 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 02 Jan 09 - 04:47 PM There are many marriages that have no offspring; there are many offspring who have no marriages. Marriage is not a commitment to breed; it is a commitment to partner for life. Ake, I do apologize for spouting names, but this has gone roundy-round a few many times, and I think that the core issue is being ignored. You and GfS both seem to think that the civil rights accorded to marriage are about reproduction, although you have no qualms extending those civil rights to non-reproducing heterosexuals, or asexuals. This is just self-contradictory with other statements about your liberal nature. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 02 Jan 09 - 05:59 PM Ake, I used the word "homophobe" not ncessarily in relation to you or anyone specific here, but if you want to put the shoe on and announce that it fits, that's your choice. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 02 Jan 09 - 07:15 PM "Now you and Don both maintain that Guest and I are homophobic bigots because we don't share your views, I can't speak for Guest but by his/her other writing I would say we more or less agree on this subject. For myself, I would submit that I am less of a bigot and more of a libertarian than both of you put together" Shoe?...Fit?.....Bullshit!!.....:0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 02 Jan 09 - 08:31 PM Not a homophobe, then, Ake. Just willing to rule them out roundly without a second thought from your circle of marital privilege? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 02 Jan 09 - 11:47 PM From: Jeri Date: 02 Jan 09 - 03:04 PM I get the same feeling Ebbie. A little too much visualization of other people's sex lives. If all you (whoever 'you' is) can do is obsess on the sex act of people you don't know,.....blah blah blah.... ......Ever seen a 'Gay Pride Parade'???????????? I am glad to see, though, that the bigger issue is finally being addressed. Ake's post is correct..as mine is, as well...and, The post I gave prior(Date: 30 Dec 08 - 04:50 AM) was straight from 'textbook'!...a post that the ideologues seem to just slough off, to spout some erroneous talking points from a lame political 'point', that is founded on completely uneducated nonsense!!!! Nobody here, or anywhere I know is 'denying' them their civil rights. They are, however not being deluded enough, though to call how they want to live 'Marriage', though...because its not, nor will ever be!
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: fumblefingers Date: 02 Jan 09 - 11:57 PM Get the rest of the world to agree to and to put it into actual practice and maybe I'll take another look at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jan 09 - 12:10 AM Most of the rest of the world already does...sweetheart! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 03 Jan 09 - 12:52 AM Nobody here, or anywhere I know is 'denying' them their civil rights. Really? They have the legal right to declare themselves married to a person of their choice and have it recognized under the law? Well, that's all right then. If not, whether you care to face it squarely or not, you are in fact denying them a civil right, because of their minority status. Are you saving up for dual-system drinking fountains too? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jan 09 - 01:00 AM Amos, that is silly. I have the right to declare myself married to a camel..so what??? Somehow, you must have missed a few prior posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 03 Jan 09 - 01:24 AM "Nobody here, or anywhere I know is 'denying' them their civil rights." They're being denied civil rights if they can't name a partner on a health insurance policy, or own community property, or any number of other benefits that are afforded married couples. If they could have those things, would that satisfy them, or would they continue to push to force churches to marry them in the same manner that minorities bring suits against motels for not renting rooms, or sue resaurants for not serving them. At that point, it seems to me, you would have two aspects of the constitution in conflict. The government involving itself in religion, as opposed to a public business refusing service for irrational reasons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jan 09 - 01:44 AM Rig, anyone can name anyone else on a policy, if they want to pay for it, just not as a 'married' couple. Anyone can own anything they want as joint owners,..just put both names on the title. Never heard of a restaurant refusing to serve them....... However, (and the other hack jobs at PETA will back me on this one) they won't serve me and my camel...not even at the 'Tavern on the Village Green', in New York, no matter how much I tipped the Matre'D. Think I should sue???? I mean PETA thinks animals should have the same rights as humans, right???? My camel will make a wonderful spouse!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 03 Jan 09 - 02:51 AM You're spinning hard, girl, but I don't believe you're making the turn. You keepignoring the core fact: the status "M" has certain legal rights of inheritance, tax, and insurance rights that come with it. Those are the specific rights your policy denies people on the basis of their sexual orientation. To do so is unjust. Camels have nothing to do with it. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jan 09 - 03:11 AM A will and a trust, or living trust can be drawn up any way one wants to, Mr. Bright |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jan 09 - 04:40 AM See, what some of you don't get, is that homosexuals can do just about anything they want to do, or mimic, or imitate any domestic living situation they want, with any of the rights afforded normal married couples. But, that is not what they want, nor is it the goal, of those exploiting their grievances, with all the ballyhooing about their rights being 'denied'!..and if it wasn't for the emotional immaturity that is inherent, in their nature, they'd be doing just that...and no one would hardly notice or care...Have you ever seen a 'hetero pride' parade, where functioning, married, hetero couples flaunt their sexuality????...especially in the manner the homos flaunt theirs??? Why do you think that is?? What is with the 'shock value' that goes along with the disgusting, and lewd behavior these people parade around in public?? Are you so naive to think this is a 'celebration' of their 'hip liberated' mentalities??? ..Come on, reach deep. Both myself, and Ake, along with a few others, see it and call it for what it really is....and neither of us have broached any 'religious' or spiritual moralization, on the matter. Why is it, that homosexuals feel such a need to have established religions change their beliefs, to accommodate their deviance??...So they can worship God better?????? Come on, get past your political, persuasions, and ask yourselves, 'Why?' Considering they can do, and in all practicality, do, do what they want, just what is it they want??? For those who go as far as getting trans gender operations, do any of you know the massive and intensive amount of counseling, and re-orientation that goes with it, before the final operation is performed????? You think its just a matter of preference??? Or elective surgery, done on a whim????!! or even done as cavalierly as liposuction or breast augmentation?? You think this is as lightweight as where someone wants to stick it, or be stuck by it??? You think because a guy or a woman decides to be the other sex, its just a matter of 'I think I'll do it this way, or that way'? Do you actually think men and women think and feel intuitively alike????? No, dear Mudcatters, this is far more of a derailment, than I think many of you have pondered...and its NOT just a political question or answer. To even think it is, is just a mixture of ignorance and arrogance, not to mention a lack of compassion, and understanding, of the psyche and emotional damages that accompany, those who have found it 'convenient' to disregard their own gender and traits...and now seek acceptance, in lieu of help!! Like I've said before, however anyone wants to slice it up, re-hash it, redefine it, or go through the motions of it, 'marriage' it will never be, and certainly not by the majority, of not only this country, but the rest of the world (or Heaven, if you will). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 03 Jan 09 - 08:02 AM If I'm covered by health insurance at work, I can add a spouse and children under my care. I can't include anyone else. Those are the options. In states with community property laws, if I own a house, my spouse owns the house as well. I can't exclude her/him, and I can't sell the house without her/his cooperation. Those rights only pertain to a spouse. I won't try to second guess homosexual goals, but the government is treating them differently than other citizens. That's unconstitutional. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Jeri Date: 03 Jan 09 - 09:12 AM I said I get the same feeling Ebbie. A little too much visualization of other people's sex lives. If all you (whoever 'you' is) can do is obsess on the sex act of people you don't know,..... Mart... I mean GfS said ......Ever seen a 'Gay Pride Parade'???????????? So THAT'S your problem--watching Gay Pride parades all the time. (You must have videos because they don't happen all that often.) We don't have them in my area, we have actual gay people who mostly don't act like horny drunk people during Mardi Gras. I can't imagine what they must be doing during those parades, but you might consider not going to so many if they upset you so, and not continuously replaying the videos. If your opinion comes solely from obsessing over a parade, well... the things I could say about that stupid Pink Panther, or Wile E. Coyote! Hmff! Sooner or later, the scorpion does what a scorpion must do This thread has jumped the shark and I'm out. (We need a term that means the same basic thing but is more appropriate to the internet.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 03 Jan 09 - 12:22 PM Running out to the extremes to make an argument that is not applicable to the majority of same-sex people is pretty butt-ugly logic. I am sorry for your constant state of near-nausea, but you're gonna have to grow up some day. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Jan 09 - 02:45 PM
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 03 Jan 09 - 02:54 PM If you are upset by Gay Pride parades, don't go to them. And if you are upset at the thought of someone humping with their pet camel, stop thinking about it. Or, deep down, does that really excite you a bit? I'm really suspicious of those who object the most strenuously to same-sex marriage, or who are concerned at all with what other people do in the privacy of their own homes. Why do you care? Look into a mirror and ask yourself, "Why do I care!??" Or would that be too frightening? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 03 Jan 09 - 04:04 PM My god!! No sane person cares! Do you really not understand what this discussion is about? I think you do know, but are reduced to making simplistic personal comments rather than address the real points raised by his discussion. I don't just mean you Don...jeri's post was disgraceful. At least Amos attempts to address the issues most of the time...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 03 Jan 09 - 08:02 PM Jeri's post was right on the money. It's the comments of a few other people on this thread that's disgraceful. Yes, Ake, I fully understand the real issues here. Do you? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 03 Jan 09 - 10:11 PM The issue is nothing to do with churches or any of your precious, albeit bewildering, religions. The issue is LAW. In this country law and religion are separate matters. Under LAW a minority is denied privileges available to a majority purely on the basis of sexual orientation, according to the disputed Proposition. By fundamental principle this is an unconstitutional action, or effort. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 03 Jan 09 - 11:19 PM Everyone deserves equal treatment under the law. If you ain't got that, you ain't got nothin'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 12:11 AM Sorry I took so long..I've been watching the news quite a bit today.. Ok..down the line: Rig, the law isn't restricting homosexuals from being homosexuals or the practice thereof. Actually, there is more laws restricting smokers, but non-smokers have their objections to them. Are you suggesting that people don't have the right to be offended, or being concerned about homosexuals, and their behavior in public,that draws attention to their 'orientation' as you call it??..A bit hypocritical, don't you think? Amos, The same can be applied to your reply, however you brought in the religious issue. I don't think you seem to understand that to the religious community, the 'law' that governs them is vastly more strict about this issue than secular law. There is a difference between trying to force them to change the tenets, of their beliefs by attacking them, and churches, just not wanting to sanction the permissiveness that they deem immoral. P.S. to that: I found it interesting that Mormons, who still hold to polygamy, (though discreetly), should help finance opposition to homosexuality. Perhaps more attention to 'Love thy neighbor, as theyself' should be in order, and garner more attention! Don, That as I saw, with her link, may be true...but those comments were not made by me....On your first post, I don't go to them nor watch them, other than what comes up on the news,.they are a disgrace! The camel analogy was used to illustrate, that somewhere, someone,(in this case PETA, who believes that animals should be given the same rights as humans) could ridiculously raise the same bullshit about discrimination...and in their minds, they'd feel justified...though in reality, their just whacked out. Sorry, you needed that explained to you, at least that's my clue, that you don't have much of one! Joe, I didn't 'cut and paste'!...hope everyone knows what they wrote before that I'm commenting on...their positions vacillate in logic so much, I wasn't sure if they could remember! Jeri, As pointed out to you by another post...well yours just too stupid, to comment on. Try again after some coffee and ginkgo biloba, and a few years. and back to Rig, I guess smokers are discriminated against, too..because they have to pay higher rates..if accepted at all. For anyone's information ONLY.02% got that??..2/10,000, are born, with a gene that is claimed by 97% of homosexuals claim they are born with, that makes them 'unable' to be attracted to the opposite sex, and in fact, gives them the 'attributes' of being a female being trapped in a male body, and vice versa!! I guess the smokers analogy, just isn't that far off, then, is it??? Ake, Do you play an instrument, or write lyrics, I'd love to hear them! At least your brain works, and if it was 'protest songs', or something creative, at least it promises not to be the same dribble and drivel, as driven by media talking points. I've wondered if you were a fan of Frank Zappa, who was of course, the satirical voice of conscience of his generation.... The rest can join together in a chorus of Kumbayah', as long as they delete all references, and lyrics to 'Lord'...just to be 'politically correct'!....Bet you I made no friends on this post....unless the sky broke open, and a bolt of lightning hit someone, causing them a new experience, called 'thinking, and reason'!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 12:19 AM Oh, I nearly forgot, Ebbie, I left out a lot of commas, just for you. Being as you'd rather count commas, than read text,(or understand it), so,I thought I'd do you the favor! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 12:47 AM Akenaton, I thought I'd post this for you. Though it is 'satirical', there's a lot more truth to this, than one might think. The progression of the story/lyrics, resembles the truth, a lot closer than the lame explanations used to excuse it! www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIoLr8CJzk0&feature=related |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Ebbie Date: 04 Jan 09 - 02:58 AM GtS, thank you for the revelations. I've decided that you are more to be pitied than censured so carry on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Jan 09 - 03:48 AM Sanity - your posts regularly border on personal attacks, and I have received a number of complaints about you. Like I said, address the issues, not the people. And yes, it's clear that you continually copy-paste excerpts of posts from others. If you cannot refrain from insulting people, I will be forced to begin deleting all posts from you that address individuals. It's good to hear your opposing point of view, but stick to the issues. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 04 Jan 09 - 06:07 AM Come Joe, be fair, since when have the pro homosexual marriage brigade stuck to the issues.....they unfailingly resort to personal abuse when their opinions are questioned. If you don't agree you are branded a bigot or much worse....They don't look at statistics, or listen to alternative arguments, they just reach for the tar brush! I have been one of you strongest supporters here in the difficult job you do....although we rarely see eye to eye. I never take up your valuable time by complaining when I become irritated by the childish abuse levelled at me by long term forum members, so they feel free to use words like "vile", "Homophobe", "bigot", etc to describe my views. The only time I was tempted to complain was when one young lady sggested that I probably abused my own children.....this without any comment from moderators or clones! However, if guest is to be censured for his/her posts....which dont seem personal,unless in response to a snidey insult,....then Don, jeri, and even wee Kat deserve a word of criticism.....Ake
-Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 09 - 12:43 PM The issue is LAW. In this country law and religion are separate matters. Under LAW a minority is denied privileges available to a majority purely on the basis of sexual orientation, according to the disputed Proposition. By fundamental principle this is an unconstitutional action, or effort. Two free, adult human beings decide to marry. They fill out the forms, are duly ceremonied and witnessed, and the form is filed with the county or state. They are married. In consequence these people have certain rights of inheritance, certain tax statuses, certain spousal rights to represent each other, certain health benefits, and sundry other bits and pieces of status allowed by laws. According to current law, this process may not be overridden by other people on the basis of race, religion, blood type, hair color, skin color, pH level, political preference, metaphysical viewpoints, ear-size, shoe size, eye color, number of digits remaining, height, habits of tobacco, vulnerability to alcohol, left-handedness, epithelial folds, rate of hair curl, facial asymmetry, or degree of spine curvature. Yet in your high wisdom and sanctity, you decree that sexual yearning alone, of all the attributes men and women have, should serve as a completely sufficient basis to deny this privilege to an individual. Of course, there have been, in more repressive times, many cases where a homosexual man married a heterosexual woman. Should these marriages, then, be searched out and nullified? Perhaps a special police force organized? There have been many cases where heterosexual men married women who turned out to be lesbians. Would you like to offer a resolving decree for these cases? Or do you not care at all about the sexual proclivities as long as one Dongle and one Vagina are correctly distributed amongst the participants, regardless of what they do with said shapes? Oh, and may they invite their friends over later? Please? For some experimental activities? Oh, please? They will fill out the forms if you want....do you need triplicate plans? Pfffffft. This is clearly bigotry, no matter how much the Defenders of Purity insist it is not. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 03:40 PM Ok, then let's get this straight, using nothing but the cold hard facts! Homosexuality is NOT a political issue. It is, in FACT, A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE!! ...and can, and as has been treated effectively, as such! This is not an 'opinion', but a reality. To just throw money,(other people's I may add) at it, is just an indication, of how far the disconnect, between reality, and certain political agendas, who dig up anything to champion, and bitch about, rather than those very same people, lifting an understanding, and compassionate heart to deal realistically, about it! Yes, I know some homosexuals, who are very gifted and creative people, who in my opinion, border on genius, some who have taught, and worked with me, in both music, sound, and laser engineering, but in this one area, AS SOME WHO HONESTLY ADMIT, there is a deep sadness, that they carry, inside...and it is in honest moments, when talking to someone who is honestly compassionate, and not judgmental, can they open up. I know of which I speak, and what I just posted, is indeed accurate! Unless any of you that understand that, I guess you're stuck with turning it into a political issue, and with sterility, just accept them in large numbers, and stay uninvolved, and placate them to launder your own lack of understanding, care, or involvement...and still convince yourselves that you're doing 'something'!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 09 - 04:19 PM Your opinion of their mental health --which you offer as a cold hard fact--is cold enough, but it is neither hard nor fact. It is an amateur piece of psychobabble. Deep sadness? What else is new? Everyone has their own, I suppose, at some level, if only by reason ofbeing bound to the Earth.. It is quite judgemental of you to sweep every same-sex person into a mental health category because you have met some sad ones. I know some who are generally bright, productive, loving and happy with their lives. People who, I would say, are in better mental health than you are! Is it possible you are projecting here? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: gnu Date: 04 Jan 09 - 04:38 PM "Come Joe, be fair, since when have the pro homosexual marriage brigade stuck to the issues..." I have. (Even tho it is NOT marriage... it IS CIVIL UNION!!!!... when are you gonna get with the fuckin program????... pun intended) And I am not a pro. The only kinda pro I am is a master debater. As someone who masters (I have a degree to prove it) in logical debate and analysis, I must say that the lot of you antis seem to misunderstand elementary debating. Fact... being a homo is legal. Fact... civil union is legal. Fact... all persons are equal under the law. Fact... your arguement is completely fucked up. Now, even tho I dislike many of the ramifications of the obvious outcome of this debate... Fuck off and leave these people alone. They are not hurting YOU. You are hurting THEM. gnightgnu |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 04:49 PM Amos, you have just shown me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you don't know a damn thing about what you are talking about. It appears to me, that you argue issues armed with uninformed 'opinions', and nothing else. You have further convinced me, though, that you merely spout off, opinions adopted by a political bias, that in itself, is not grounded in fact, reality, or anything of sound mind. My advice to you, is that you seek professional help, as this narrow mindedness probably affects other parts of your life, and happiness, as well.....and that is the 'opinion' of someone who is educated, and highly so, in this field. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 04 Jan 09 - 05:18 PM Guest from Insanity, your post above is way out of line in any rational discussion. It's simply rude, insulting, and just plain wrong. #### There is a correlation between same-sex orientation and a particular lobe of the hypothalamus (for verification, do some googling yourself—it's there: "homosexuality" + "hypothalamus"). There are several implications of this discovery (made in the 1990s, I believe). One is that there may be a genetic component to same-sex orientation. Another is that it is based on the structure of the individual's hypothalamus, hence it is not a matter of choice as some try to claim. Nor is it a mental health issue. Since it may very well have a genetic component, that means that discrimination against folks with same-sex orientation is like discrimination against people with blue eyes, or different shaped eyes, or differently shaded skin. It is a civil rights issue. Case closed! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 09 - 05:22 PM Well, there you have it in a nutshell. I need professional help, and so does every homosexual human under the sun. Having been advised in this analysis by a true expert, there's no way out. I will seek the help of a professional. Say, GfS, are you one, yourself? A professional, I mean. I'm looking for a highly qualified jolly walker, or maybe a sex therapist. Obviously, I have a lot to learn. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 04 Jan 09 - 05:36 PM Well, the people who reject civil union are the homosexual fundies. As Mr McGrath said long ago it does all boil down to redefinition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Riginslinger Date: 04 Jan 09 - 06:17 PM Would they reject civil unions, if civil unions gave them all of the entitlements of marriage? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: akenaton Date: 04 Jan 09 - 06:42 PM As far as I am aware, in the UK civil union has all the legal entitlements,but of course it is the word which is important. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 09 - 06:46 PM Getting in to semantic horseplay is not going to clarify anything. All marriage-under-law is civil, by nature. The other hankypanky--blessings from old wankers in pointy hats or whathaveyou--is of no interest to anyone, I am sure. So are you saying, there must be two separate but equal versions of the same union? One for opposite-poles, one for like? That's an awful waste of harumph and paper and office space given that it is an identical function being subdivided by a superficial opinion. Why would anyone need to maintain separate but equal facilities for filing papers? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: gnu Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:08 PM Over the top, eh? Yeah. I kinda figured that. But, it's true. Oh, got a PM... figured I would save any others some tine.... no, I am not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:15 PM Don, As I posted in an earlier post, political pressure was applied to get the medical community, and its training, in the professions, to change homosexuality from a dysfunction, as all living things on this planet primary attribute is to survive and reproduce, to merely an 'orientation' or 'preference'. Though alternative debates have arisen, yours and Amos's are an offshoot, stemming from the highly publicized, politically motivated, claims, the are founded on 'junk science', not accurate and proven treatment, of this treatable condition. The figures I gave you, are accurate, and whatever website you researched, may be just a product of 'politically pressured' re-adaptations, of 'junk science'...which is no science, at all.....Sorta' like global warming is caused by SUV'S. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:17 PM Me neither, If I were, it would come as one helluva surprise to both me and my wife. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:18 PM P.S...Don, those pressures, I spoke of, on my prior post, just to clarify, were done in the mid seventies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:20 PM Cross posted. Sounds to me like you're positing an International Gay and Lesbian Conspiracy, there, Guest from Bewilderment. Right up there with the Illuminati, eh? They now control the scientific community? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:25 PM So, GfS: you view homosexuality as an elective lifestyle, perhaps a desperate solution to deep unhappiness or intolerable stress in life? Wonders never cease--the whole body of evidence on genetic (non-elective) causes of homosexuality is bogus??? Politically generated BS? Wow!!! I am really glad you tipped me off before I said anything embarrassing. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:27 PM Look Don, I shot it to you straight...you are entitled to believe what you like..or make up your own stuff, and believe it...it's up to you...but to try to convince me that what is, isn't, is a waste of both our time. It's really very simple....I'm right....and your wrong. I have a working history with results, and you don't. It's really simple. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Don Firth Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:37 PM C'mon, folks, get a clue! A few years ago, in a conversation with a friend whom I knew to be gay, on the idea that being gay was a matter of choice, he said, "When you consider that being gay can get you ostracized from friends—and even your own family—can get you fired from your job, and can even get you repeatedly beat up in a dark alley—or killed—who in his right mind would choose to be gay?" Don Firth P. S. On television a couple of days ago, I heard an interview with a member of Congress. When the interviewer alluded to some political issue he was trying to deal with (relating to the economy) and asked him if he anticipated a hard time with it, he remarked, "Hey, I'm gay, I'm Jewish, and I'm left-handed! How much harder can it get!??" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: Donuel Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:39 PM it seems to me... When scientific doctrine tries to hit religious dogma, it wrongly aims at the head, believing that reason resides there. When religious doctrine hits scientific observation it always aims for the groin. I think Rev. Ted Haggard should have the lifestyle he wants. That is one dude that proves that "if it quacks like a dick...I mean duck...its a duck." Same goes for J Edgar Hoover or King David in Bible who was a real queen at times. Obama has some good quotes similar to RFK on the subject. You might even google an Obama Quote generator and have some fun. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jan 09 - 07:40 PM True wisdom begins with hearing a person with more wisdom than you, and listening to that person, the way you'd want that person to listen to you. |
