll admit it)
If it was right, guys would be able to make babies with each other.
But the thing is that this country was founded on Liberty and Freedom...
and to take away Liberty would be huge direspect to the founding fathers and if you don't believe in Liberty, which is the only reason this county was made...then you shouldn't be here.
Liberty: freedom from unjust or undue government control.
Illegalization of gay marriage is undue government control because it was not supposed to happen, this negelct of the blessing of Liberty to the people. -
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 06:30:42QUOTE (sangara @ Oct 25 2008, 06:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What is saying that marriage is specifically between a man and a woman, I want quotes and viable sources.
Well, the Bible says so, that marriage is exclusively a union between a man and a woman, at least a lot of people interpret it that way.
Genesis 2:22-24:QUOTEThen the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man.' For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
But just because the Bible says so, that does not mean it has to be that way. You could have same-sex couples married in legal sense. It would just have to be a civil wedding instead of one in a church. -
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 11:23:50
the bible contradicts itself if it says only a man and woman may marry as it says every1 should be treated equally, this includes men and women being treated equally
a man marrying a woman is fine
but a man marrying a man isnt...
1 difference makes it wrong?
but every1 should be treated equally so there should be no difference between the to
in a mathematical answer
have X = man and Y = woman
man and woman are equal (X = Y)
1 = good
now... a man and a woman marrying is good... so...
X + Y = 1
but X = Y... so we can freely substitute to create
X + X = 1 and Y + Y = 1
translating to a man and a man marrying being good
and
a woman and a woman marrying being good
maths nerd
-
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 12:16:26
You obviously haven't read the bible enough. It's not contradicting itself, it's saying that you should love everyone equally including bad people. Loving doesn't mean letting them do anything they want.
As a religious person I don't think gay marriage is good, but if they want to get married then so be it... it's their choice after all... so I guess I don't care which way it goes. -
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 14:39:38
Not everybody is christian, it's not like marriage is only for christians since almost every civilization in the world have a concept of marriage they found independently, so it wouldn't be fair for the US to impose their vision of christian marriage if people don't care about christianity.
-
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 15:37:05
I don't think the government or the people should have any say in the matter. If gays want to get married it would be up to the church who is going to marry them to decide if they want to or not. The government shouldn't have a say in whether or not people get married or not, nor should the public its a personal issue to be decided by those involved.
If the gay couple wants the legal benefits of a couple, the government should allow for that, but beyond that the public or the government should have no say in whether gay marriages happen or not, or oppose them for that matter. -
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 15:54:58QUOTE (Awesome @ Oct 25 2008, 08:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I don't think the government or the people should have any say in the matter. If gays want to get married it would be up to the church who is going to marry them to decide if they want to or not. The government shouldn't have a say in whether or not people get married or not, nor should the public its a personal issue to be decided by those involved.
If the gay couple wants the legal benefits of a couple, the government should allow for that, but beyond that the public or the government should have no say in whether gay marriages happen or not, or oppose them for that matter.
I have one question for you, does separation of church and state mean anything to you?
EDIT: And Zombo is right, marriage wasn't made by Christians, it isn't only for Christians, so why do they get to make the rules? -
Date: Sat, Oct 25 2008 16:04:34QUOTE (Awesome @ Oct 25 2008, 05:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I don't think the government or the people should have any say in the matter. If gays want to get married it would be up to the church who is going to marry them to decide if they want to or not. The government shouldn't have a say in whether or not people get married or not, nor should the public its a personal issue to be decided by those involved.
If the gay couple wants the legal benefits of a couple, the government should allow for that, but beyond that the public or the government should have no say in whether gay marriages happen or not, or oppose them for that matter.
I think you are right in saying that the government should not decide whether churches should have wedding cermonies for same-sex couples. But I don't think it is the church there should decide who should have the right to get married elsewhere, that is for the public to decide. As Zombo said, marriage is not just religious matter, it is also a legal matter. And in a modern secular state, the church should not decide the laws. Religous values might influence the law, but in the end it should be the people who decides. -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 01:15:01
it doesn't matter what the states rule now, its a federal issue...
like if you get married in california (gay) and then you move to oregon, does oregon still recognize your marriage?
+ you get insurance benefits from marriage, do you get that from gay marriage?
vote yes for prop 8
protect marriage -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 01:17:36QUOTE (hoiboy909 @ Oct 25 2008, 06:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>vote yes for prop 8
protect marriage
I find this highly ironic, you're saying protect marriage by taking away marriage rights...
And it does matter about the states because there is no federal law preventing gay marriage. -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 02:30:01QUOTE (hoiboy909 @ Oct 25 2008, 09:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>protect marriage
protect it from what exactly? homosexuality?
-
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 03:41:57
yeah wtf
you're either argueing against your own point, or you don't know wtf prop 8 is -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 03:45:26QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Oct 25 2008, 08:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>yeah wtf
you're either argueing against your own point, or you don't know wtf prop 8 is
Actually it's prop 8's slogan
-
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 03:54:37
holy shit wtf
god that pisses me off...
qft zombo -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 04:06:06
I do not understand why it says protect our children from learning about gay marriage. It says the schools teach their kids to respect all marriages, since when did respecting others become a bad thing? So if two people dont love each other and they are a straight couple and they hate each other, its okay for them to be together? Whereas a gay couple who love each other, its wrong for them to be together? :/
-
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 09:58:39
Aren't you born gay?
So if its something your born with, how can they make a law against it?
That would be like preventing midgets from getting married. -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 13:02:46
There's no law against being gay. There is a proposition to outlaw gay marriages in California ( I think ).
-
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 14:26:32QUOTE (KurtAB @ Oct 26 2008, 05:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Aren't you born gay?
So if its something your born with, how can they make a law against it?
That would be like preventing midgets from getting married.
thats a grey area, you could become gay.
its also possible that you can become gay at a very young age, so it looks like it's something you're born with, but actually it's more like you got influenced when very young. -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 15:59:46QUOTE (Zombo @ Oct 26 2008, 07:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>thats a grey area, you could become gay.
its also possible that you can become gay at a very young age, so it looks like it's something you're born with, but actually it's more like you got influenced when very young.
But we still don't know, there was a family with twins both raised pretty much the same way, taken on all the same trips, restaurants, they were never really apart. By age 5 one already knew he was gay, the other completely straight. -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 21:07:09
i believe that you become gay, simply because i dont believe sexuality is something you can be born with, i think it's aquired
anyways that's another debate >< -
Date: Sun, Oct 26 2008 21:25:01
Even though I'm religious, it doesn't mean I disrespect gay people... I try to respect everyone whether I think they're doing something wrong.
So I don't see anything wrong with the schools telling people to respect gays and all that.
I don't agree with gay marriage, but I guess because of separation of church and state it could be allowed. -
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 09:59:03
Im neutral. Since I'm not interested in gays and their actions, I don't really care if they marry, they should be left alone. Not some random guys disturbing them, that'll cause problems. If they want to marry, go ahead.
But biologically, homosexuality is something that shouldn't happen. Homosexuality is abnormal condition for species with two sex which heterosexual mating is needed to impregnate. It's not seen on animals other than humans (or at least not found), so homosexuality isn't really right. But I don't know. seriously.
I don't support gays, but I'm not homophobic or gay haters. -
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 10:27:59
I think that the decision to be gay is up to the people who are involved, i.e, the people getting married and such.
If they want to get a homosexual partner than i guess its fine with them as long as they know the consequences and such.
Man - Man relationships can result in AIDS but not Woman - Woman I think. Im not sure but I think it's why gayism is banned in some countries although I don't see why Woman - Woman relationships cannot get AIDS. -
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 15:08:21
If Social Darwinism were to be applied to homosexuality it would be totally fail.
-
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 16:28:58QUOTE (Glamouraz @ Oct 27 2008, 03:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think that the decision to be gay is up to the people who are involved, i.e, the people getting married and such.
If they want to get a homosexual partner than i guess its fine with them as long as they know the consequences and such.
Man - Man relationships can result in AIDS but not Woman - Woman I think. Im not sure but I think it's why gayism is banned in some countries although I don't see why Woman - Woman relationships cannot get AIDS.
Are you serious?
-
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 22:53:11QUOTE (nada @ Oct 26 2008, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Even though I'm religious, it doesn't mean I disrespect gay people... I try to respect everyone whether I think they're doing something wrong.
So I don't see anything wrong with the schools telling people to respect gays and all that.
I don't agree with gay marriage, but I guess because of separation of church and state it could be allowed.
I applaud you.QUOTE (Dark Angel-REX @ Oct 27 2008, 02:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Im neutral. Since I'm not interested in gays and their actions, I don't really care if they marry, they should be left alone. Not some random guys disturbing them, that'll cause problems. If they want to marry, go ahead.
But biologically, homosexuality is something that shouldn't happen. Homosexuality is abnormal condition for species with two sex which heterosexual mating is needed to impregnate. It's not seen on animals other than humans (or at least not found), so homosexuality isn't really right. But I don't know. seriously.
I don't support gays, but I'm not homophobic or gay haters.
If you're neutral, really, I think that means you should vote no.
Simply because voting yes would take away rights, whereas voting no would simply leave them be.QUOTE (Glamouraz @ Oct 27 2008, 03:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think that the decision to be gay is up to the people who are involved, i.e, the people getting married and such.
If they want to get a homosexual partner than i guess its fine with them as long as they know the consequences and such.
Man - Man relationships can result in AIDS but not Woman - Woman I think. Im not sure but I think it's why gayism is banned in some countries although I don't see why Woman - Woman relationships cannot get AIDS.
Are you retarded?
That's right.
You've just received my one and only facepalm in the history of my membership. -
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 22:59:12QUOTE (Glamouraz @ Oct 27 2008, 03:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think that the decision to be gay is up to the people who are involved, i.e, the people getting married and such.
If they want to get a homosexual partner than i guess its fine with them as long as they know the consequences and such.
Man - Man relationships can result in AIDS but not Woman - Woman I think. Im not sure but I think it's why gayism is banned in some countries although I don't see why Woman - Woman relationships cannot get AIDS.
u just made me speechless.
-
Date: Mon, Oct 27 2008 23:02:15QUOTE (Glamouraz @ Oct 27 2008, 03:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think that the decision to be gay is up to the people who are involved, i.e, the people getting married and such.
If they want to get a homosexual partner than i guess its fine with them as long as they know the consequences and such.
Man - Man relationships can result in AIDS but not Woman - Woman I think. Im not sure but I think it's why gayism is banned in some countries although I don't see why Woman - Woman relationships cannot get AIDS.
I think this might be one of the most ignorant things I've ever read on this board, and I'm including the spammers bin in that too.
-
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 02:33:19
Why was Glam's post so ignorant? :x
-
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 02:36:00
...
okay
wtf is gayism
why would the people getting married... decide that gay people shouldnt get married...
and of course
EVERYONE CAN GET AIDS -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 02:52:21QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Oct 28 2008, 10:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>why would the people getting married... decide that gay people shouldnt get married...
Lol i don't mean that.
I meant that if people want to have a same sex partner, then I don't think anyone should stop them. I mean, its their decision to marry the same sex partner.
-
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 02:54:17
okay
you fail to address your other points of failure -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 03:07:09
er.. gayism is being gay?
Ok shouldnt have used it here. I didnt know it was only used in my area.
Everyone can get AIDS? yeah ok thanks for tellling me. -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 04:59:21
my post got f'd up in this thread *delete*
-
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 09:33:43QUOTE (Glamouraz @ Oct 27 2008, 07:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think that the decision to be gay is up to the people who are involved, i.e, the people getting married and such.
If they want to get a homosexual partner than i guess its fine with them as long as they know the consequences and such.
Man - Man relationships can result in AIDS but not Woman - Woman I think. Im not sure but I think it's why gayism is banned in some countries although I don't see why Woman - Woman relationships cannot get AIDS.
Do you really think that?
EDIT: well this was already fixed so it's okay.
Well as someone suggested, i'll vote no on this. -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 16:59:47
Okay, I've sat back on the topic for awhile now. Frankly, its this kind of shit that makes me want to projectile vomit on a church or holy facility. As sangara previous mentioned in his arguments about the separation of church and state is the whole entire issue behind it. Honestly if you took out religion(of any kind) this proposition is no more than discrimination in its purest forms. Seriously, how fucking ignorant is it of people to say that a gay man/woman are not EQUAL or UP-TO standards of ourselves merely because they prefer to be with ones who are the same way. [referring to inter-men/woman relationships]. That is the EXACT equivalent of everyone of us having our constitutional rights taken away depending on whether we buy Apples or Oranges. Honestly, WHAT IS SO DISTURBING ABOUT HAVING TWO PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX LOVE EACH OTHER DEARLY ENOUGH TO GET MARRIED? How fucking ignorant and ARROGANT of people to say that.
Seriously, read this and then proceed,
http://grove.ufl.edu/~ggsa/pdf_docs/gaymarriage.pdf
Christians, in the bible as most will point out marriage is between a man and a woman. ITS A BOOK, not a piece of FACT. As goes for all other religions as well, they are BELIEFS, not GIVEN logically, in print, signed, documented, researched, clinically-proven, to be RIGHT. Seriously these California legislators are fucking pants-on-head retarded if they vote yes on this, same goes for any citizen. If you vote yes, you are TRULY voting for DISCRIMINATION of gender, violating constitutional rights, PROOF that there is no separation of church and state, religious SUPERIORISM, and further proof that the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a racist, discriminatory, ego-tistical moronic culture that does nothing but wallow around in our own greed and ignorance.
Honestly, people need to fucking grow up and see that the world IS NOT THE FUCKING SAME AS IT WAS 100 YEARS AGO. These kind of FUCKING politics are the kind you would expect from a 6-year old making decisions on whether going to war is morally right.
Why are people discriminatory towards gay people? Because they fear change, they don't like knowing the ideas they grew up with are POSSIBLY WRONG. These people don't have that ability to be able to sit down and admit, "Hey, I was wrong, I apologize." Sincerity lacking in every discipline. What have JUST the GAY culture done to society as whole, that is DAMAGING PHYSICALLY? Absolutely nothing. If your not willing to step in another person's shoes and see it from THEIR perspective, then your just as guilty of being discriminatory as any other person goes. (Of course there's going to be one jackass here who will say, "BUT What about Rape and CHILD PORN! and...and...and..and...MURDER!) I'll leave that to be up to you, it all depends on a certain cultures views, I'm saying you need understand the context which these things are put in.
I can understand that people can feel uncomfortable when things change. But to pass laws against a person from being who they are(within lawful boundaries of a culture) is sincerely prejudice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice
./end rant -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 19:30:08
Well like i said before, homosexuality is an abnormal condition in biology (With animals that reproduce through heterosexual sex), that can't be seen anywhere other than humans. What is happening that causes people to discriminate Homosexual people is similar to how people discriminate people with physical defection-type diseases and conditions. Animals tend to abandon "hopeless animal of the same kind" simply because for their own survival (possibly food) are the priority. Gay people can't bear children, our bodies aren't made to have homosexual sex, which can be seen as "hopeless". Animals abandon "hopeless" as a sign that they don't want to have someone "too different" that would jeopardize their own survival. Now this is the place that you might think we got food or jobs and things and it doesn't really jeopardize our survival, but that isn't necessary the same for other animals, and probably what we have as an animal instinct is what is causing people to discriminate homosexuality.
It's natural for animals to abandon "hopeless animal of the same kind" in order to make perfect state of their own kind.
What should be noted here is that Gay is discriminated, but Lesbian isn't discriminated as much as Gays, especially from men. This is due to libido that men has, which overcomes the "Abandon hopeless animal of the same kind for sake of their own survival". It becomes somewhat forgivable because it's the opposite sex.
What the government is doing is that they don't want to encourage Homosexuality simply for sociological, philosophical, theological and biological reasons.
Don't mistaken me. I'm only trying to figure out why people discriminate homosexuals. Of course, this is merely my hypothesis, I don't really know what's truly making people discriminate homosexuals. I don't discriminate them, but I don't think it's normal to be homosexual. So i'll be neutral. I mean we are humans, and don't have the same mind other animal do. We have people in the world like abnormal libido, or psychologically and mentally ill people, or something like that. So i can't really say if Homosexuality is that abnormal. It happens.
I'm neutral. I'm just trying to figure out an explanation of why people hate gays and make a huge fuss about it and government making prop8 and stuff. I don't get why I am being so penalized for it.
EDIT: I made things more clear. Cuz i wrote things that make me look like an idiot -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 20:51:33QUOTE (Dark Angel-REX @ Oct 28 2008, 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well like i said before, homosexuality is an abnormal condition in biology, that can't be seen anywhere other than humans. What is happening that causes people to discriminate Homosexual people is similar to how people discriminate people with physical defection-type diseases and conditions. Animals tend to abandon "hopeless animal of the same kind" simply because for their own survival (possibly food) are the priority. Gay people can't bear children, our bodies aren't made to have homosexual sex, which can be seen as "hopeless". Animals abandon "hopeless" as a sign that they don't want to have someone "too different" that would jeopardize their own survival. Now this is the place that you might think we got food or jobs and things and it doesn't really jeopardize our survival, but that isn't necessary the same for other animals, and probably what we have as an animal instinct is what is causing people to discriminate homosexuality.
It's natural for animals to abandon "hopeless animal of the same kind" in order to make perfect state of their own kind.
What should be noted here is that Gay is discriminated, but Lesbian isn't discriminated as much as Gays, especially from men. This is due to libido that men has, which overcomes the "Abandon hopeless animal of the same kind for sake of their own survival". It becomes somewhat forgivable because it's the opposite sex.
What the government is doing is that they don't want to encourage Homosexuality simply for sociological, philosophical, theological and biological reasons.
Don't mistaken me. I'm only trying to figure out why people discriminate homosexuals. Of course, this is merely my hypothesis, I don't really know what's truly making people discriminate homosexuals. I don't discriminate them, but I don't think it's normal to be homosexual. So i'll be neutral. I mean we are humans, and don't have the same mind other animal do. We have people in the world like abnormal libido, or psychologically and mentally ill people, or something like that. So i can't really say if Homosexuality is that abnormal. It happens.
I'm neutral.
...The government would want the OPPOSITE. We are trying to DECREASE our rate of population. So wouldn't it make sense to have LESS kids?
Animals don't have NEAR as high level thinking as humans do. How many animals have you seen creating quantum based equations. They have to adapt or they die. Humans can adapt to a greater extent than most (not all) animals. The government is basing their decisions on RELIGION, seriously, how fucking democratic is that? -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 22:54:52
Very well putt iMatt a little lengthy but well put
QUOTE (Dark Angel-REX @ Oct 28 2008, 12:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well like i said before, homosexuality is an abnormal condition in biology
I wan't to know the relevance of this statement, please. -
Date: Tue, Oct 28 2008 23:33:32QUOTE (Dark Angel-REX @ Oct 28 2008, 12:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well like i said before, homosexuality is an abnormal condition in biology, that can't be seen anywhere other than humans.
why do you say this? that's not true at all -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 02:50:02
Well, personally, i would vote no on prop 8. But, I'm catholic and that would be against my religion since the church does not believe in gay marriages. People have all different types of religion, so I think that i would rather not look on Prop 8 from my religion, but as a whole, so I would vote No on Prop 8.
And for the schools, teaching about gay marriages is fine in my opinion. Some kids are gay, so why would it be wrong for then to learn about that? They're going to have to learn about it someday. I'd rather have them being open about this. Using "gay" for name calling, at least kids would have a sense about what gay means. ya know? -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 02:56:35
mmmhmm. haha. gayism is used as a word?
-
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 03:14:48
...no... it isnt..
-
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 03:27:19QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Oct 28 2008, 08:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...no... it isnt..
lol, i know..it was just funny...xD Gayism.. -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 04:16:46QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Oct 29 2008, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>why do you say this? that's not true at all
prove it.
EDIT: Oh now i get what you mean. I meant that Homosexuality in animals that reproduce through heterosexual sexual activity. -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 04:29:28QUOTE (iMatt @ Oct 29 2008, 05:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...The government would want the OPPOSITE. We are trying to DECREASE our rate of population. So wouldn't it make sense to have LESS kids?
Animals don't have NEAR as high level thinking as humans do. How many animals have you seen creating quantum based equations. They have to adapt or they die. Humans can adapt to a greater extent than most (not all) animals. The government is basing their decisions on RELIGION, seriously, how fucking democratic is that?
1) No we are not. We aren't trying to decrease our rate of population. At least not in Japan.
2) EXACTLY what i mean iMatt. Animals don't have NEAR as high level thinking as humans do, and that's the point. If human didn't develop their Cerebral Cortex, there would be no such thing as homosexualilty. I'm not creating equation at all man. Chillax.
I don't know if you read everything, but i said "What the government is doing is that they don't want to encourage Homosexuality simply for sociological, philosophical, theological and biological reasons". And probably Theological and Sociological mostly.
By the way, I'm neutral on this. I'm just trying to figure out an explanation to why people hate gays. -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 04:33:50QUOTE (Dark Angel-REX @ Oct 28 2008, 09:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>prove it.
EDIT: Oh now i get what you mean. I meant that Homosexuality in animals that reproduce through heterosexual sexual activity.
....
there are animals...
like some species of primates, birds, reptiles, and insects...
who engage in homosexual activities..
im not talking about some unisex species here
and wtf why do i have to prove it? you're the one accusing
not trying to decrease population in japan? since when? they have no room for more people... -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 05:21:07
Resource? You lack in convincing me.
If you can say it does exist, then prove it. I'm accusing, and you say no. How am i supposed to believe you if you don't prove it? Or maybe can't prove it/ -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 05:26:35
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...ayanimal_2.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m158...735/ai_20164884
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15750604/
http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm
of course, tho you'll probably call it unreliable:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anima...sexual_behavior -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 05:44:16
Okay. You got me well.
There are a lot of stuff like that. You could also search online about human homosexuality, and comes along with explanation of other animal homosexuality. Unfortunately, they said there are no homosexuality in other animals.
Guess you can find stuff only about what you look for. no is for sure. But I'll go with yours. -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 13:56:46QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Oct 29 2008, 12:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>not trying to decrease population in japan? since when? they have no room for more people...
their popular is decreasing, it's not even increasing...
that means if the trend continue, their population will eventually be 0...
but japan's problbmes have very little to do with homosexuality though, more with the fact that ppl only raise 1 child at most which means at every generation you're losign 1 person per family, population wise. -
Date: Wed, Oct 29 2008 20:45:17
true, but thats because they marry too late. average for male is 29, and for female is 27.
Probably due to financial problems. cuz major recession in 1994 or something caused people to be unemployed, and hard to get employed. Jobs usually get stable after 26, four years after graduating college.
it becomes dangerous to reproduce after 42 or something, and people think about money too much. -
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 00:57:26
No on Prop 8 as long as im not effected
-
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:00:10
i dont see how anyone could be 'affected' seeing as no on prop 8 simply keeps things the way they are now
-
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:14:10
i mean im fine as long as no homosexual person hits on meh anyways we had this conversation yesterday on SB so some ppl know my point of view. no on prop 8
-
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:19:45
LOL that has like... nothing to do with anything >>
anyways i was just making a general statement, not towards you or anything. -
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:36:27
i like how everyone is so involved in this prop 8
i hear ppl at my school talkin about this when they usually dont
and even freshmen, sophomores, and juniors talk about it lol
and ofc, seniors -
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:44:27QUOTE (SJ. @ Oct 29 2008, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>i like how everyone is so involved in this prop 8
i hear ppl at my school talkin about this when they usually dont
and even freshmen, sophomores, and juniors talk about it lol
and ofc, seniors
Because it's a huge issue, think of it this way, Koreans aren't allowed to get married in California. That's the level of discrimination this is.
NOTE: I only used Koreans as an example because I assume SJ. is Korean. -
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:47:58QUOTE (sangara @ Oct 29 2008, 06:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Because it's a huge issue, think of it this way, Koreans aren't allowed to get married in California. That's the level of discrimination this is.
NOTE: I only used Koreans as an example because I assume SJ. is Korean.
ya, i am. lol i was just making a statement but thanks for the input...
i liked ur analogy dude -
Date: Thu, Oct 30 2008 01:53:31QUOTE (SJ. @ Oct 29 2008, 06:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>ya, i am. lol i was just making a statement but thanks for the input...
i liked ur analogy dude
Yea after all this shit that I've caused I've decided to start using my intelligence and be less dickish.
anyway, back on topic... -
Date: Wed, Nov 5 2008 08:02:20
Double Post:
Well it's here in Sacramento at around 12 AM Prop 8 is leading at 53% Yes 47% No with only 49% of the votes cast. I am sickened, even though I know it will be taken to the supreme court, it's still very sad. -
Date: Wed, Nov 5 2008 10:04:20
prop 8 sounds really gay :/
-
Date: Wed, Nov 5 2008 23:57:04
so it passed...
....at the moment, im ashamed of my country
i'm extremely upset, and have been all day
i just cant believe the direction this country is headed -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:08:00
Sorry if this is off topic but what about incest? How come incestral marriage isnt legalized or considered normal? If a brother and sister fall in love with each other in that way do they have the right to marry as well? Just trying to clear up other arguements Ive heard here.
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:15:29
incest is a health hazard, increstral families (nobles) from ancient times all ended up becoming haemopheliacs as their blood thins more and more further down the line
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:20:30
but then how come they wouldnt be able to be married?
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:23:43QUOTE (pholord @ Nov 5 2008, 04:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>but then how come they wouldnt be able to be married?
christians and catholics don't allow marriage for same gender supposively in the bible as i hear -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:26:29
screw religion
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:26:46
tomo he's talking about incest
pho... the idea is to outlaw incest (emotional and sexual relationships within close family) so that that will never happen
if they allow marriage between them it would kinda defeat the purpose -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:27:13QUOTE (tomohiro @ Nov 5 2008, 04:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>christians and catholics don't allow marriage for same gender supposively in the bible as i hear
Hes talking about incest, not gay marriage
And as for it passing with an alarming number, I just hope that the Supreme Court will actually hear the trial this time. -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:28:10QUOTE (sangara @ Nov 5 2008, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Hes talking about incest, not gay marriage
And as for it passing with an alarming number, I just hope that the Supreme Court will actually hear the trial this time.
o whoops my bad
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:38:59
In the Bible, it says that matrimony happens between a man and a woman.
However, it also states the 2 most important commandments:
Matthew 22:36-40QUOTE"Teacher, what commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "You shall love the Lord, your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. The whole law and the prophets depend on these two comandments."
Basically, treat others like you would want to be treated.
Just thought I'd share that... -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:42:21
yeah, well anyways, the whole point is that state should be separate from church...
the bible should hold no value at all in this debate
but even if it did, well, there you go -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 00:45:56QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Nov 5 2008, 07:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>incest is a health hazard, increstral families (nobles) from ancient times all ended up becoming haemopheliacs as their blood thins more and more further down the line
So they can outlaw incest beacuse its a "health hazord", but you support gay marriage? What about homsexual relations have a higher chance to contract aids?
I don't feel that insest is right or should be legalized, but couldn't someone say the same thing about gay marriage?
I am appalled that prop 8 passed , but I think I am begging to understand a bit better how those who voted for it feel about it. If homosexual couples are allowed to marry, wouldn't you have to grant the same rights to all the minority groups, even if you thought it was "wrong". Considering you just said how close minded those who voted yes were, and how ignorant they were, they could say the same about you if you wanted to deny others the right to be married.
If any group was allowed to get married, marriage wouldn't mean as much if someone could marry sheeps and dogs lets say.
IDK Iam confused about the whole issue now, I don't think prop8 should of been passed, but I don't feel as opposed to it as I was before.
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 01:53:49
the hell?
If you ban gay marriage on the defense that they have a higher risk of spreading AIDS, you'd have to ban anal sex altogether.
Incest runs the risk of creating a hemophiliac society....
If everyone lived in incestral families the whole human race could just die off after scratching their arm on a rock...
and as for animals, you know what, it's exactly what the prop 8 proponents said, and guess what? A dog cannot stand in a wedding and say "I do". -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 02:06:43
Personally i think the only arguments that can be made will eventually lead to this conclusion:
If you believe homosexuals are born homosexuals, you will most likely support gay marriage.
If you believe homosexuals make the choice to be homosexual on their own, you will most likely disapprove of gay marriage. -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 02:12:34
I don't think that at all...
I am i bisexual and i believe i chose to become one
.....why would that make me think it's wrong?
The core of this issue is religion, and the core of that is separation of church and state. -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 02:16:01QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Nov 5 2008, 05:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>the hell?
If you ban gay marriage on the defense that they have a higher risk of spreading AIDS, you'd have to ban anal sex altogether.
Incest runs the risk of creating a hemophiliac society....
If everyone lived in incestral families the whole human race could just die off after scratching their arm on a rock...
and as for animals, you know what, it's exactly what the prop 8 proponents said, and guess what? A dog cannot stand in a wedding and say "I do".
Gay couples adopt because they cannot have kids so couldnt an incestral couple do the same to not have kids with disorders?
Dont we have the same discrimination arguement here? -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 02:24:33
Them adopting cannot prevent them from sexual relations which could always result in children.
The easiest way to deal with it is to not allow it.
Really, yeah, that makes sense, and honestly I wouldn't mind it, so idk what to say -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 13:57:12
so gay marriage isn't allowed now? :/ I've not really understood all this. thank god you didn't get palin as vice president anyway, she would've shot all gay people.
anyway, in sweden it's not allowed either, but they're trying to have a new law pass though. I think they should make it that the legal part of marriage is handled by the state, and is open to everyone, and the ceremony in the church is up to them to do decide who they allow. -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 17:31:55QUOTE (Sfsr @ Nov 6 2008, 05:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>so gay marriage isn't allowed now? :/ I've not really understood all this. thank god you didn't get palin as vice president anyway, she would've shot all gay people.
anyway, in sweden it's not allowed either, but they're trying to have a new law pass though. I think they should make it that the legal part of marriage is handled by the state, and is open to everyone, and the ceremony in the church is up to them to do decide who they allow.
Yes now in California gay people are not allowed to be married. This doesn't affect a gay couple that have already married, they are still married and will remain married until they separate(divorce, death, etc.) . However I see two things happening: 1. It will the Supreme Court where (if they have any common sense anymore) they will actually hear it this time, and deem that it is discrimination. 2. We will have to wait another four years to create another proposition to outlaw this new constitutional amendment.
BTW: I have no problem in leading the rebel platoon in taking down this amendment by force (I hope the government isn't watching
)
-
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 23:53:26
yeah
im gonna give a little history for those who don't know:
in 2000, california voters passed Prop 22, which did ALMOST EXACTLY what prop 8 does.
That law stood for 8 years until May 15th, 2008, when the California Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional to the state constitution.
Now, prop 8 is an exact repeat of prop 22 except prop 8 is an amendment to the california constitution, as opposed to a law.
Therefore, the california supreme court has no power over the matter, only the supreme court.
so yeah, i just hope the supreme court will take this, and if not, i hope next election will fix this...
i think No on Prop 8 did a horrible job with campaigning, really -
Date: Thu, Nov 6 2008 23:58:36QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Nov 6 2008, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>i think No on Prop 8 did a horrible job with campaigning, really
Because they didn't realize the stupidity of Californians and the audacity of the Yes on Prop 8 people, so they were late from the start. -
Date: Fri, Nov 7 2008 00:39:29
yeah...
the general idea was oh there's no way it's gonna pass
i dont think enough people who were against it voted no... -
Date: Sun, Nov 9 2008 04:55:38
Just, you gotta remember that religious invented te concept of marriage, so, it's totally right that religious arguments are used...
-
Date: Sun, Nov 9 2008 05:19:04QUOTE (Stay'n Alive @ Nov 9 2008, 12:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Just, you gotta remember that religious invented te concept of marriage, so, it's totally right that religious arguments are used...
Marriage has been soooo distorted since its creation i don't think religion should hold and place at all in this argument...unless you want to also argue that we should retain selling our daughter's hand in marriage for 3 goats and a new computer......btw, the earliest evidence of marriage was between the greeks and NOT a religous ceremony, not to mention the Greeks were open to same-sex relationships...... -
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 10:31:33
true true.
Im still neutral, but I still can't 100% say homosexual is completely normal. I mean why do men have penis and woman have womb? Why do woman get pregnant and men don't?
But again, Prop 8 still takes away freedom of choice and thoughts.
I'm neutral. I just can't say if it's alright. -
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 13:06:42
Liberty of oppinions is at least as important as liberty of sexual orientation
-
Date: Wed, Nov 19 2008 17:14:44QUOTE (Shadowserpant @ Nov 7 2008, 01:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>yeah
im gonna give a little history for those who don't know:
in 2000, california voters passed Prop 22, which did ALMOST EXACTLY what prop 8 does.
That law stood for 8 years until May 15th, 2008, when the California Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional to the state constitution.
Now, prop 8 is an exact repeat of prop 22 except prop 8 is an amendment to the california constitution, as opposed to a law.
Therefore, the california supreme court has no power over the matter, only the supreme court.
so yeah, i just hope the supreme court will take this, and if not, i hope next election will fix this...
i think No on Prop 8 did a horrible job with campaigning, really
Ugh this is so confusing.
There's a higher supreme court above the california supreme court?
And in the presidential election thread...you supported that Obama will remove Prop 8? didn't quite follow that one..
So, now, in California, Same-sex marriage is not allowed? Not even civil ones?
Can you explain to me how the FUCK a Proposition to amend the constitution in a discriminating way even happened?
You'd think the exact opposite would happen, a proposition to ALLOW same-sex marriage, and that it didn't pass, and that people want it passed.
But no, it's exactly the other way around. How the fuck did that happen?
This entire thing seems like Apathy at it's best.
So is this only in California? What's up with everywhere else? -
Date: Wed, Nov 19 2008 17:32:07QUOTE (Teatime @ Nov 19 2008, 09:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Ugh this is so confusing.
There's a higher supreme court above the california supreme court?
And in the presidential election thread...you supported that Obama will remove Prop 8? didn't quite follow that one..
So, now, in California, Same-sex marriage is not allowed? Not even civil ones?
Can you explain to me how the FUCK a Proposition to amend the constitution in a discriminating way even happened?
You'd think the exact opposite would happen, a proposition to ALLOW same-sex marriage, and that it didn't pass, and that people want it passed.
But no, it's exactly the other way around. How the fuck did that happen?
This entire thing seems like Apathy at it's best.
So is this only in California? What's up with everywhere else?
Yes, in the US there are different levels of courts our highest court the "Supreme Court" is run by the national government. However each state has it's own court system, and usually (infact I think all states) call their highest court a "Supreme Court" also.
Yes, no marriage of any type that is not between a man and a woman is legal.
I'm just as confused as you are.
I'm not sure I can say that, 4 years ago we allowed it and there weren't giant 100,000+ people marches.
The reason why it's only in California is because well (I think) we were the only other state (besides Massachusetts) to allow it. And the fact that we were the only state to bring it up this year.
But the thing is is that there is a whole other controversy behind all this The Church of Ladder Day Saints (or Mormons as we like to call them) put at least $20 million into funding for the Yes on 8 people. Once this became known it became an even bigger controversy because originally the Yes on 8 people claimed "it's for the sake of the children, not religion". Go ahead look at almost any of their debates and you will see they try to mask their true cause with the wonderfully innocent children.
-
Date: Wed, Nov 19 2008 20:00:50
Weird as hell.
Thanks for clearing up.
Have nothing to add really. I think it's obviously completely stupid.
Can't grasp my head around the idea that the country that supports freedom the most of all allowed this to happen, and that it hasn't been rectified already.
Let people do whatever the fuck they won't, jeez, what's the big fucking deal.
If they really want to get married they'll just move out of the state anyway so what's the point...
ugh, stupidity hurts >_<