Issues concerning gays -- part XXXVVV

[Ming]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
To change that pretty noble institution into a "bang whatever you want" mentality is more than a little stirring.

Hmmm... so only hetero couples can love each other?

Many couples get married all the time without any desire to raise a family... using your logic, they shouldn't be allowed to get married... because being in love isn't just enough for you...

What matters is LOVE and wanting to make a commitment. Any consenting adults should be allowed that option... It shouldn't be based on your view of morality... because as stated, how would you like it if somebody tried to impose their morality on you.

[Wiglaf]

Again. That can be used to justify allowing orgy marriages of 50 people and their cat. It's absurd to take this "morality is subjective" to say "morality is irrelevant."

Marriage is not only about love between two people. In fact it has not been since homosexuals made this such an issue. Puritan New England since the inception of this country, all the way to today many believe marriage ought to be for procreative and functional purposes, or they cut your ball off.

Now, it's about pleasure pleasure. You think divorces would go down! Ha. If you spot a flaw in some marriages should not be compounded by allowing homosexuals to marry out of pleasure. Divorces would go way up if anything.

[Guynemer]

This is so fascinating, I just can't tear my eyes away... someone who really ought to know better, trying to reason with Wiglaf... fascinating...

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
The fact that straight couples divorce is irrelevant. As you said they do not plan to divorce when they are married; the idea is usually to start a family.

Is it really? And gay couples, let alone gay people, are incapable as parents? Can you prove these statements? There are plenty of studies showing gay people are just as capable of parents as heterosexuals.

To change that pretty noble institution into a "bang whatever you want" mentality is more than a little stirring. It is also the government's call, and the government can decide what is and what isn't fundamentally or historically founded for the best interests of the country.

Bang whatever you want? So I can't love because I don't comform to your ideas of morality? You can't direct other people in this country. This is a democratic country. This is not Nazi Germany. The government DOES NOT direct the social lives of private individuals, nor can it tell people who to love.

Sounds like more liberal BS to me, and in addition this has nothing to do with the argument. If you want to call an institution for raising stable families a wildly right wing operation then I think you need to rethink your widly liberal philosophies.

Oh it very much has to do with this argument. You have brought up morality, and clearly you can only justify your position by the bible (your position has no evidence what-so-ever). You are calling me a liberal? That's like calling Sava a republican.

[Wiglaf]

This is so fascinating, I just can't tear my eyes away... someone who really ought to know better, trying to reason with Wiglaf... fascinating...

More Cowbell. Ha. Maybe you should Sense of humor, come back and DE-BATE.

[Sava]

edit: nevermind xpost

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Wiglaf

Now, it's about pleasure pleasure. You think divorces would go down! Ha. If you spot a flaw in some marriages should not be compounded by allowing homosexuals to marry out of pleasure. Divorces would go way up if anything.

No it isn't. This is very much about love and committment. Say if Asher and his boyfriend want to get married, they should have that right.

And can't you just as easily apply your statement to heterosexual couples? Your comments keep backfiring on you.

[Wiglaf]

Is it really? And gay couples, let alone gay people, are incapable as parents? Can you prove these statements? There are plenty of studies showing gay people are just as capable of parents as heterosexuals.

Great. So you want to make babies in test tubes. Either that or you want to contend that children in marriage shouldn't be raised by their own parents. Great..

Bang whatever you want? So I can't love because I don't comform to your ideas of morality? You can't direct other people in this country. This is a democratic country. This is not Nazi Germany. The government DOES NOT direct the social lives of private individuals, nor can it tell people who to love.

It isn't tell you who to love, obviously. This reminds me of one idiot putting in his profile "HOW can America not allow gays to hold hands." HA!

Gays can hold hands, they simply do not have the government's sanctioned instiution of marriage on their side because they don't procreate.

You have brought up morality, and clearly you can only justify your position by the bible (your position has no evidence what-so-ever). You are calling me a liberal? That's like calling Sava a republican.

No, I can justify it through history, tradition, and common sense. Read more than my first post, Amen. Haha.

[Sava]

Gays can hold hands, they simply do not have the government's sanctioned instiution of marriage on their side because they don't procreate.

So old people and sterile people aren't allowed to get married?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Marriage is not only about love between two people. In fact it has not been since homosexuals made this such an issue. Puritan New England since the inception of this country, all the way to today many believe marriage ought to be for procreative and functional purposes, or they cut your ball off.

Puritan New England was also a tyrannical theocracy with ZERO freedom.

[Ming]

Hey Wiggy... what about hetero couples who have no desire to have children... do you think they should be allowed to get married... If you answer yes, then you are just proving you are a bigot because you won't give the same right to gay couples. If you answer no, then you are just an idiot

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


Great. So you want to make babies in test tubes. Either that or you want to contend that children in marriage shouldn't be raised by their own parents. Great..

By their own parents? Often kids who are left to adoption, are left by parents who aren't able to raise children. It happens a lot. there are plenty of abusive heterosexual couples and if you were incharge these couples would still have the children under their countrol.

Gays can hold hands, they simply do not have the government's sanctioned instiution of marriage on their side because they don't procreate.

They should have the government sanctioning marriage because marriage stands for a deeper level of committment (it is not for procreation). What about those heterosexual couples who choose not to procreate? Should they not be allowed to marry because they don't want to? And who brought up anything about holding hands? I certainly didn't.

No, I can justify it through history, tradition, and common sense. Read more than my first post, Amen. Haha.

You can't justify through history or common sense. Tradition yes. But tradition isn't always right. Eating people for example isn't right, but some tribes in certain parts of the world did it.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ming
Hey Wiggy... what about hetero couples who have no desire to have children... do you think they should be allowed to get married... If you answer yes, then you are just proving you are a bigot because you won't give the same right to gay couples. If you answer no, then you are just an idiot

ATTACK THE IDEAS. NOT THE POSTERS
[/Ming]

[Provost Harrison]

Wiglaf, explain contraception? Isn't that so people can enjoy sex without the babies? I will reiterate, your views are outdated and hold no relevence in a more enlightened society. If there is a demand for orgy marriages too, as you so put it, then so be it. What is the problem with orgies if all are consenting (omit the damn cat, that is just trying to lower the tone of the argument)?

If you desire to live in a puritanical state, then that is your desire, but you have no right to impose that existence on other people who don't agree with your sanitised and closed-minded view on the world.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Spiffor

ATTACK THE IDEAS. NOT THE POSTERS
[/Ming]

Actually... I am. If he thinks that hetero couples who aren't planning on having children should be allowed to get married, then he can't use the no children crap arugment