Sign In
Register
Help
I understand, however you need to just ignore it. Everyone here has their opinion on religion and their option to chose a religion, but people shouldn't be insulted for either having one or not having one. Respect someone's religious preference whether you believe in it or not. This is a debate forum to post your opinion, not a forum to force everyone to believe your opinion.
United States Gay Marrige Ban
MultiQuote
#334
Mobster101 
- C=B
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1,217
- Joined: 10-March 05
- Location:Miami, Florida
Posted 06 May 2005 - 11:58 PM
Ok ok ok, Back on topic now.
Being gay, in my opinion, is wrong and unnatural. It is selfish and that selfishness should not be "ok'd" by the United states Goverment.
Being gay, in my opinion, is wrong and unnatural. It is selfish and that selfishness should not be "ok'd" by the United states Goverment.
Cliff=Bumgardner
#335
Baseballl
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Moderator
- Posts: 5,469
- Joined: 20-December 02
Posted 07 May 2005 - 12:34 AM
I can see how you think it is selfish, but they just want to be recognized as a couple. They don't want any other special rights other than marriage rights, which I don't really have a problem with it.
The population argument won't fly because they are going to be gay anyway, regardless of marriage. So giving them those rights won't affect anyone, except recognize them for being humans and having their own choice on how to live their lives.
The population argument won't fly because they are going to be gay anyway, regardless of marriage. So giving them those rights won't affect anyone, except recognize them for being humans and having their own choice on how to live their lives.
Alex
#336
Mobster101
- C=B
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1,217
- Joined: 10-March 05
- Location:Miami, Florida
Posted 07 May 2005 - 12:36 AM
True, i was thinking though. A ban won't do anything..no more than a gun or drugs ban. It won't matter. So..whats even the point of debating it? Just a thought...
Cliff=Bumgardner
#337
Dragonman
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Super Moderator
- Posts: 6,890
- Joined: 11-November 02
- Location:Miami, Florida
Posted 07 May 2005 - 07:40 AM
Banning gay marriage simply prevents gay couples from having family benefits and such. Just because they can't get married doesn't mean they're gonna switch teams again. I dunno, maybe it should be banned so that homosexuality isn't widespread throught the future and then corrupts your existince. 
"Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
--K
#338
Jarik C-Bol
- Blue. The one true color.
-
- Group: Moderator
- Posts: 1,558
- Joined: 20-April 03
- Location:Miami, Florida
Posted 07 May 2005 - 08:05 AM
Re-Posting this because it got ignored dureing our little of topic trip:
QUOTE(Jarik C-Bol @ May 4 2005, 07:03 PM)
Here's what I see:
It’s not about marriage, that’s a side issue that is just currently in the spotlight.
Here’s what the problem is, (as I see it):
Gays have been given a bad name and face by a select few people (on TV, in the news ect.) this face is the annoying "fruity" aspect. I for one don't believe that your sexual preference actually reflects much on the way you dress, talk, walk, and shake hands. However, there are a lot of gays in the public spotlight who behave in what literally feels like an "abnormal" way, talking in a falsetto voice, using language that is feels forced. Honestly, for me (not gay) it annoys me, it looks un-natural to me.
So how is this source of the problem? Non-gays have been essentially force-fed the idea that this behavior is normal (when it feels wrong to us) it’s really hard to convince anyone that something that feels wrong is good) and we are tired of it.
Non gays are tired of being told over and over to accept gay people, and that it is normal. Normal or not, is not the problem, the problem is we're tired of being told.
It’s a push and push back type thing. a lot of people i've talked to about gay rights tell me that they are willing to let gays have all the rights they want, as long as they (the people I talked to) don’t have to give up any rights. However, at this time, a lot of non-gays feel like they are being forced to give up the right to not like what some people do (free speech anyone?)
what I mean is, when a non gay says something about what he does not like about gays, and is immediately shouted down and told he is not supposed to hate, and should accept gays, he/she feels like his/her free speech is being violated. (Make sense?)
So, when gays ask for the right to marry, the people who get the feeling that they are loosing there free speech to the gays are going to push back and say no. why? Because it is the obvious way to fight back.
So, what we have here is a dilemma. The biggest problem that keeps gays from getting the right to marry is the gay rights activists who try to keep people from voicing there opinions about gays. So I think that if gays want the right to marry, the people who are pushing the hardest for the right need to take a step back and realize that they are stepping on the toes of a lot of other people by "forcing" the idea on them. Gays can get the right to marry, but only if they realize that no matter what happens, not everyone will "accept" them
You can’t have a perfect world where everyone gets along; we tried it before, and failed. the best we can do is realize that even though you may not like someone, or they may not like you, the best you can do is let them have a little, and then they will give a little. (Let non gays have there dislike (hate is to strong a word for it), and then gays will get something they want)
It’s not about marriage, that’s a side issue that is just currently in the spotlight.
Here’s what the problem is, (as I see it):
Gays have been given a bad name and face by a select few people (on TV, in the news ect.) this face is the annoying "fruity" aspect. I for one don't believe that your sexual preference actually reflects much on the way you dress, talk, walk, and shake hands. However, there are a lot of gays in the public spotlight who behave in what literally feels like an "abnormal" way, talking in a falsetto voice, using language that is feels forced. Honestly, for me (not gay) it annoys me, it looks un-natural to me.
So how is this source of the problem? Non-gays have been essentially force-fed the idea that this behavior is normal (when it feels wrong to us) it’s really hard to convince anyone that something that feels wrong is good) and we are tired of it.
Non gays are tired of being told over and over to accept gay people, and that it is normal. Normal or not, is not the problem, the problem is we're tired of being told.
It’s a push and push back type thing. a lot of people i've talked to about gay rights tell me that they are willing to let gays have all the rights they want, as long as they (the people I talked to) don’t have to give up any rights. However, at this time, a lot of non-gays feel like they are being forced to give up the right to not like what some people do (free speech anyone?)
what I mean is, when a non gay says something about what he does not like about gays, and is immediately shouted down and told he is not supposed to hate, and should accept gays, he/she feels like his/her free speech is being violated. (Make sense?)
So, when gays ask for the right to marry, the people who get the feeling that they are loosing there free speech to the gays are going to push back and say no. why? Because it is the obvious way to fight back.
So, what we have here is a dilemma. The biggest problem that keeps gays from getting the right to marry is the gay rights activists who try to keep people from voicing there opinions about gays. So I think that if gays want the right to marry, the people who are pushing the hardest for the right need to take a step back and realize that they are stepping on the toes of a lot of other people by "forcing" the idea on them. Gays can get the right to marry, but only if they realize that no matter what happens, not everyone will "accept" them
You can’t have a perfect world where everyone gets along; we tried it before, and failed. the best we can do is realize that even though you may not like someone, or they may not like you, the best you can do is let them have a little, and then they will give a little. (Let non gays have there dislike (hate is to strong a word for it), and then gays will get something they want)
#340
Jarik C-Bol
- Blue. The one true color.
-
- Group: Moderator
- Posts: 1,558
- Joined: 20-April 03
- Location:Miami, Florida
Posted 07 May 2005 - 04:58 PM
i didn't say anything about banning it, i said that banning it is NOT the solution.
#342
Neraphym
- Do not want!
-
- Group: Super Moderator
- Posts: 10,332
- Joined: 29-October 03
- Location:Miami, Florida
Posted 13 May 2005 - 02:53 PM
It's been a while since last I posted on here, and I see this topic has grown a great deal. I'm not going to bother and go back and read a bajillion pages, but I'll just post my thoughts as they are now.
1. Homosexuality is not a choice. People are homosexual because that is what their bodies tell them they are. There is nothing that can be done to my knowledge to prevent you from being homosexual or for forcing you to change your sexual orientation.
2. Homosexuality is not morally wrong in the views of many people. Because of this, no one has the right to say it is morally wrong and in doing so, place a ban on gay marriges for that reason. (Do not get me wrong, people are allowed o voice their morals, but what I'm saying is that they don't have the right to oppress a minority because of their 'opinion' on morals)
3. Gay marrige should be legal, and it should be called marrige. Marrige should be redefined as a type of relationship between two people, rather than one between a man and a woman. I see nothing wrong with calling it a marrige and giving them all rights entitled to married couples. Some have suggested something different. They would like to call it a 'civil union' rather than redefine marrige. I think that even if civil unions grant gay couples the same rights as marrige, it is still wrong. I see the situation of having marrige and civil unions as segrigation. It can be defined as nothing less than separate but equal. As we all know, segrigation is wrong and illegal, so marrige rights and the title of marrige should be given to gay couples.
1. Homosexuality is not a choice. People are homosexual because that is what their bodies tell them they are. There is nothing that can be done to my knowledge to prevent you from being homosexual or for forcing you to change your sexual orientation.
2. Homosexuality is not morally wrong in the views of many people. Because of this, no one has the right to say it is morally wrong and in doing so, place a ban on gay marriges for that reason. (Do not get me wrong, people are allowed o voice their morals, but what I'm saying is that they don't have the right to oppress a minority because of their 'opinion' on morals)
3. Gay marrige should be legal, and it should be called marrige. Marrige should be redefined as a type of relationship between two people, rather than one between a man and a woman. I see nothing wrong with calling it a marrige and giving them all rights entitled to married couples. Some have suggested something different. They would like to call it a 'civil union' rather than redefine marrige. I think that even if civil unions grant gay couples the same rights as marrige, it is still wrong. I see the situation of having marrige and civil unions as segrigation. It can be defined as nothing less than separate but equal. As we all know, segrigation is wrong and illegal, so marrige rights and the title of marrige should be given to gay couples.
Neraphym Archaeon
GWAMM
GWAMM