California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

failures art wrote:

Foofie wrote:

In fact, if tomorrow a pill was available that would make homosexuals become heterosexuals, what percentage of homosexuals would take the pill? A high percentage, I believe. So, in my opinion, it is only the collective lgbt organized agenda that claims homosexuality is normal and homosexuals should just enjoy their persuasion.

You're probably right Foofie. If there was a pill that could change a person's sexuality, I bet a lot of people would take it.

For that matter...

If there was a pill that made you blonde and blue eyed, I bet a lot would take it.

If there was a pill that let you change from male to female or vice versa, I bet a lot would take it. In fact, I bet many homosexuals would take this pill over your gay-away pill.

Name a reason that any person could possibly feel like they don't fit in, and if there is a pill for it, some number of people would take it. Sure. Fact is, these pills don't exist. More important still, they don't need to exist. Things like homosexuality or brown hair are not diseases. They don't require a cure.

A
R
T

I cannot agree with you. Society should try to eventually offer homosexuals "a cure," in my opinion. It is not like brown hair. It is like hair that the owner knows makes him/her less attractive in the eyes of a large segment of society. So, if there was a pill to make one's hair a certain way (perhaps, silky straight, based on today's concept of "lovely" hair), then yes, many people with the supposed unattractive hair (based on society's current style) would take the hair correction pill. So might short people take a growth hormone to grow taller (already being done by parents of some short children).

And, the pill to cure homosexuality would not be mandated. But let us agree that many homosexuals would rather go through their one life "fitting in," so many would take the pill to become heterosexual. So, the "gay rights movement' could be looked upon as somewhat ingenuous in its claim that homosexuality is "normal," if many homosexuals would very quickly take a "straight pill," if it was available.

In other words, like it or not, much of the lgbt community has internalized the social mores of straight society, and are just reflecting perhaps a bit of over-compensation, or wishful thinking, for their claim that homosexuality is no different than heterosexuality. It is different, since homosexuals are treated by a large segment of society as different. So are Jews, Catholics, and numerous ethnic groups. But, since many causes of differentness is based on one's family history, it cannot be corrected like shortness, or perhaps one's hair, or perhaps eventually, one's sexual orientation.

It might just be a matter of time. Until a straight pill is available for either a homosexual, or as a preventive for a pregnant woman, I understand that gays will continue to promulgate the belief that gayness is just another lifestyle, equal to the heterosexual lifestyle. And, in my own opinion, Santa Claus is also Jewish.

Is that anything like the women's rights organizations? How about minority rights? Ever hear of Cesar Chavez and the Farm Workers Union? That was for mostly the Hispanics that work out on our farms.

It's because the title of this forum is "California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban" which relates to their battle to win equal rights in our country. Maybe, you just don't understand what all that entails for the minorities or women who must continue to fight for their equal rights. Did you know that women still earn less on average for the same job performed by men? Is their fight for equal pay not warranted?

I do try to understand your position and I do apologise for my boring post I am thankful for your enlightenment.

I just would like to meet and converse with one of these people that you speak of so that I can get a more complete understanding of what you define as a transplant gay person.

failures art wrote:

Foofie wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:

the fact that there is a religious issue here for many people.

all the more reason to let people choose to go back to the church for marriage, which presumably will require that the individuals sign contracts which are church approved.

Exactly!

If they go to that church. The Unitarians and other churches will marry homosexuals.

The part about the contract is where you'll run into trouble. If the point of the contract was solely for the benefit of the two people getting married, this wouldn't be so bad. You could even get married at a bank, they do contracts. Homosexuals don't need a church. The problem is that if marriage has ANY sort of recognition (child custody, hospital visitation, tax filing, etc), the contract from the Catholic church must be recognized in the same way as the Unitarian church.

A
R
T

So go argue with the Vatican!

I cannot agree with you. Society should try to eventually offer homosexuals "a cure," in my opinion.

It is not like brown hair. It is like hair that the owner knows makes him/her less attractive in the eyes of a large segment of society. So, if there was a pill to make one's hair a certain way (perhaps, silky straight, based on today's concept of "lovely" hair), then yes, many people with the supposed unattractive hair (based on society's current style) would take the hair correction pill.

So might short people take a growth hormone to grow taller (already being done by parents of some short children).

And, the pill to cure homosexuality would not be mandated. But let us agree that many homosexuals would rather go through their one life "fitting in," so many would take the pill to become heterosexual.

So, the "gay rights movement' could be looked upon as somewhat ingenuous in its claim that homosexuality is "normal," if many homosexuals would very quickly take a "straight pill," if it was available.

In other words, like it or not, much of the lgbt community has internalized the social mores of straight society, and are just reflecting perhaps a bit of over-compensation, or wishful thinking, for their claim that homosexuality is no different than heterosexuality.It is different, since homosexuals are treated by a large segment of society as different.

So are Jews, Catholics, and numerous ethnic groups. But, since many causes of differentness is based on one's family history, it cannot be corrected like shortness, or perhaps one's hair, or perhaps eventually, one's sexual orientation.

It might just be a matter of time. Until a straight pill is available for either a homosexual, or as a preventive for a pregnant woman, I understand that gays will continue to promulgate the belief that gayness is just another lifestyle, equal to the heterosexual lifestyle.

And, in my own opinion, Santa Claus is also Jewish.

And, in my own opinion, Santa Claus is also Jewish.

Ok I do believe that you know that I was only joking in my last post, but I do have a serious question for you though. Have you ever studied neuroscience? If you had a brain tumor or some other brain broblem would you seek the help of a neurosurgeon?
The reason why I ask is because if I am not mistaken 99.9% of them have a different view point about religion than you do. If you would like I think that I could prove it. Now I do realize that I could be wrong. I am only sharing info with you that I have studied from neuroscience.

But, to come to the "big city, and then they might acquire a "big mouth" can be viewed as Janus faced, regardless of the correctness of keeping their mouths shut in their homophobic hometowns!

We don't have a big book full of lies to defend...

There are no textbooks that voices your kind of opinion.

Foofie wrote:

So are Jews, Catholics, and numerous ethnic groups. But, since many causes of differentness is based on one's family history, it cannot be corrected like shortness, or perhaps one's hair, or perhaps eventually, one's sexual orientation.

So if Jews are treated as inferior and less worthy of life, then they are inferior and less worthy of life because they are treated as if they are inferior and less worthy of life, then they are inferior and less worthy of life because they are treated as if they are inferior and less worthy of life, then they are inferior and less worthy of life because they are treated as if they are inferior and less worthy of life, then they are inferior and less worthy of life because they are treated as if they are inferior and less worthy of life, then they are inferior and less worthy of life because they are treated as if they are inferior and less worthy of life, then they are inferior and less worthy of life because they are treated as if they are inferior and less worthy of life.

Gotcha. Sounds like you're ready to get rid of the Jews Foofie.

A
R
T

Foofie wrote:

Quote:

And, in my own opinion, Santa Claus is also Jewish.

And I always thought Santa Claus was German.

I was talking about "differentness." I never implied anyone is "inferior and less worthy of life."

Quote:

But, to come to the "big city, and then they might acquire a "big mouth" can be viewed as Janus faced, regardless of the correctness of keeping their mouths shut in their homophobic hometowns!

So you would agree with the thesis of mine which I posted earlier that there is a property price consideration in grooming young people to become homosexuals and to incentivise them once on the primrose path to relocate to urban areas.

I suggested that California might be engaging in such a project on a larger scale and that if this project is successful it will become a homosexual state just as certain areas in cities have become homosexual precincts. Then the word "Californian" will acquire a meaning in the rest of the world just as the Gay Hussar has done. Gay Paris (Paree) goes on just the same though. I believe that the Can-can is just as gay as ever it was apart from the two days in the 1890s when it was performed sans knickers and was closed down by the cops.

By using that renowned word yourself Foof to save you typing out "homosexual" you fight a good proportion of their side's cause.