Why won't gay people accept democracy ?

[Pa(b)st Prime]

I give you props for passing the duplicity test. I suspect though that the SSM lobby would be horrified if incest marriage rights accompanied them on the same ballot iniative....

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

The children of Adam and Eve were incestuous, or the race would never have be able to progress.

Think about it, God setup a situation with the creation of Adam and Eve, having the same Father, then having children, brothers and sisters, who then had to procreate to perpetuate the species.

Medically, there is some decent research as to why incest is not good for the gene pool, but no, if people love each other for any reason and want to be married, and are of an age where they are able to make up their own mind, no, I don't object.

There simply is no science to support resisting it beyond the potential damage to the gene pool and progress of a society's physical and mental health.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:

I give you props for passing the duplicity test. I suspect though that the SSM lobby would be horrified if incest marriage rights accompanied them on the same ballot iniative....

I don't expect that people are going to put scientific fact before their religions, and I doubt that they are going to think much that they are the product of an incestuous relationship dating back thousands of generations...

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

My sexual preference is none of anyone's business.

The fact that you would even ask is an absurdity to me.

I support human rights to love each other, gay, straight, with many wives, with whomever they chose as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

Quote from kut2k2:

No, I wasn't making that comparison. Women expect to be hit on by men, even lesbians. It's called normalcy. Being hit on by some closeted gay is in no way normal, especially when I was fantasizing about girls 24/7 and just beginning to work up the courage to approach them.


It happens all the time in our prisons, sad to say. You really are being deliberately obtuse about this issue. Go rent The Shawshank Redemption, it's a great movie on many levels and it deals with this very issue of homosexual rape.


Tell us, Z10, are YOU gay? Because your reasoning doesn't make sense coming from a heterosexual.

 

[Mercor]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

[B
Homosexual behavior exists in nature in some animals naturally. Why is it to be assumed that in some small percentage of human population that gay tendency or homosexual sex is therefore unnatural and a perversion?
[/B]

I don't think animal homosexuality is natural from a sex drive point of view, Animal homosexuality is primarily a social and political act. Mostly used to reinforce social hierarchy, dominance.

I doubt animals see a difference between grooming the Alpha male or getting bonked by that same male.

What is natural behavior ,and the primary purpose of animals is to reproduce.

When a small population acts a certain way it is deviant behavior. The gays know this. Their agenda it to create more gays to get above the deviant level.

This is the reasoning behind the alternate but equal lifestyle and the push into education. In Chicago they want a separate high school just for gays.

 

[jem]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Even after the judicial and legislative branches took steps to outlaw racism, racism existed.

So why bother to take steps to legislate and have courts protect the rights of minority groups if the majority is still going to maintain their prejudice?

This is your argument against gay marriage. That we shouldn't look to the truth of a situation, simply because it won't change public opinion immediately?

We should do the right thing, that's the American way.

No way 50 years ago could Obama get elected, no way. It has not been the passage of laws and judicial decisions that opened the door directly for Obama to be electable, but those open door gradually and slowly gave people a chance to change their ignorant and unfounded point of view.

Change takes time, generations generally, but the same issues apply to the rights of gays as they have to blacks, women, or any other group that has been denied rights as citizens simply because of their color, their creed, or their sexual preference.

Change starts with accepting what is the right thing to do, keeping church and state separate.

If some gay church exists, that believes that Jesus Christ was a gay man, and was married to the appostles...does the government have a right to stop that church from preaching their message?

Why should the government or the people have a right to discriminate on issues on a religious foundation?

That seems to sun counter to the very principle of the formation of this country, religious freedom for everyone and anyone to practice their own religion.

So what if gays think Jesus was a gay man who married other gay men.

It changes his important message of peace, love, brotherhood, love of God, etc. not one iota.

Preventing people who actually love each other from marrying in any church that will marry them seems quite unconstitutional to me.

Having the government decide which religion should sanctify marriage seems even more unconstitutional to me.

this is part of the reason some were saying blacks supported prop 8. Your comparison of gay marriage to minority rights is specious.

Gays have equality. No one is allowed to discriminate against them because they are gay in - CA. Period. This marriage thing is a bullshit political move.

Answer this - what will marriage give them that Civil Unions in CA will not. (legally speaking).

And then why should should not grant the same rights to two men and woman?

Until you can answer simple questions stopit with the bullshit comparison to real civil rights movements. It insults what Obama just achieved.

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from Mercor:

The true agenda of the gays is to have use of the word "Marriage" With civil unions they would receive all the same rights but they want more.
At this point in time the State should drop the word "Marriage". Leave that word only for the church.

The true agenda is to make gay lifestyle an alternate but equal lifestyle. They want to promote this message to school children. They want to make 2 daddies / mommies as normal as red, white and blue.

Is this alternative equal? What is considered deviant behavior?Some in psychology believe once you get 2 standard deviations from the norm you get into deviant behavior. That means a population under 5%. It is no accident the gays fight hard to claim a population over 5% ,they say close to 10%. Most non-gays put it close to 2%.

I agree with oktiri, you nailed it in this post. That 10% number always struck me as bogus.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Just exactly is natural from a sex point of drive, from a scientific point of view?

As far as a small part of a population acting differently being deviant, than I would have to say that out of the entire population who attempts to trade, those who are successful are deviant...given the norm is failure.

Quote from Mercor:

I don't think animal homosexuality is natural from a sex drive point of view, Animal homosexuality is primarily a social and political act. Mostly used to reinforce social hierarchy, dominance.

I doubt animals see a difference between grooming the Alpha male or getting bonked by that same male.

What is natural behavior ,and the primary purpose of animals is to reproduce.

When a small population acts a certain way it is deviant behavior. The gays know this. Their agenda it to create more gays to get above the deviant level.

This is the reasoning behind the alternate but equal lifestyle and the push into education. In Chicago they want a separate high school just for gays.

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Just exactly is natural from a sex point of drive, from a scientific point of view?

As far as a small part of a population acting differently being deviant, than I would have to say that out of the entire population who attempts to trade, those who are successful are deviant...given the norm is failure.

Is homosexuality natural? Of course. It isn't some product of science or technology run amok, it's ancient.

But natural and normal are two different things. Birth defects are also natural, but that doesn't make them normal or acceptable. Before your head explodes, I'm not saying homosexuality is a birth defect. But it is certainly abnormal, mayhap even clinically deviant behavior. I'm not one to claim that homosexuality is a choice. For many it may well be congenital. That's why I have no problem with gay civil unions and I also voted against Prop 22. But the more I think about SSM, the less it seems to be anything but a political move to claim homosexuality is normal, which it is not.

Natural yes, normal no.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Okay, should people with birth defects be able to marry?

They are not "normal."

Quote from kut2k2:

Is homosexuality natural? Of course. It isn't some product of science or technology run amok, it's ancient.

But natural and normal are two different things. Birth defects are also natural, but that doesn't make them normal or acceptable. Before your head explodes, I'm not saying homosexuality is a birth defect. But it is certainly abnormal, mayhap even clinically deviant behavior. I'm not one to claim that homosexuality is a choice. For many it may well be congenital. That's why I have no problem with gay civil unions and I also voted against Prop 22. Buit the more I think about SSM. the less it seems to be anything but a political move to claim homosexuality is normal, which it is not.

Natural yes, normal no.

 

[Mercor]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Just exactly is natural from a sex point of drive, from a scientific point of view?

As far as a small part of a population acting differently being deviant, than I would have to say that out of the entire population who attempts to trade, those who are successful are deviant...given the norm is failure.

Animal homosexuality is not a preference or a choice between male or female. It is used to support social order. Human gays is when sexual impulses substitute the natural urge for reproduction. Is reproduction a natural urge? Yes, it would be hard to reject that premise.

Deviancy is a neutral state. It is not a judgment on right or wrong. It simple says when a population is under 5% it is not the "norm". Certainly, successful traders are not the "norm"