The party of tolerance (political)

Pages

467 posts / 0 new
Last post
701FishSlayer's picture
701FishSlayer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/5/09

Ya, gay thread is might gay. Let it die.

 

 

 

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Christ almight btr, you really can not comprehend simple things or you are simply not willing to be honest.

It started out claiming they wanted the same "rights". If a domestic partnership gives gays the same "rights" then this claim was a lie.

Where did you ever draw the conclusion that gay marriage affects my marriage?

Even an idiot would not jump to that asinine conclusion from what was posted.

It is the religious sanctity of marriage that the gays now want after they are given the same legal rights. The title itself as a means to breakdown long held religious standards. 
 
Second class my ass. It is soley about shoving down the throats of the people that have opposed their being able to be married in a vindictive attempt to shatter the longstanding tradition of marriage based on religious standards.

At least be honest to admit that as it is glaringly easy to see.

So btr, what are you going to do when the 40 year old man wants to "marry" a 13 year old girl here in ND? Advocate for his "rights" like you do gay "rights"? A 13 year old can not consent. Is 18 the exact correct age? Not necessarily.

"Or does that go against the gain of what YOU believe is right or wrong?Yes, and there are valid reasons for it"

Once again the very same hypocritical bullshit multi tried defending his position with.

"Oh wait, it is not about "rights" but the "status" of how people look at something. It is about a same sex couple being able to exercise the same privilege of marriage that heterosexual couples do. "

Quit lying btr. it is NOT about the "privilege of marriage" when a domestic partnership gives that very "privilege"  to them. Try being honest here for once.

So why then should not the "status" this 40 year old man is viewed under be considered the same as two guys? Because a child is not an adult. An animal is not a consenting adult. Animals and kids cannot sign a contract. Polygamy? Good question, I'm not sure it shouldn't be legal. 

Did you bother to read the links to New Hampshires marriage laws? One last time, New Hampshire says children CAN get married. States can make their own laws just as they can with gay marriage. But yet YOU claim they should not be able to make laws that they have regarding this one restriction of marriage.

I thought you supported states making THEIR own laws?

honesty goes a long ways towards credibility.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

gst Said:
Christ almight btr, you really can not comprehend simple things or you are simply not willing to be honest. 

It started out claiming they wanted the same "rights". If a domestic partnership gives gays the same "rights" then this claim was a lie. Marriage is not domestic partnership. It was created for specifically to keep people away from marriage.

Where did you ever draw the conclusion that gay marriage affects my marriage? If it doesn't affect heterosexual couples marriage and it doesn't affect society, then why attempt to deny it from gays? Because you just don't like it. 

Even an idiot would not jump to that asinine conclusion from what was posted. Ok. So your best reason to not allow gays to marry, is because you feel marriage is a tradition reserved for heterosexual couples? I think that is what you are getting at. One thing is fore sure, and that is completely normal for traditions to change. Marriage hasn't been exempt to it over time either. 

It is the religious sanctity of marriage that the gays now want after they are given the same legal rights. The title itself as a means to breakdown long held religious standards. No. That is the simple answer. No doubt, some christian gays would love to be able to get married in a church. No doubt, there are some gays that would like to stick it to Christains and be able to get married in a church. But that isn't what it is about. Religion does not own marriage. Marriage is not religious unless you want it to be. 
 
Second class my ass. It is soley about shoving down the throats of the people that have opposed their being able to be married in a vindictive attempt to shatter the longstanding tradition of marriage based on religious standards. I hope that isn't what you've been talking about this whole time, "religious marriage", because this whole debate would've been nipped in the butt a long time ago. 

At least be honest to admit that as it is glaringly easy to see. Um, no. Like I said, the church has no authority over marriage. You sure seem to think everyone is out to get you

So btr, what are you going to do when the 40 year old man wants to "marry" a 13 year old girl here in ND? Advocate for his "rights" like you do gay "rights"? A 13 year old can not consent. Is 18 the exact correct age? Not necessarily.

"Or does that go against the gain of what YOU believe is right or wrong?Yes, and there are valid reasons for it"

Once again the very same hypocritical bullshit multi tried defending his position with. Again,It isn't hypocrititcal when you have valid reasons.

"Oh wait, it is not about "rights" but the "status" of how people look at something. It is about a same sex couple being able to exercise the same privilege of marriage that heterosexual couples do. "

Quit lying btr. it is NOT about the "privilege of marriage" when a domestic partnership gives that very "privilege"  to them. Try being honest here for once. Gst, please don't get upset. If I wasn't being honest, I wouldn't go out of my way on this overwhelmingly conservative site just to debate against highly conservative Christians about something I don't agree with. When I see things written that I don't agree with or are just flat out wrong, I tend to respond. No different than you. Yet, I don't go around calling you a liar.

So why then should not the "status" this 40 year old man is viewed under be considered the same as two guys? Because a child is not an adult. An animal is not a consenting adult. Animals and kids cannot sign a contract. Polygamy? Good question, I'm not sure it shouldn't be legal. 

Did you bother to read the links to New Hampshires marriage laws? One last time, New Hampshire says children CAN get married. States can make their own laws just as they can with gay marriage. But yet YOU claim they should not be able to make laws that they have regarding this one restriction of marriage. Again,I have never said the people of any state do not have the right to make marriage laws. What I have done, is disagree with their reasoning behind those laws. 

I thought you supported states making THEIR own laws? Obviously, since I have stated it multiple times now. The next few times you decide to ask me this question again, just refer to my earlier posts. 

honesty goes a long ways towards credibility. I agree. Trying to call someone a liar most certainly doesn't, however.

There is a difference between supporting the state's right to marriage and disagreeing with the peoples opinion. 10 years ago, the people of this state voted to ban gay marriage. I have no problem with the process, but that most certainly doesn't mean I have to agree with the reasoning behind the decision. 5, 10, 20 years from now, In this state, there is a good chance you could find yourself on the losing side of a same sex marriage vote. 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

johnr Said:
Maybe both. But I would put my money on the sensitive liberal.

Sensitive? You won't have to look to hard on this site to find a thread where after awhile, the conservatives couldn't help but to get all pouty, sensitive, and start spitting out vitriol in response to me.

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

 you guys need some face time

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

btr, the simple fact that can not be denied is the "claim" by national gay rights groups was all about "rights" . Survivorship rights, healthcare rights ect.....

gay couples can be given these "rights" thru civil unions, domestic partnerships ect...
and yet now that is not enough.

Lie to yourself if you wish to convince yourself this is NOT about incrementally dismantling Christian values, but when you start to lie to others what this is really about to achieve an agenda is when I take exception.

For YOU personally it might not be about dismantling Christian values and traditions, but for the national gay movement it is indeed about that.

I am sure most people see the irony in YOU claiming YOUR reasons to disagree with others states laws that allow 13 year olds to marry 40 years olds are "valid", but the views they hold regarding gay marriage are not.

So btr please explain why when one state passes laws to allow 13 year olds and 40 year olds to marry, there exists "valid" concerns to oppose this, but when a state passes a law to prevent two men from marrying there are NO "valid" reasons to support this OUTSIDE YOUR PERSONAL VEIWS.

Then explain why YOUR views are any more "valid" than anyone else's. 
 
Explain what age you believe is able to give "consent" legally.

I probably do not disagree with you on the subject of laws restricting the age of when people can marry, and why, but clearly in other states there are other views that have been "valid" enough to influence state law.

So the point you seem to be missing here, as these traditional views and values are dismantled, (marriage between a man and a woman, marriage younger than 18 or even 16) to the point we now legally have men marrying men and 13 year old girls marrying 40 year old men, are we really that far from a state passing a law that a 40 year old man can legally marry a 14 year old boy?

How will we argue a law like this is wrong when we have allowed gay marriage, and 13 and 40 year old heterosexual marriage?

Should not gays have the same age laws regarding marriage as heterosexuals do???

If a gay group filed suit on this in New Hampshire, where gay marriage is legal and a 40 year old man can legally marry a 13 year old girl, how would a judge be forced to rule?

You mention that I may be on the losing "side" 10, 15, 20 years from now on gay marriage, the whole point is that if we continue to allow these incremental changes to traditions and law regarding marriage, we may BOTH be on the losing side in arguments regarding other restrictions on marriage down the road as well. 

So btr, where do we stop and say that is not right?

History has shown in the downfall of most every great society, the incremental degrading of moral values has played a large part.  

So btr, where does your "tolerance" level start and stop?

What will YOU do when others wish to push their ideals past that point?

Why will that be any different than what those that support traditional marriage are doing right now?

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

BringingTheRain Said:
 

johnr Said:
Maybe both. But I would put my money on the sensitive liberal.

Sensitive? You won't have to look to hard on this site to find a thread where after awhile, the conservatives couldn't help but to get all pouty, sensitive, and start spitting out vitriol in response to me.

Sorry, didnt mean to be insensitive...

Neat

Candiru's picture
Candiru
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/2/06

 gst,  What is with your obsession about dirty old men marrying teenagers?

It does not say this is wrong in the bible.   If it is in there please provide chapter and verse.   I thought the bible is this great guide to life and morality.   Where do you get the idea from that this is wrong - if you believe it is wrong?

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 Gst-we get it you don't gay marriage to happen for fear of pedophilia and beastiality. Go out to the pasture and get another horse

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Candiru Said:
 gst,  What is with your obsession about dirty old men marrying teenagers?

It does not say this is wrong in the bible.   If it is in there please provide chapter and verse.   I thought the bible is this great guide to life and morality.   Where do you get the idea from that this is wrong - if you believe it is wrong?

Thought perhaps you would have ben perceptive enough to understand it being used as an example of laws that regulate marriage that those that demand THEIR views on certain laws that regulate marriage be accepted as the "norm" refuse to accept as standing marriage laws due to THEIR own ideals.  

Perhaps you have missed the fact I do not tie this discussion to the Bible and what is written in it.

Beminoid, it seems you have missed the point as well.

On a side note though, The Gov. Of New York has gone on record saying if some one is pro life, pro assault weapons, and anti gay, as an "extreme" conservative they have no place in the state of New York.

Indeed the "party of "tolerance".

Yet one more lie.

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

Ya... Beminoid... Whoosh... that point mustve went right over your head. How could you miss it? ;)

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

espringers Said:
Ya... Beminoid... Whoosh... that point mustve went right over your head. How could you miss it? ;)

Surely you didn't espringers.

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

No. I didnt miss it. Neither did he. But, you clearly aren't grasping what a poor point everyone else thinks it is... Even those who share your views on gay marriage are distancing themselves from your particular method of coloring by numbers and connecting the dots.

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

I guess I would have to be more on the phil robertson side of this topic

Neat

Candiru's picture
Candiru
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/2/06

Our moral values are constantly changing.   Years ago slavery was OK, women were not allowed the right to vote, beating your wife was OK, and racial segregation was looked at as a good thing.   ND thought that unmarried men and women should not be allowed to live together, that law has been repealed.    Years ago you would not have seen a farmer out in the field on Sunday, now it's commonplace.     Teenage girls getting married was OK, now it is not.     If laws have not been changed in some sates it is probably because it has not been an issue.   It is hard to say that all change is good or all change is bad, but things have and will continue to change.  

Attitudes on gay marriage are changing because the gay community has been making their case and people, young people in particular, are siding with them.    Young people favor gay marriage by a large margin.  It is going to happen.     All these years of debate and all the anti-gay marriage folks can come up with is something about the bible, sin, or deflect with pedophilia/beastiality 

Being gay in this day and age is looked at by many people, myself included, as being no different than race;   they did not choose to be born that way it just happened.     As with race they deserve protection against discrimination.   

We should have a society where people are free to be themselves and pursue happiness as long as you don't step on someone else's toes.   The gays and lesbians that I have known in my life have been good and decent people.   They work, obey the law, and pay taxes.    None of them ever tried to recruit me and have treated me with decency and respect.  


sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

 

Candiru Said:
Our moral values are constantly changing.   Years ago slavery was OK, women were not allowed the right to vote, beating your wife was OK, and racial segregation was looked at as a good thing.   ND thought that unmarried men and women should not be allowed to live together, that law has been repealed.    Years ago you would not have seen a farmer out in the field on Sunday, now it's commonplace.     Teenage girls getting married was OK, now it is not.     If laws have not been changed in some sates it is probably because it has not been an issue.   It is hard to say that all change is good or all change is bad, but things have and will continue to change.  

Attitudes on gay marriage are changing because the gay community has been making their case and people, young people in particular, are siding with them.    Young people favor gay marriage by a large margin.  It is going to happen.     All these years of debate and all the anti-gay marriage folks can come up with is something about the bible, sin, or deflect with pedophilia/beastiality 

Being gay in this day and age is looked at by many people, myself included, as being no different than race;   they did not choose to be born that way it just happened.     As with race they deserve protection against discrimination.   

We should have a society where people are free to be themselves and pursue happiness as long as you don't step on someone else's toes.   The gays and lesbians that I have known in my life have been good and decent people.   They work, obey the law, and pay taxes.    None of them ever tried to recruit me and have treated me with decency and respect.  


I think that captures it right there.

I would also say, gst, that if you're worried about the shifting of the definition of marriage, lobby the government to get them out of the business of issuing marriage licenses at all and let everybody get civil unions for the governmental rights they bestow.  You will get no fight from me if you wish to have your church recognize marriages and define them however they like.  At this point, however, marriage remains a government sanctioned relationship, and I feel our government is being discriminatory when not all consenting adults are allowed to enter into marriage with the consenting adult of mutual choosing.

And yes, the "incrementalism" argument is beyond played out.  It has been demonstrated how this so-called argument could be applied to virtually any law of one's choosing, and it becomes just silly.

Allow 16 year olds to drive?  Heck no!  Next thing you know we'll be teaching driver's ed in kindergarten!

Allow hunting of coyotes? NO!  Next thing you know, it will be legal for somebody to come "hunt" my pet black lab!


gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

No shit our "moral values" are constantly changing. Genius observation.

So candiru, beings you are suggesting we just sit back and let the moral ideals on gay marriage "change" what then do you think about a state like New Hampshire allowing a gay man to marry a 14 year old boy? Should we just sit back and let that "change" happen as well? They already let men marry 14 year old girls there. They already let men marry men there, what is the next logical step as "our morals change"?

Candiru claims"All these years of debate and all the anti-gay marriage folks can come up with is something about the bible, sin, or deflect with pedophilia/beastiality" 
 
Candiru, what most, including btr I am guessing, would consider "pedophilia" is currently happening in some states. You can not deny that unless you think 40 year old men being able to legally marry 13 year old girls is NOT pedophilia. '

The people that support gay marriage like Candiru don't want to admit this "change" is occurring in this nation because it might actually wake people up. So you either stick your head in the sand and pretend it is not happening or make bullshit claims about "morals changing" so we need to change with them" on sites like this and "deflect" by linking those wanting traditional marriage as "fixated" on bestiality or pedophilia.

"Deflect?"?????

It is happening as our "morals change".

That is why those that want to stick their heads in the sand and not believe the "changing " of "moral values" will NOT incrementally lead to things THEY think are morally wrong are blind fools. 

THEY wish to demand THEIR views of what is "moral" be accepted, but yet will not admit what they may very well lead to.

Espringers you are a lawyer. Answer this question if you would.

In the state of New Hampshire where gay marriage is legal, and where a 40 year old man CAN marry a 14 year old girl according to state law, how could a judge rule if a 40 year old man wanted to marry a 14 year old boy and filed a law suit to have his "civil rights" upheld under already established New Hampshire law?

For me it is a matter of states rights. Period.

I just point out what other states have currently allowed by law to show that the line people like btr and multi think should not be crossed just like others think the line of gay marriage should not be crossed is happening as our "morals change".

Combine that with my personal opinion that a couple that by design has the ability to propagate the human species should have a different "title" of their legal union than a couple that by design can not.

Cut it however you want, two women or two men can not create a child by themselves as a couple. To me that indeed makes their union secondary to those that by design could.

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

sparetire Said:
 

I think that captures it right there.

I would also say, gst, that if you're worried about the shifting of the definition of marriage, lobby the government to get them out of the business of issuing marriage licenses at all and let everybody get civil unions for the governmental rights they bestow.  You will get no fight from me if you wish to have your church recognize marriages and define them however they like.  At this point, however, marriage remains a government sanctioned relationship, and I feel our government is being discriminatory when not all consenting adults are allowed to enter into marriage with the consenting adult of mutual choosing.

And yes, the "incrementalism" argument is beyond played out.  It has been demonstrated how this so-called argument could be applied to virtually any law of one's choosing, and it becomes just silly.

Allow 16 year olds to drive?  Heck no!  Next thing you know we'll be teaching driver's ed in kindergarten!

Allow hunting of coyotes? NO!  Next thing you know, it will be legal for somebody to come "hunt" my pet black lab!

So spare, what do YOU think of New Hampshire's law that allows a 40 year old man to marry a 13 year old girl? 
 
How about Florida's marriage laws that allow "adults" to marry "children"?

Perhaps you just think they are "silly".

Candiru, Same question.

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

I assume a 14 year old would need parental consent and a court waiver to get married... And also assume the same rules would apply to boys as they do girls... I find it disgusting and doubt they are allowed under anything but extremely extraordinary circumstances that i couldnt even imagine...

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

So spare, what do YOU think of New Hampshire's law that allows a 40 year old man to marry a 13 year old girl? 
 
How about Florida's marriage laws that allow "adults" to marry "children"?

Perhaps you just think they are "silly".

Candiru, Same question.

I think such laws are wrong.  A 13 year old is not a consenting adult.  These laws have nothing to do with the so-called incrementalism between gay marriage and pedophilia. I think marriage is a legally binding contract, and as such, a person should be the age of majority in order to enter into it.

I don't think that states' rights are the be-all end-all.  

This whole business that marriage needs to be between people who can procreate together is a slippery slope.  I ask you, which of the following people would you allow to get married?

-women with Turner syndrome.
-women with androgen insensitivity syndrome.
-men who have had a vasectomy.
-post-menopausal women.

If you would allow them to marry, why?  They can't procreate.  

Would you let a post-op trans-sexual woman marry a man?  Should each person have chromosomal testing before marriage, in order to prove their biologic gender?



Candiru's picture
Candiru
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/2/06

Good grief,   Why are you so infatuated with teenagers getting married?  Is that all you got?

I would guess that those laws, NH in particular, are holdovers from another era.   If this stuff were actually going on now I would imagine there would be a drive to repeal it due to public outrage.    At one time a 13 year old getting married to an older man was viewed as being OK.  It is no longer.

 I strongly disapprove of people under 18 getting married.  If I was living in one of those states I would be asking my legislator to change those laws to make the age 18.    

How many people under 18 are getting married these days?   I really don't think it is very many at all.      Where is the movement out there to lower the age of marriage?   I really don't see it.    

I think we were all sickened a few years ago when the dealings of Warren Jeffs and the polygamist FLDS were revealed.   It is some really sick shit.  Google and read up on it.  It is a cult built around old men having sex with girls.   Or do you think that the gov't was violating the "religious freedom" of Warren Jeffs when they threw him in jail for life?

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 Gst-last I checked we were in ND, not NH,OR,NV, FL ect ect. Your argument keeps going to what most think is pedophilia. Get over it. Who cares if a guy wants to marry a guy or woman wants to marry a woman. Through 12 pages we get that your opinion is the only one that you care about, #letitgo

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

 

beminoid31 Said:
 Gst-last I checked we were in ND, not NH,OR,NV, FL ect ect. Your argument keeps going to what most think is pedophilia. Get over it. Who cares if a guy wants to marry a guy or woman wants to marry a woman. Through 12 pages we get that your opinion is the only one that you care about, #letitgo

Sorry, I can tell by your profile pic that you are a man who likes to have meat slapped across his forehead.  As such, your opinion is rendered invalid by FBO bylaw 12.31.45, subsection a, part 12.


Old Jake's picture
Old Jake
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/08

Candiru Said:
Good grief,   Why are you so infatuated with teenagers getting married?  Is that all you got?

I would guess that those laws, NH in particular, are holdovers from another era.   If this stuff were actually going on now I would imagine there would be a drive to repeal it due to public outrage.    At one time a 13 year old getting married to an older man was viewed as being OK.  It is no longer.

 I strongly disapprove of people under 18 getting married.  If I was living in one of those states I would be asking my legislator to change those laws to make the age 18.    

How many people under 18 are getting married these days?   I really don't think it is very many at all.      Where is the movement out there to lower the age of marriage?   I really don't see it.    

I think we were all sickened a few years ago when the dealings of Warren Jeffs and the polygamist FLDS were revealed.   It is some really sick shit.  Google and read up on it.  It is a cult built around old men having sex with girls.   Or do you think that the gov't was violating the "religious freedom" of Warren Jeffs when they threw him in jail for life?

There you go pressing your views and morals on others which appears to be the crux of the argument.

Candiru's picture
Candiru
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/2/06

 If protecting 13 year olds from dirty old men means that I am "imposing my morals" on others, I am guilty as charged.  

Candiru's picture
Candiru
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/2/06

 If protecting gay people so they can live their lives without fear of being fired from a job, denied housing, or discriminated against including entering into marriage with another fully consenting adult and all the benefits attached to it;  means I am imposing my morals on others, I will proudly plead guilty.  

Old Jake's picture
Old Jake
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/08

Candiru Said:
 If protecting 13 year olds from dirty old men means that I am "imposing my morals" on others, I am guilty as charged.  

So you're saying those cultures which allow child marriage are wrong?

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 

sparetire Said:
 
beminoid31 Said:
 Gst-last I checked we were in ND, not NH,OR,NV, FL ect ect. Your argument keeps going to what most think is pedophilia. Get over it. Who cares if a guy wants to marry a guy or woman wants to marry a woman. Through 12 pages we get that your opinion is the only one that you care about, #letitgo

If only it was me in my profile pic...it's hunttomuch

Sorry, I can tell by your profile pic that you are a man who likes to have meat slapped across his forehead.  As such, your opinion is rendered invalid by FBO bylaw 12.31.45, subsection a, part 12.

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

 *pukes.

I can't believe you are comparing this issue to race or women's rights.   

I will not accept the notion that some were "born" gay,  any more than I will accept the thought that some are born with bestial tendencies.   

  If it can't produce offspring how could it be natural?    

You will try to claim that I hate gay people.   And that is simply not true.    I do not accept what they do,  but I do not hate them  #fact.

#still puking.   

sparetire Said:
 

Candiru Said:
Our moral values are constantly changing.   Years ago slavery was OK, women were not allowed the right to vote, beating your wife was OK, and racial segregation was looked at as a good thing.   ND thought that unmarried men and women should not be allowed to live together, that law has been repealed.    Years ago you would not have seen a farmer out in the field on Sunday, now it's commonplace.     Teenage girls getting married was OK, now it is not.     If laws have not been changed in some sates it is probably because it has not been an issue.   It is hard to say that all change is good or all change is bad, but things have and will continue to change.  

Attitudes on gay marriage are changing because the gay community has been making their case and people, young people in particular, are siding with them.    Young people favor gay marriage by a large margin.  It is going to happen.     All these years of debate and all the anti-gay marriage folks can come up with is something about the bible, sin, or deflect with pedophilia/beastiality 

Being gay in this day and age is looked at by many people, myself included, as being no different than race;   they did not choose to be born that way it just happened.     As with race they deserve protection against discrimination.   

We should have a society where people are free to be themselves and pursue happiness as long as you don't step on someone else's toes.   The gays and lesbians that I have known in my life have been good and decent people.   They work, obey the law, and pay taxes.    None of them ever tried to recruit me and have treated me with decency and respect.  


I think that captures it right there.

I would also say, gst, that if you're worried about the shifting of the definition of marriage, lobby the government to get them out of the business of issuing marriage licenses at all and let everybody get civil unions for the governmental rights they bestow.  You will get no fight from me if you wish to have your church recognize marriages and define them however they like.  At this point, however, marriage remains a government sanctioned relationship, and I feel our government is being discriminatory when not all consenting adults are allowed to enter into marriage with the consenting adult of mutual choosing.

And yes, the "incrementalism" argument is beyond played out.  It has been demonstrated how this so-called argument could be applied to virtually any law of one's choosing, and it becomes just silly.

Allow 16 year olds to drive?  Heck no!  Next thing you know we'll be teaching driver's ed in kindergarten!

Allow hunting of coyotes? NO!  Next thing you know, it will be legal for somebody to come "hunt" my pet black lab!

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

Tell me about your father.    Was he there for you as a child?   

Gays can do whatever they want,  but they certainly shouldn't call it marriage.   
Denial and buttplay sound more factual to me.

Candiru Said:
 If protecting gay people so they can live their lives without fear of being fired from a job, denied housing, or discriminated against including entering into marriage with another fully consenting adult and all the benefits attached to it;  means I am imposing my morals on others, I will proudly plead guilty.  

sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

 

The Mantis Said:
 *pukes.

I can't believe you are comparing this issue to race or women's rights.   

I will not accept the notion that some were "born" gay,  any more than I will accept the thought that some are born with bestial tendencies.   

  If it can't produce offspring how could it be natural?    

You will try to claim that I hate gay people.   And that is simply not true.    I do not accept what they do,  but I do not hate them  #fact.

#still puking.   

I'll ask you the same thing I asked gst.  Should people with androgen insensitivity syndrome be allowed to marry?  Is that condition "not natural"?   How about women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome?  Should they be allowed to get married?

If you know any gay people, sometime you should ask them when they chose to be gay, and why they chose to be gay. 


The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

sparetire Said:
 

The Mantis Said:
 *pukes.

I can't believe you are comparing this issue to race or women's rights.   

I will not accept the notion that some were "born" gay,  any more than I will accept the thought that some are born with bestial tendencies.   

  If it can't produce offspring how could it be natural?    

You will try to claim that I hate gay people.   And that is simply not true.    I do not accept what they do,  but I do not hate them  #fact.

#still puking.   

I'll ask you the same thing I asked gst.  Should people with androgen insensitivity syndrome be allowed to marry?  Is that condition "not natural"?   How about women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome?  Should they be allowed to get married?

If you know any gay people, sometime you should ask them when they chose to be gay, and why they chose to be gay. 

I can't say that I know any gay folks at the moment.   I do however,  know four different girls that were lesbians for a while.   They were lesbians through and through they claimed,   they wanted to be accepted they said.   One of them hoped to marry her partner.    You know what the crazy thing is?     Two of them are married to men,  another has since renounced her lesbianism,  and the other is living with her boyfriend.     I guess these are just four random gay people that just weren't "born that way".    Apparently they were just born to flop back and forth a bit?   Or perhaps they had no IDENTITY and thought being gay would help.   

I know men from my grandfather's generation with feminine voices.   But nobody ever told them they could be gay so they got married and had kids like a man should.   Is that how it works?    Were they born gay or straight?   You're the gay expert why don't you explain all these things to us oh great gay authority,   o ye respecter of the weak and gay!   You gay morality mastermind!

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

This is gay

Neat

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

 

johnr Said:
This is gay
sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

I can't say that I know any gay folks at the moment.   I do however,  know four different girls that were lesbians for a while.   They were lesbians through and through they claimed,   they wanted to be accepted they said.   One of them hoped to marry her partner.    You know what the crazy thing is?     Two of them are married to men,  another has since renounced her lesbianism,  and the other is living with her boyfriend.     I guess these are just four random gay people that just weren't "born that way".    Apparently they were just born to flop back and forth a bit?   Or perhaps they had no IDENTITY and thought being gay would help.   

I know men from my grandfather's generation with feminine voices.   But nobody ever told them they could be gay so they got married and had kids like a man should.   Is that how it works?    Were they born gay or straight?   You're the gay expert why don't you explain all these things to us oh great gay authority,   o ye respecter of the weak and gay!   You gay morality mastermind!

I will try to answer your questions, but I will also note that you ignored mine.  As for the highlighted portion, I suspect that both of those things do indeed happen from time to time.  
Yes, there are gay men who get married and have kids because they and others think that's what a man "should" do.  I've also known some of these men to find it a very stressful existence, to live in denial.  

How does any of this matter in the context of gay marriage?


espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

I can understand chicks choosing to try gay Life cause some chicks are simply irresistibly smoking!

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

I guess I amstraight because I find gay gay

Neat

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

I didn't answer your other questions because I'm stressing the point that you think it is a birth trait and I do not,   therefore the other questions are VOID.  

This relates to gay marriage because I believe it has to do with the root of the 'problem'.   I believe homosexuality is a mental health issue,  not a birth trait.    

As I told candiru.   Gays can do whatever they want,   but when they want to defile traditional marriage and share the title, traditional marriage supporters aren't going to like it.  Those are really the points I'm trying to make here.   We clearly disagree.   Eight more pages won't decide the issue so I think I'll be done now.  

   I simply disagree with you,  and to me this is a very big issue.

sparetire Said:

I can't say that I know any gay folks at the moment.   I do however,  know four different girls that were lesbians for a while.   They were lesbians through and through they claimed,   they wanted to be accepted they said.   One of them hoped to marry her partner.    You know what the crazy thing is?     Two of them are married to men,  another has since renounced her lesbianism,  and the other is living with her boyfriend.     I guess these are just four random gay people that just weren't "born that way".    Apparently they were just born to flop back and forth a bit?   Or perhaps they had no IDENTITY and thought being gay would help.   

I know men from my grandfather's generation with feminine voices.   But nobody ever told them they could be gay so they got married and had kids like a man should.   Is that how it works?    Were they born gay or straight?   You're the gay expert why don't you explain all these things to us oh great gay authority,   o ye respecter of the weak and gay!   You gay morality mastermind!

I will try to answer your questions, but I will also note that you ignored mine.  As for the highlighted portion, I suspect that both of those things do indeed happen from time to time.  
Yes, there are gay men who get married and have kids because they and others think that's what a man "should" do.  I've also known some of these men to find it a very stressful existence, to live in denial.  

How does any of this matter in the context of gay marriage?

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

I didn't answer your other questions because I'm stressing the point that you think it is a birth trait and I do not,   therefore the other questions are VOID.  

This relates to gay marriage because I believe it has to do with the root of the 'problem'.   I believe homosexuality is a mental health issue,  not a birth trait.    

As I told candiru.   Gays can do whatever they want,   but when they want to defile traditional marriage and share the title, traditional marriage supporters aren't going to like it.  Those are really the points I'm trying to make here.   We clearly disagree.   Eight more pages won't decide the issue so I think I'll be done now.  

   I simply disagree with you,  and to me this is a very big issue.

sparetire Said:

I can't say that I know any gay folks at the moment.   I do however,  know four different girls that were lesbians for a while.   They were lesbians through and through they claimed,   they wanted to be accepted they said.   One of them hoped to marry her partner.    You know what the crazy thing is?     Two of them are married to men,  another has since renounced her lesbianism,  and the other is living with her boyfriend.     I guess these are just four random gay people that just weren't "born that way".    Apparently they were just born to flop back and forth a bit?   Or perhaps they had no IDENTITY and thought being gay would help.   

I know men from my grandfather's generation with feminine voices.   But nobody ever told them they could be gay so they got married and had kids like a man should.   Is that how it works?    Were they born gay or straight?   You're the gay expert why don't you explain all these things to us oh great gay authority,   o ye respecter of the weak and gay!   You gay morality mastermind!

I will try to answer your questions, but I will also note that you ignored mine.  As for the highlighted portion, I suspect that both of those things do indeed happen from time to time.  
Yes, there are gay men who get married and have kids because they and others think that's what a man "should" do.  I've also known some of these men to find it a very stressful existence, to live in denial.  

How does any of this matter in the context of gay marriage?

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

I didn't answer your other questions because I'm stressing the point that you think it is a birth trait and I do not,   therefore the other questions are VOID.  

This relates to gay marriage because I believe it has to do with the root of the 'problem'.   I believe homosexuality is a mental health issue,  not a birth trait.    

As I told candiru.   Gays can do whatever they want,   but when they want to defile traditional marriage and share the title, traditional marriage supporters aren't going to like it.  Those are really the points I'm trying to make here.   We clearly disagree.   Eight more pages won't decide the issue so I think I'll be done now.  

   I simply disagree with you,  and to me this is a very big issue.

sparetire Said:

I can't say that I know any gay folks at the moment.   I do however,  know four different girls that were lesbians for a while.   They were lesbians through and through they claimed,   they wanted to be accepted they said.   One of them hoped to marry her partner.    You know what the crazy thing is?     Two of them are married to men,  another has since renounced her lesbianism,  and the other is living with her boyfriend.     I guess these are just four random gay people that just weren't "born that way".    Apparently they were just born to flop back and forth a bit?   Or perhaps they had no IDENTITY and thought being gay would help.   

I know men from my grandfather's generation with feminine voices.   But nobody ever told them they could be gay so they got married and had kids like a man should.   Is that how it works?    Were they born gay or straight?   You're the gay expert why don't you explain all these things to us oh great gay authority,   o ye respecter of the weak and gay!   You gay morality mastermind!

I will try to answer your questions, but I will also note that you ignored mine.  As for the highlighted portion, I suspect that both of those things do indeed happen from time to time.  
Yes, there are gay men who get married and have kids because they and others think that's what a man "should" do.  I've also known some of these men to find it a very stressful existence, to live in denial.  

How does any of this matter in the context of gay marriage?

eberg83's picture
eberg83
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/11/12

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

 Sorry for the floooooooooood of posts.   T'wer not intentional

The Mantis's picture
The Mantis
Offline
Joined: 12/7/12

Are you saying some people were born to hate gays?    

johnr Said:
I guess I amstraight because I find gay gay
gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

sparetire Said:

So spare, what do YOU think of New Hampshire's law that allows a 40 year old man to marry a 13 year old girl? 
 
How about Florida's marriage laws that allow "adults" to marry "children"?

Perhaps you just think they are "silly".

Candiru, Same question.

I think such laws are wrong.  A 13 year old is not a consenting adult.  These laws have nothing to do with the so-called incrementalism between gay marriage and pedophilia. I think marriage is a legally binding contract, and as such, a person should be the age of majority in order to enter into it.

I don't think that states' rights are the be-all end-all.  

This whole business that marriage needs to be between people who can procreate together is a slippery slope.  I ask you, which of the following people would you allow to get married?

-women with Turner syndrome.
-women with androgen insensitivity syndrome.
-men who have had a vasectomy.
-post-menopausal women.

If you would allow them to marry, why?  They can't procreate.  

Would you let a post-op trans-sexual woman marry a man?  Should each person have chromosomal testing before marriage, in order to prove their biologic gender?


Spare tire, perhaps you missed the two important words I emboldened.

"by design"

Whether you believe in creation or evolution, you can not deny by design it takes a man and a woman to procreate the species.

Perhaps you can think abit about the phrase "by design" before you wish to quibble about such things as you list.

sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

 

The Mantis Said:
I didn't answer your other questions because I'm stressing the point that you think it is a birth trait and I do not,   therefore the other questions are VOID.  

This relates to gay marriage because I believe it has to do with the root of the 'problem'.   I believe homosexuality is a mental health issue,  not a birth trait.    

As I told candiru.   Gays can do whatever they want,   but when they want to defile traditional marriage and share the title, traditional marriage supporters aren't going to like it.  Those are really the points I'm trying to make here.   We clearly disagree.   Eight more pages won't decide the issue so I think I'll be done now.  

   I simply disagree with you,  and to me this is a very big issue.

Okay, try these then.

Should women who choose permanent contraception, such as tubal ligation be allowed to marry?
Should men and women who have no intention of having children be allowed to marry?

I'll say it again, if marriage were not something that was sanctioned by governments, I would have no beef with you, your church, or whatever other organization defining it however they see fit.  As it stands, currently two mutually consenting adults are able to enter into a contract that is sanctioned by the government.  This contract confers special privileges to those people.  Currently, those people must be (or at least claim to be) a man and a woman.  This contract is called a marriage by government entities, who issue a marriage license.  This is discriminatory, and I don't believe governments should discriminate in this way.  My thoughts on this wouldn't change even if I thought gay people made a choice to be gay.  

If people who believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman would convince their governments to stop sanctioning what they see as a religious institution, this problem would melt away very quickly.  No more marriage licenses.  If it is felt necessary to retain such things as spousal privilege, inheritance rights, filing of joint income tax, allow each consenting adult to identify one other mutually consenting adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, ability to have children, or any other thing, and let the government sanction that relationship.


sparetire's picture
sparetire
Offline
Joined: 5/14/09

Spare tire, perhaps you missed the two important words I emboldened.

"by design"

Whether you believe in creation or evolution, you can not deny by design it takes a man and a woman to procreate the species.

Perhaps you can think abit about the phrase "by design".

Sometimes that design doesn't work out, though, does it?  Which is why I asked those questions.  I notice that you didn't answer them.  I believe I've offered my perspective on each of the questions you've asked me.  How about you go back and answer mine?


gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Candiru Said:
Good grief,   Why are you so infatuated with teenagers getting married?  Is that all you got?

I would guess that those laws, NH in particular, are holdovers from another era.   If this stuff were actually going on now I would imagine there would be a drive to repeal it due to public outrage.    At one time a 13 year old getting married to an older man was viewed as being OK.  It is no longer.

 I strongly disapprove of people under 18 getting married.  If I was living in one of those states I would be asking my legislator to change those laws to make the age 18.    

How many people under 18 are getting married these days?   I really don't think it is very many at all.      Where is the movement out there to lower the age of marriage?   I really don't see it.    

I think we were all sickened a few years ago when the dealings of Warren Jeffs and the polygamist FLDS were revealed.   It is some really sick shit.  Google and read up on it.  It is a cult built around old men having sex with girls.   Or do you think that the gov't was violating the "religious freedom" of Warren Jeffs when they threw him in jail for life?

Instead of just guessing perhaps you can inform yourself a little. I provided a link to several states marriage laws some of which allow by law the marriage of children to adults.

In Florida, a judge can make that decision regardless of what the parent might wish.

Stop trying to "deflect" from what is happening as our "morals change" in this country.

But at least thanks for admitting you would argue against something you find morally wrong.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

espringers Said:
I assume a 14 year old would need parental consent and a court waiver to get married... And also assume the same rules would apply to boys as they do girls... I find it disgusting and doubt they are allowed under anything but extremely extraordinary circumstances that i couldnt even imagine...

So this is your answer to the question regarding marriage laws in New Hampshire?

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

beminoid31 Said:
 Gst-last I checked we were in ND, not NH,OR,NV, FL ect ect. Your argument keeps going to what most think is pedophilia. Get over it. Who cares if a guy wants to marry a guy or woman wants to marry a woman. Through 12 pages we get that your opinion is the only one that you care about, #letitgo

nice deflection from having to take a stance on what happens as our "morals change".

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Candiru Said:
 If protecting gay people so they can live their lives without fear of being fired from a job, denied housing, or discriminated against including entering into marriage with another fully consenting adult and all the benefits attached to it;  means I am imposing my morals on others, I will proudly plead guilty.  

Where has anyone suggest gays be fired, denied housing or even denying gays the benefits associated with the legalities of marriage outside a title?

Quit trying to deflect by making false claims.

Pages