Gay Marriage

Quote from waggie945:

Are you trying to tell us that you do not enjoy anal sex with your wife?

:D
More...


Nope.......tushies are meant to be an exit not an entry....why would you want to go there when you have this incredible thing like the V only a few inches away??? Its warm, its wet, its accomodating and best of all, you don;t have to worry about seeing remanents of last nights dinner there:eek: :p :p
 
Human rights, minority rights, gay rights, baboon rights, insect rights.

Is there ever an end? Obviously we have to draw the line somewhere.

For all the endless moralising of the pro gay marriage movement you would think they just uncovered the moral bedrock on which to rebuild society. But are they willing to follow their principles through to the end?

Are they going to then turn and give the same support to polygamous marriage? If not, why not?

Are they going to support paedophilia? Again, if not why not?

The "rights" issue is much more analogous to those two issues than the "right" to redefine marriage.
 
Alfonso, please tell us why such a "freedom" is an illusion.

Moreover, aren't you rather naive to the fact that lesbian and gay male "unions" have been around for quite some time. This isn't something that just happened overnight because George Bush made it an issue in a State of the Union Address. Perhaps you live in an area that is extremely plain "vanilla" and without much diversity in its population? I live out in the San Francisco Bay Area and people really couldn't care less whether or not a lesbian couple moved onto their block and was raising a child together.

In 1996-97 in Denmark, seven years after same-sex registered partnerships were legalized, a study found that 17% of gay partnerships ended in divorce compared with 46% of the straight relationships during that same time period. This basically flies in the face of those on this message board that seem to think that homosexuality is some sort of a "fad" or that "promiscuity" is indigenous to the lifestyle of gay men or women.

Furthermore, who are you to say how society should be "shaped" or "molded" in our Country? Who are you to discriminate against a group of people that make up 10% of our population?

Again, please enlighten me as to why such a "freedom of choice" is an "illusion" . . .
 
TM:
>" well Sally, its perfectly normal and acceptable...
>BRUCE puts his PENIS into STEPHEN"S RECTUM...""

>" But why Daddy, to make Babies"????

>" Uhhhmmmm...I have no idea!...Love, Thats how
>Bruce expresses his Love"


I just don't know why that is different then...

"well Sally, it's perfectly normal and acceptable... Bruce puts his PENIS into STEPHANIE'S VAGINA..."

"But why Daddy, to make Babies"???

"Uhhhmmmm...not most of the time! ...Love, That's how Bruce expresses his Love".

Why is one a harder conversation than the other? If you are planning on telling your children that sexual pleasure is only for "making babies" then I do see your point, but I doubt that this will be your position with your kids (though I certainly could be wrong on that).

JB
 
Alfonso:
>Do you have children or are planning to?

One..young lady of 19 (stepdaughter since 3yr. Treat her as my own).

>Would you want your kid turing out gay?

I want her or any other child of mine to be comfortable and proud of what they ARE and what they have become. I don't give a rip is that is gay, straight or bi-sexual.

>When you teach your child about love and
>sex etc etc what message are you going to
>convey?

The message conveyed was one of respect and responsibility.

>Wouldn't you agree that for the vast majority
>of people it would be an overtly heterosexual
>one?

Yes, because the vast majority(percentages debatable but not important to the point) are hetrosexual.

>Because people, generally, like and desire
>a heterosexual society?

Again, it will be because most ARE hetrosexual.

>And we'd want to keep it that way?

If you say "we'd" in the context of you...then of course "yes". If you mean "we'd" as in all of us then..."no, cause some us don't mind people practicing there life in this area the way they ARE and the way they see fit."

>That our children would grow up as
>heterosexuals? Is this too difficult to
>grasp?

What's hard to grasp is how you think this will effect your children. You don't plan on marrying someone of the same sex and raising children do you? So, your children will be raised in a hetrosexual environment and you seem quite certain that the results of that enviroment is a hetrosexual child. The problem for your children has been solved.

JB
 
Quote from waggie945:

Alfonso, please tell us why such a "freedom" is an illusion.

Moreover, aren't you rather naive to the fact that lesbian and gay male "unions" have been around for quite some time. This isn't something that just happened overnight because George Bush made it an issue in a State of the Union Address. Perhaps you live in an area that is extremely plain "vanilla" and without much diversity in its population? I live out in the San Francisco Bay Area and people really couldn't care less whether or not a lesbian couple moved onto their block and was raising a child together.

In 1996-97 in Denmark, seven years after same-sex registered partnerships were legalized, a study found that 17% of gay partnerships ended in divorce compared with 46% of the straight relationships during that same time period. This basically flies in the face of those on this message board that seem to think that homosexuality is some sort of a "fad" or that "promiscuity" is indigenous to the lifestyle of gay men or women.

Furthermore, who are you to say how society should be "shaped" or "molded" in our Country? Who are you to discriminate against a group of people that make up 10% of our population?

Again, please enlighten me as to why such a "freedom of choice" is an "illusion" . . .
More...




Sure. Just realize I was referring to a particular example, not the concept of "freedom of choice" in its entirety.

In the post where I made that comment, Diode had agreed with that a variety of factors influenced the emergence of homosexual behavior. So I contested whether this really constituted a "free choice", the way we normally understand the term. Calling it an "illusion" was just a bit of hyperbole on my part, nothing to get worked up over.

Yes, I am aware that some countries have legalized gay civil unions. But yes, I am also 'naive' (or just uninformed) that I didn't realize homosexuals were allowed to adopt children in the US. Well, there's a huge mistake. Sigh.

Just to point out, I am not even in your country. However, I do take a great deal of interest in what happens in the US because events/fads/ideas there tend to greatly influence the shape of things to come in other countries.

Who am I to say how society should be shaped, you ask. Well, on my own, nobody really. It's not as an invdidual that I put forward these views. Rather, I am certain they are representative of a great many people, which gives them great weight. Certainly much more than the rather optmistic "10%" you seem to have swallowed from the gay movement.

And lastly, using the word "discriminate", bold lettering and all, is rather childish, don't you think? You strike me as fairly smart guy. Obviously then you realize the issue runs deeper than anything that can be summed up with a slick buzzword.
 
>Would you want your kid turing out gay?

>>I want her or any other child of mine to be comfortable and >>proud of what they ARE and what they have become.


Lol, spoken like a politician. What does that really mean? You'd encourage your child to be proud of being a drug addict? A whore?

Understandable that someone who has no moral basis would think that way. Unfortunate, in my opinion, that so much of society seems to be turning that way. Well, me and my like won't go down without a fight.



>> I don't give a rip is that is gay, straight or bi-sexual.


But what would you prefer? Honestly now. I doubt you'll backpedal and admit you'd rather she was hetero, but I think in your heart you know you do.



>>If you say "we'd" in the context of you...then of course "yes". >>If you mean "we'd" as in all of us then..."no, cause some us >>don't mind people practicing there life in this area the way >>they ARE and the way they see fit."

>>What's hard to grasp is how you think this will effect your >>children. You don't plan on marrying someone of the same sex >>and raising children do you? So, your children will be raised in >>a hetrosexual environment and you seem quite certain that >>the results of that enviroment is a hetrosexual child. The >>problem for your children has been solved.

Okay, so according to you this would have no impact on heterosexual society. Fine. Just that it would nice to hear you actually address the points I've raised on this rather simply acting like they don't exist.
 
Quote from alfonso:

Marriage is much more importantly a social insitution, not just church institution.

And to the extent that it's a social insitution I think people should be able to have a say in it and not just leave it up to a faggot-dominated liberals to decide for us.

My opposition to gay marriage has got nothing to do with religion.

I am comfortable admitting I am disgusted by gay sex, as I imagine the vast majority of people are, even if they aren't as willing to admit it. But neither is this the reason for my opposition to gay marriage.

If we allow gays to marry and raise families, all the evidence suggests that we increase the likelihood that children raised in such families will turn out gay.
.......
More...

The last sentence here is what interests me. What is "all the evidence"? Can you reference research, studies, precedents, etc.?
 
Quote from alfonso:

And gay sex, I will remind everyone once again, is something that the vast majority of us are disgusted by.
More...

Just out of curiosity, who is "us"?
 
The notion of gay sex is frankly, distateful and uncomfortable to me. But I have no experience with gay sex acts so if Alfonso says they are disgusting, I will defer to his greater authority.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top