California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

@failures art,

failures art wrote:

...Your opinion however is not sufficient justification for denying homosexuals equal rights.

O.K., I am all for giving homosexuals equal rights; however, in my opinion, objectively (not subjectively) they are not equal to heterosexuals, since only heterosexuals are doing the main effort of continuing society with their own DNA. When the lgbt community raises children, it might just be analogous to hiring merceneries to fight a war. Any war worth fighting, should be done with one's own army, I believe.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

Illegitimate voting measures passing doesn't justify unethical practices to obstruct equal rights to citizens.

there is no such right to do what ever you want as an individual. You have that right only when it does not conflict with someone else's right. You also dont have that right when it conflicts with the needs of the collective. The question on the table is were are ancestors wrong that homosexuality can not be allowed because it harms the collective? Has technology and over population now changed things so homosexuality is no longer a problem? If and only if it can be shown that homosexuality is not a problem at all should it be put on equal footing with hetro sexuality. we are not there yet. All we should do now is what we have already done, which is basically decriminalize it. We should not however make any more changes at this time.

As for equality, you only have the right to feel equal, and be told that you are equal, if you are equal. Gays have yet to show that they are equal.

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

failures art wrote:

Foofie wrote:

I believe society may not want "to go there," since parents, relatives, etc. could then think they are to blame in some way for a child being "gay," and then it becomes a spreading source of discontent in families, more so than it may be now.

I don't think this is a huge concern. Your kid turning out to be gay is not the end of the world nor anything worth guilt.

What if we could find a religious gene and then understood what made some people religious? Perhaps then we could fix that.

We do not agree. I put the family ahead of the individual; therefore, I commiserate with the fact that an lgbt child might end the dreams of people who like to think they are part of a continuing chain into the future of a specific family. This might not seem important to you; however, it is important to many people. Simply put, it really is not all about an individual, I believe. I would rather lgbt people stay in the closet, like in Victorian times, marry and have a family. In that way, one's genes are passed on into the future.

You don't value the family more than any gay person or myself. I want to have a family, and gay people marrying doesn't threaten that. Many if not most gay people want to raise families too, even have surrogate parents and pass their genes on.

Your politics don't get to claim family values. Family values are not only a part of heterosexual relationships.

A
R
T

2 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

Family values are not only a part of heterosexual relationships.

well ya, now that "family" as been redefined and is no longer about genetic connection. "Family" now is like "marriage" will soon be, it means what ever a person wants it to mean, which means that it does not mean anything at all. It is another area of the human experience that we have lost the ability to talk about, because there are no shared meanings or shared experience. This is the definition of a collapsing civilization.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Wrong issue; it's not about "famliy." It's about equal rights for gays and lesbians to enjoy marriage - with or without a family - with all the benefits of marriage. If they want "marriage," why are so many people opposed to what others do with their life? They do not personally impact you in any way, except your bigotry and discriminatory feelings.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Family values are not only a part of heterosexual relationships.

well ya, now that "family" as been redefined and is no longer about genetic connection. "Family" now is like "marriage" will soon be, it means what ever a person wants it to mean, which means that it does not mean anything at all. It is another area of the human experience that we have lost the ability to talk about, because there are no shared meanings or shared experience. This is the definition of a collapsing civilization.

Single parent homes still have the right to call themselves family.
Adopted children have the right to call themselves family.

Your definition of family changing doesn't matter--It really doesn't. I'd love to see you try and prove otherwise. You're free to make your family how you want, but you can't make other people's family. In short, piss off. You're not as important as you think you are.

A
R
T

2 Replies

@failures art,

failures art, Couldn't have said it any better or clearer. Thx.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

Your definition of family changing doesn't matter--It really doesn't

it is not about me, it is about all of us. "Family" used to mean something, now it does not. We should have realized that we were in trouble when the Manson cult decided they were a family, but sadly we did not. Now the concept is gone. Since "family" is now a meaningless term so is "family values", which was my point.

3 Replies

@hawkeye10,

It still means "something." You just fail to catch up with the times.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

It still means "something." You just fail to catch up with the times.

everyone has a meaning, and most of the time they think what they mean is what everyone means, but it is not. At some point people will realize that they are not communicating. The def ranges from the traditional meaning to essentially a posse. Now when someone says "family" it takes a whole conversation just to find out what they are talking about. Lack of precision in the vocabulary tends to destroy communication.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Your definition of family changing doesn't matter--It really doesn't
it is not about me, it is about all of us.

"All of us" includes homosexuals.

hawkeye10 wrote:

"Family" used to mean something, now it does not.

It still mean plenty. If it doesn't mean anything to you anymore, I'm sorry for you.

hawkeye10 wrote:

We should have realized that we were in trouble when the Manson cult decided they were a family, but sadly we did not. Now the concept is gone.

Unrelated nonsense.

hawkeye10 wrote:

Since "family" is now a meaningless term so is "family values", which was my point.

It may be meaningless to you, but not others. It's a pretty sad admission that you care less for your own family as other families are able to get equal protection by the law. Homosexuals don't have any less family values than heterosexuals simply because they are gay. Children raised by gay couples are no less loved or cared for. They aren't any less well adjusted either.

A
R
T

2 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

"All of us" includes homosexuals.

sure, but that does not mean that homosexuals should get everything they want. I dont get everything I want. Do you?

Quote:

It still mean plenty. If it doesn't mean anything to you anymore, I'm sorry for you

Meaning what? What does "family" mean that we can all agree on?

Quote:

Unrelated nonsense.

all usage of the term is related. Historical use of the term in a way that is unrelated to the definition before that time is noteworthy. It is especially if this expansion of the meaning of the term went unobjected to. There is an entire field of study having to do with the evolution of definitions of words, you really should learn up so that you can at least act intelligent.

Quote:

It may be meaningless to you, but not others. It's a pretty sad admission that you care less for your own family as other families are able to get equal protection by the law

you are all for equal protection when you like the people being spoken of, or what they are doing. Not so much otherwise. When you are willing to give equal protection to guys who fantasize about having sex with teenagers but never have done so then we will talk. Until then all you "equal protection" rationalizations amount to nothing more that you promoting what you like.

Quote:

Children raised by gay couples are no less loved or cared for. They aren't any less well adjusted either.

as we have talked about many times this remains to be seen. All we have had up till now are studies devoted to kids who started out in a heterosexual household where the family broke and they went into a homosexual household. We are only now seeing kids who have known only homosexual "family" life.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawk, When are you going to learn that homosexuals don't want more than the others have. You're playing with great imagination in your opinions about what is and what is not. Show us where homosexuals "want everything?"

What is that you have that they don't have? Any clues?

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Your meaning of family only satisfies your personal interpretations. A single parent with children is a family. A gay couple with children is a family.

Some enlightened people call "family" who are not even related by blood, are very close friends.

My best friend used to invite my family to all their family functions, including wedding rehearsals as "family" members.

You must really live in a very small world.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

You must really live in a very small world.

I live in a big enough world where I know people who call their posse's "family", so I doubt that you are correct.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

But your interpretation of family is very limited, so your world view is very limited. You need to grow out of that cloister.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

But your interpretation of family is very limited, so your world view is very limited. You need to grow out of that cloister.

it has nothing to do with me, it is a factual statement that there is no longer any agreed meaning to the word, thus it has no meaning. What I think the word means to me, and what I think it should mean to everyone is not relevant. You are trying to argue that the my personal meanings are flawed, you are far diverted from the point. Is that because I am right and you have no counter argument that will pass the smell test?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

There is no longer an "agreed" meaning to the word for people like you who have not grown with the times. Single parents are still a family. Adopted children are still family.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
"All of us" includes homosexuals.

sure, but that does not mean that homosexuals should get everything they want. I dont get everything I want. Do you?

When what they want is a right that we already enjoy and our government is sword to protect, damn right they get it.

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
It still mean plenty. If it doesn't mean anything to you anymore, I'm sorry for you
Meaning what? What does "family" mean that we can all agree on?

Why do we have to agree on this? Feel free to not think of any family as a family if you don't desire to.

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Unrelated nonsense.

all usage of the term is related. Historical use of the term in a way that is unrelated to the definition before that time is noteworthy. It is especially if this expansion of the meaning of the term went unobjected to. There is an entire field of study having to do with the evolution of definitions of words, you really should learn up so that you can at least act intelligent.

You're attempting to move the goalpost with one of the most absurd comparisons ever. You really think that a group of serial killers is comparable to two gay parents coordinating over who has to pick up the kid from soccer practice. Don't lecture about "sounding intelligent."

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
It may be meaningless to you, but not others. It's a pretty sad admission that you care less for your own family as other families are able to get equal protection by the law
you are all for equal protection when you like the people being spoken of, or what they are doing. Not so much otherwise. When you are willing to give equal protection to guys who fantasize about having sex with teenagers but never have done so then we will talk. Until then all you "equal protection" rationalizations amount to nothing more that you promoting what you like.

You're too predictable. How do these men not have equal protection? Specifically.

Also, get your priorities sorted dumb ****. That fact that you'll go to bat for rapists that get to go through a legal system that favors them already before... well ANYTHING, is testament to your lack of perception.

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Children raised by gay couples are no less loved or cared for. They aren't any less well adjusted either.

as we have talked about many times this remains to be seen. All we have had up till now are studies devoted to kids who started out in a heterosexual household where the family broke and they went into a homosexual household. We are only now seeing kids who have known only homosexual "family" life.

You so casually toss out the work of the APA and the AAP. Just because it doesn't fit your narrative.

This "it remains to be seem" meme of yours is all you have anymore. You gamble that time will prove you right, but as more time passes, and it doesn't you never pay up. Get off the card table, jackass. You didn't come with the minerals.

A
R
T

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

If you're an example of the people who claim to be well read, but can't comprehend simple concepts like evolution, should not make recommendations on reading material. Whatever you're reading is the wrong stuff.

Bloody hell!! I wouldn't like you on my side in any argument ci. You could discredit angel cake. You're as circular as the water going down the bath plug- hole. Do you change direction when you go to see the southern hemisphere?

0 Replies

California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know