Homosexuality

d2sux

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
No, it comes down to that they are ruining the life of an innocent child who has no control over the situation. Can we stop fathers from leaving pregnant girlfriends and their child? No. But we do have control over areas like this and if making gay mariage illegal will save a few more children from having serious issues their entire lives then I'm all for it.

I personally find homosexuality to be wrong and unnatural, but if it's just two adults doing it then I am able to stand ir. But when they want to get married and/or bring children into their lifestyle, then I find that to be unacceptable.
 
L

Laharl

Ironically it's been proven (I cannot find the link) that two gay male parents (Not sure about lesbians, but they are a bunch of "Show boats" or "Attention whores") are typically better parents than opposite sex relationships!
 

d2sux

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Yeah and of course you have no source for that. That's total bullshit. Even if they care about the child more, they're still screwing them up mentally because of the situation.
 
L

Laharl

Very well. I'll give a list of 46 reasons why "same-sex marriage" should be banned.
__________________
1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.

2. Marriage is valuable because it produces children, which is why we deny marriage rights to infertile couples and old people.

3. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

4. If gay marriage is allowed, straight marriage, such as Britney Spears' 55-hour escapade, will be less meaningful.

5. Marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all: women are property, matches are arranged in childhood, blacks can't marry whites, Catholics can't marry Jews, divorce is illegal, and adultery is punishable by death.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because majority-elected legislatures have historically protected the rights of minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

8. There is no separation between religious marriage and legal marriage, because there is no separation of church and state.

9. Devout, faithful Anglicans should never accept same-sex marriage, because it is an affront to the traditional family values upheld by Henry VIII and his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and his wife, Anne Boleyn, and his wife, Jane Seymour, and his wife, Anne of Cleves, and his wife, Catherine Howard, and his wife, Catherine Parr. They all knew the meaning of marriage and none of them lost their heads over the matter.

10. Married gay people will encourage others to be gay, in a way that unmarried gay people do not.

11. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because dogs have legal standing and can sign marriage contracts.

12. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to legislative change in general, which could possibly include the legalization of polygamy, incest, marijuana, and unmuzzled pit bulls. Because we don’t know what might come down the next slippery slope, we should never change any law.

13. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

14. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to things like suburban malls and tupperware parties.

15. Legal marriage will inspire gays to mimic the straight traditions of spiritual commitment ceremonies and celebratory parties, which is currently impermissible for them to do and which they have never done before.

16. Marriage is designed to protect the well-being of children. Gay people do not need marriage because they never have children from prior relationships, artificial insemination or surrogacy, or adoption.

17. Civil unions are a good option because "separate but equal" institutions are always constitutional. In fact, compared with marriage, civil unions are so attractive that straight people are calling dibs on them.

18. A man should not be able to marry whomever a woman can marry, and a woman should not be able to marry whomever a man can marry, because in this country we do not believe in gender equality.

19. If gays marry, some of straight people's tax dollars would end up supporting families whose structure they may find morally objectionable. Clearly, it is more just to continue taking gay people's tax dollars to support straight families, who are going to heaven regardless of what anyone else thinks of them.

20. Gays should hold off on the marriage question until society is more accepting of them, because they are not part of society.

21. The people's voice must be heard on this issue. Therefore, we must have a referendum on a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, because we can't think of any other way to discuss the issue.

22. Each state should decide for itself whether gay marriage will be recognized, because there is no "full faith and credit" clause that requires states to recognize each other's institutions.

23. Gay marriage attempts to replace natural heterosexual instinct with a cultural institution. Morality demands that we subordinate institutionalized commitment to raw, unfettered, biological impulse.

24. Gay marriages could very well suffer maladies like domestic violence and substance abuse. That's why we invented the Quality Control department to pre-approve the righteousness of all marriage applicants, such as convicted serial killer Richard Ramirez who married a woman while on Death Row.

25. Those who support gay marriage aim to overthrow the dominant culture, as evidenced by their enthusiasm to participate in it.

26. If the state performs gay marriages, Christians might become more liberal and trigger more church schisms. Since the government is an arm of the church and is responsible for keeping the peace in Christian leadership councils, it should not get involved with gay marriage.

27. After gay marriage was legalized in Scandinavian countries, more heterosexual couples realized they wanted to live together and bear children without marrying first. Banning gay marriage is a good way to prevent this practice, as is banning independent thought and mandating straight marriage by age 21.

28. Heterosexual marriage was invented in the Biblical book of Genesis. Written somewhere between 1500 and 500 BCE, Genesis came as a great relief to people in many cultures, such as China, who, prior to 1500 BCE, sat around waiting for the Mesopotamians to invent the family unit.

29. Gay marriage would allow more partners and children to sign onto the family breadwinner's healthcare plan. Given that 44 million Americans do not have health insurance, it is safe to say that health insurance is not an American value.

30. The possibility of getting a gay marriage might encourage some married heterosexuals to divorce and seek a gay union instead. These marriages were obviously happy and successful, and the justices who provide gay second marriages should be charged with alienation of affection.

31. Gay marriage may hurl the populace into existential crisis and cause spontaneous divorces. Divorce triggers our moral apoplexia, but we will keep it legal. It is easier to seek the criminalization of gay marriage than the criminalization of divorce, particularly because most of us have had a few divorces.

32. Gay marriage is tainted because some of the applicants might be divorcees marrying for the second time. We oppose remarriage, and would like to ensure that no one marries more than once; therefore we will oppose the entire institution of marriage, to ensure that no one ever marries at all. That casts the net wide enough to catch all the would-be second-timers.

33. The people have the right to demand to vote on a Massachusetts constitutional amendment against gay marriage. There is no reason for proposed amendments to go through the state Legislature first, as is constitutionally required, because the Legislature doesn't spend all that many paid hours sitting around discussing the legal ramifications on behalf of ordinary citizens who are too busy with their own jobs to figure out everything at stake.

34. The arguments for gay marriage are flawed because Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has made inconsistent statements about gay marriage, and he is known for his consistency on other issues.

35. Married gay couples will find it easier to adopt children, who might then be bullied and teased by other children for who their parents are. This reflects poorly on the judgment of gays who adopt children with the risk that their child could possibly be teased. It does not, of course, imply anything about the responsibilities of heterosexual parents, whose children only pick up rocks for geological interest and couldn't have been listening when their parents made those comments about their neighbors.

36. Children of married gay couples might suffer bullying and teasing more often than children of unmarried gay couples, because playground bullies are sensitive to the nuances of contract law.

37. It is reasonable and fair to institute "civil unions" that provide all the rights and responsibilities of marriage, but we cannot apply the holy, mystical word "marriage" to this contract. Deriving from the Latin <i>maritare</i>, "marriage" evokes the dignity of the typical Roman man who engaged in licentious sex with both sexes until he reached middle age, at which time he <i>maritared</i> a teenage girl to bear his children.

38. According to the three proposed "compromise" Massachusetts constitutional amendments defeated by the Legislature on Feb. 11 and 12, 2004, the best way to "protect the unique relationship of [heterosexual] marriage" is to institute civil unions that are in every way identical to it.

39. God created the institution of marriage, just after he created 2.9% APR automobile financing, student loans, HMOs, and divorce.

40. We must defer to the President's opinion on gay marriage, since the Republican party was given its authority by God. As it is written: "Republican and Democrat created He them." Paul elaborated: "Democrats, submit to the Republican."

41. In San Francisco, where renegade officials have married same-sex couples for the past several weeks, experts suggest that the city may suffer an earthquake in about ten years. Geological experts, that is. But good Christians don't recognize the opinion of Earth scientists, who falsely claim the Earth is 4.5 billion years old; they get their seismic information from their preachers, who say the earthquake's coming next week.

42. Allowing same-sex marriage could increase gay public displays of affection, because marriage has historically been proven to stimulate couples' interest in sex.

43. Making civil marriage available to same-sex couples could spur the wedding industry, and businesses would sure hate to pay taxes on all that profit.

44. Straight men are opposed to gay marriage because they would prefer that gay men try to be straight and compete with them for access to women, trimming down the pool of eligible dates to make courtship more challenging and exciting.

45. The country can't afford to provide benefits for married gay couples. That's why Bush would never consider spending $150 million on programs that encourage more straight people to get married.

46. Gay marriage is wrong because children might be led to think that it is right and that would clearly be wrong.

__________________
Note: My religion says nothing of homosexuality being right, wrong, or neither. It's just not in there.
 

d2sux

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I'm not even going to comment on that, that's all just so stupid.
 
L

Laharl

It's satire, insulting the position against same-sex marriage. It does it quite well.
 
L

Laharl

I'll pull out the relevant points.

13. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
12. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to legislative change in general, which could possibly include the legalization of polygamy, incest, marijuana, and unmuzzled pit bulls. Because we don’t know what might come down the next slippery slope, we should never change any law.
35. Married gay couples will find it easier to adopt children, who might then be bullied and teased by other children for who their parents are. This reflects poorly on the judgment of gays who adopt children with the risk that their child could possibly be teased. It does not, of course, imply anything about the responsibilities of heterosexual parents, whose children only pick up rocks for geological interest and couldn't have been listening when their parents made those comments about their neighbors.
 
L

Laharl

As women we don't NEED to vote. So let's do something like voting but call it something else. Like suggesting.

Or how about this one? This is a good one, too.

We don't really NEED to escape from our white slave masters, so let's do something else that's close to it. Like being dragged from a horse.

Doesn't quite work, does it?

I'll be damned if I'm going to sit by and watch somebody else's god tell me who and who cannot be my family.
 

Knox

Member!
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
When 50% of marriages end in divorce and, more likely then not, a large percentage of our children come from unmarried couples (Or couples who get married due to the child) their is nothing sacred about this sacrament.

I honestly think the Catholic Church won’t allow gay marriage since they would lose more of their clergy, which is already growing smaller as time goes on.

Its just that people fear change and want a few basic things standard in their life, which is pathetic but understandable, so we need to find a way to slowly break in gay marriage, not just say all yes or all no.

(Oh. And the whole "The Bible says gay marriage is wrong" is absolutely retarded. The Bible says a lot of things, and if you want to use that part then you would be a hypocrite not to use/believe in everything that it says. When scientists discovered that the Earth wasn’t made in 7 days that part became "metaphorical", so why can’t the no queers part be "metaphorical" as well? ****ing church thinks it can make the Bible say whatever it wants and everyone will agree, and the sad part is that it works.)
 
L

Laharl

You forgot to mention one key thing, Knox. The rest of the world didn't sit around and wait for the "family unit" to be invented by the jews. They made their own systems. The church isn't the only organization to ever allow run "marriage".

37. It is reasonable and fair to institute "civil unions" that provide all the rights and responsibilities of marriage, but we cannot apply the holy, mystical word "marriage" to this contract. Deriving from the Latin maritare, "marriage" evokes the dignity of the typical Roman man who engaged in licentious sex with both sexes until he reached middle age, at which time he maritared a teenage girl to bear his children.
 

Deanoz

Member!
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Location
Anchorage, AK
I think that long as freedom and equality stand amongst each and every member of society, then it should be unlawful for anyone to infringe on another individuals ability to act freely.

I think people that try to make gay marriage unlawful, are people that hate freedom, and are amongst the true terrorists of this country for trying to force their morals onto others.
 

Master.America

Premium Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2002
Messages
4,225
Reaction score
0
Location
San Jose, CA
Website
www.soundclick.com
Wow, this thread is... wow. After reading this page alone, I'd bet that this thread is one of the most chaotic threads in the Arcane Sanctuary.

Needless to say, there's far too much nonsense to comment on in here. Mith that said, I'll just toll in my two cents like everyone else. Please, excuse me if this is redundant; I haven't read the whole thread.


The way I see it, the US government needs to stand by its "separation from church and state" attitude. Marriage was once considered to be a holy matrimony, meaning the union of a husband and a wife through the blessing of the church. Marriage was restricted to the union of a man and a woman because the Bible says same-sex marriage is wrong. However, the US government doesn't follow the Bible, it follows the ever-evolving US Constitution. Of course, the Constitution was formed by God-fearing men (not unlike those who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance), so shouldn't it be modified to allow freedom of marriage?

Don't get me wrong--I firmly believe that homosexuality is unnatural. I believe that it is the result of a genetic mutation--a flaw in the human genome. However, the US government is no less flawed in the sense that it claims objectivity toward all, yet it portrays several subjective biases. Why is it that a single heterosexual atheist male has the ability to remove the words "under god" from the Pledgo of Allegiance, yet all the gays in the nation can't convince the government to allow gay marriage? That, my friends, is hypocrisy.
 

Deanoz

Member!
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Location
Anchorage, AK
Why gay people are gay is irrelevant. If they can't act freely and be treated as equal as a heterosexual as far as rights are concerned, then the nation of America is not free.
 

Tipsy

Respected Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2003
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
2
Location
Washington D.C
Deanoz said:
Why gay people are gay is irrelevant. If they can't act freely and be treated as equal as a heterosexual as far as rights are concerned, then the nation of America is not free.
The thing is, homosexuals and heterosexuals already have the exact same rights as each other. Can a heterosexual man marry a woman? Yes. Can a homosexual man marry a woman? Yes. Can a heterosexual man marry a man? No. Can a homosexual man marry a woman? No. The list of the equalities between homosexual and heterosexuals goes on. Everyone here is right about one thing, civil marriage is in no way a religious part of the Church. It is an economic union, nothing more.

In civil marriage, love is not a factor, attraction is not a factor, very little of the parts in getting religiously married are in civil marriage. There is already perfect equality in marriage between heterosexuals and homosexuals in marriage.

My personal opinion is that all civil marriage (homosexual and heterosexual) should be abolished, the reasoning I have already posted earlier in this thread.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
714
Reaction score
0
In my serious opinion, being homosexual, is just wrong in so many ways.
If God had wanted men to love men and women to love women, he would have made the world that way. Men and women are meant to marry the opposite sex, or not marry at all. Homosexuality can result in alot of life-chainging things especially if this "couple" wants kids. The kids will be picked on, "How come you have 2 dads?". Do you wanna tell your kid that? I myself, and I'm pretty sure no one else sure as hell would want to tell their kids that they are homosexuals and have to tell them what that is.
 

Jimbo

Member!
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
4,493
Reaction score
11
Website
Visit site
_Chris said:
In my serious opinion, being homosexual, is just wrong in so many ways.
If God had wanted men to love men and women to love women, he would have made the world that way. Men and women are meant to marry the opposite sex, or not marry at all. Homosexuality can result in alot of life-chainging things especially if this "couple" wants kids. The kids will be picked on, "How come you have 2 dads?". Do you wanna tell your kid that? I myself, and I'm pretty sure no one else sure as hell would want to tell their kids that they are homosexuals and have to tell them what that is.
If god wanted men to love women, then there would be no homosexuals.
 
L

Laharl

In fact in my religion there are no laws against same-sex relationships; in fact it speaks positively about it.

So my religion allows marriage. In fact it has been doing so before your cult was even started, Tipsy.

Mostly I'm going to be dipped in **** before I allow somebody else's god to tell me who can and can't be my family.
 

The_Raven7

Member!
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Website
www.ytmnd.com
_Chris said:
In my serious opinion, being homosexual, is just wrong in so many ways.
If God had wanted men to love men and women to love women, he would have made the world that way. Men and women are meant to marry the opposite sex, or not marry at all. Homosexuality can result in alot of life-chainging things especially if this "couple" wants kids. The kids will be picked on, "How come you have 2 dads?". Do you wanna tell your kid that? I myself, and I'm pretty sure no one else sure as hell would want to tell their kids that they are homosexuals and have to tell them what that is.
The funny thing about god is that nothing in the bible shows that he gives a shit about humanity. In fact, it basically shows that we're his natural version of The Sims. Nobody creates something "perfect" (twice), only to put something that could utterly destroy it in plain access to anybody who might want to destroy it (like satan and the tree of knowledge). People yap on about "sin" and "temptation", which is funny because it's supposedly god who put prostates in an area accessable through the rear. In fact, plenty of "temptations" are assisted by things that god allegedly did.

And even if he "meant" for it to be one way, that makes the other way wrong? Do you know how many breakthroughs in history have occured because something that was abandoned for centuries was dug up and applied for some other purpose? There is no way to directly prove homosexuality as wrong.

And marriage isn't religious. It's a lineage and family tradition. And what would you say in that situation of being adopted by gay people? How about that you don't have 2 dads, but you were orphaned and given up and they were the only ones who would take you in?
 
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Location
Hell's Toilet
_Chris said:
In my serious opinion, being homosexual, is just wrong in so many ways.
If God had wanted men to love men and women to love women, he would have made the world that way. Men and women are meant to marry the opposite sex, or not marry at all. Homosexuality can result in alot of life-chainging things especially if this "couple" wants kids. The kids will be picked on, "How come you have 2 dads?". Do you wanna tell your kid that? I myself, and I'm pretty sure no one else sure as hell would want to tell their kids that they are homosexuals and have to tell them what that is.
Kids would be picked on because other kids parents might advocate homophobia. And a kid asking another kid if he has 2 dads isn't an insult. In fact, in my elementary school, my friend told everyone that he had two moms, and nobody cared, and nobody picked on him. So that hypothesis fails.

If it was up to God, he would send Jesus to whoop all these blasphemers' asses that declare unjust war in the name of God. But the fact is, we are a society that accepts (or should) all religions. So we can't consider one religion when making laws.

In fact, you can't make any law based on religion, because it's against the very idea of our government. Although there was some religious aspects of the American government that shouldn't be there, the idea is that we are part of a secular government. So the whole "God wouldn't allow it" argument doesn't work.
 
Top