So, what do you guys think?
What do you think of gays and lesbians?
What do you think of gays marrying gays?
And for some of you, what do you think of the idea of the bonding of two gays being called marriage?
(Censored for your viewing pleasure.)
Printable View
So, what do you guys think?
What do you think of gays and lesbians?
What do you think of gays marrying gays?
And for some of you, what do you think of the idea of the bonding of two gays being called marriage?
(Censored for your viewing pleasure.)
Its the least of my worries.
They are threatening the sanctity of my marriage vows! Stop them! AAAGGHGHHH!!
(Just kidding - I am in favor of equal rights for all tax-paying member of society, and I don't care what they call it.)
Fras, I think your questions couldn't possibly be more homophobic.
As long as they dont touch me its fine and I dont care.
How are they homophobic?Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
if they aren't hurting anybody then i could really give one rats booty what they do. i think there are much more important things to worry ourselves with than whether it's right or wrong for people of the same sex to be together. it's been happening since the dawn of man, and i doubt anything will stop it.
why the powers that be want to ban it in the constitution is ludicrous. unnecessary and ignorant.
How homophobic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee
Question one generalizes a class of individuals out of all recognition.
Question two employs the archaic and (now considered disparaging) word "homo" instead of the more generally used and PC "gay."
Question three italicizes the word "called," implying that gays don't rate being married, but can be allowed to "pair bond."
Altogether, they convey the clear impression that you keep your distance from gays and the gay community; ignore the fact that gays are also individuals; and suggest that gays, as a class, aren't people, but only curious objects.
Well, I don't wonder when soon homosexuals can have a legal child...
Did you know that many homosexuals actually want to sleep with people who have HIV? A gay man in television, who has AIDS, actually told it.
I can imagine a future city, all kinds of people, wearing latex, mans wearing woimen clothes, rings, lingeries etc. Or there will be big homosexual ghettos.
But well, homosexuals have always been. There are even gay animals. And actually there were homosexualistic civilizations btw. In the Hamurap age, there were even mass homosexual orgies.
People were much cruler actually. Just a few centuries ago, there was a little kingdom in Abessinia where people were incredibly cruel. People cut raw meat from alive animals and king spend his time by making his prisoners blind in many ways.
It also reminds me that there was a paradise island near Africa, not too much time ago. There were only women and when a man sailed there, then he had an orgy with women and after that, he was killed in cold blood. This is not a rumour btw, you could even find some information about it via google. I just don't remember the proper search names.
But I think that marriage was actually ment to be something holy. Marriage is religious btw. This paper signing is not marriage, it is just registering and I can't see the difference if gays just live together or they are registered together and they live together.
But gay marriage in church, no. Although, church has been most gay place in middle ages, no, all the time. That is the place where boy molestating and raping comes from.
*laughs* agreed. And whatever.. doesn't phase me in the least, I'm too busy worrying about my own shit to be concerned with anyone else's.Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
I don't care if individiual churches choose to deny homosexuals a marriage ritual (and by the way, Booba, not all churches/religious denominations reject homosexual marriage). I object to government-sanctioned discrimination because they are supposed to be ensuring equal rights for citizens, not restricting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by boobaa
And I don't think Frasbee meant to be offensive - I think he is simply using the vernacular of his generation, although to PC ears, it may sound distancing.
Funny, I thought I was being more politically correct by using homosexual, cause I thought it more properly covered both gays (being male) and lesbians (being female).Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
Secondly I called it "pair bonding" because I didn't want to sound redundant, also many people find the joining of two gays too blasphemous for the use of the word, marriage.
Altogether I suppose to an individual such as yourself who would nitpick about such things would assume I "keep my distance" which is entirely untrue would come up with the silly assumptions that I "ignore the fact that gays are also individuals" and "curious objects" (where the hell did you get that from?).
All in all I think you looked way too deeply into what I said.
But because some of you are obviously way too easily offended I'll censor it for you all.
Poor Frasbee - so much under attack these days!
Tell us, Frasbee, what is YOUR opinion?
Did you also know, Boobaa, that in Ancient Greece, Plato's nickname was "Old Golden Thighs"? Moreover, he's alleged to have often gotten drunk and walked around Athens breaking of the penis's from statues of Priapus, presumably to use them as dildos.
Fras, replace the word "homosexual" with the "n" word in your original survey post and I think you'll see how it comes across.
well being that you used the word "homosexual" but didn't spell out the n word i can see that it's clearly different, in your opinion, right?
But I'm not discussing racial issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
I wanted to discuss issues of sexual orientation.
The word nigger is irrelevant.
Do you think Plato just made up all that about Atlantis?
I was deigning to defer to political correctedness and not offend any of our board members of color, nor set a poor example for the younger among us. Please note my location (Alabama). In private conversations, no one here has any issues using racial epithets such as "nigger." But the difference you refer to, misombra, reflects what I was trying to get across. Fras framed the questions in such a way as to make it seem gays are, somehow, second-class citizens, particulary as regards marriage. Further, the idea that marriage is a "sacred" thing gays shouldn't have access to in churches, as suggested by another member, just underscores the homophobic point of view the dicussion is departing from.Quote:
Originally Posted by misombra
Alright, rephrase the damn questions as you see fit if it makes you feel better, as we're arguing more about how I worded the the question rather than actually answering it.Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
I don't actually have a problem with religious organizations choosing not to sanction same sex marriage, as people are free to leave their church if they don't agree with its position on the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
Fras:
I can't "think about homosexuals" or gays or lesbians. I can only think about a person who happens to be gay.
Why should marriage between gays be any different than for anyone else?
Given that, the third question becomes irrelevant.
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by shh!
However I find it rediculous that they're afraid of the word itself, "marriage" to be used.
"Just dont' call it marriage."
Who gives a **** what you call it?
It's doin' the same thing between two heteros as it is gays so I don't see the big deal.
I agree - the church is simply trying to elevate the meaning into something supposedly more respectable and meaningful to God. I think all unions should be called civil unions, and people can seek out religious "marriages" separately if they choose to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee
The whole gay marriage debate just annoys me. About as ridiculous as debating over whether blue-eyed people be 'allowed' to marry. Utter BS.
No you are right - I think blue-eyed marriages should be dissolved! Oh wait, I have blue eyes!
AHA! So you ARE wanting a divorce, eh?
Depends on the time of the month...
haha
I agree with this post although it's interesting to see different views anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by whaywardj
Quote:
Originally Posted by shh!
LMAO!
(10 chars)
What do you think of gays and lesbians?
I'm perfectly fine with them
What do you think of gays marrying gays?
Good. They deserve to be happy.
And for some of you, what do you think of the idea of the bonding of two gays being called marriage?
Doesn't bother me in the least.
Canada has just passed the bill to fully legalize gay marriage in Canada. I live in Ontario and Gay marriage has been here for a while now. I don't understand why people want to discriminate others due to an obsolite religion thats not even close to being in the 20th century.
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fawn
See?
She did it, why can't you all be as cool as her?!
ironically didn't the bible also forbid the marriage of a same-sexed couple??
raverboy
So, what do you guys think?
What do you think of gays and lesbians? they are just like the rest of the world..
What do you think of gays marrying gays? Iīm ok with it, why wouldnīt they get married? itīs a piece of paper that give them the same as a boy/girl marriage
And for some of you, what do you think of the idea of the bonding of two gays being called marriage?[/B] with sould it be chaged? if someone changes that word to call the gays marriage it would be like... you are diferent ... they canīt do that, if they whant to change it, it must be to englobe both, gay marriage an "normal" marriage
(Censored for your viewing pleasure.)
Englobe is not a word, unless it's used in medical terms
But i think you mean to make the change globally..
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee
(10 Char)
Quote:
Originally Posted by missguided.rose
sorry.. yep that was what I mean
I dont think anything special about them. I have some gay and lesbian friends, and I regularly forget that they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee
No problem, it's their own business after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee
It's just a word.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee
And about the extra topics mentioned:
- I think any "official" religion can deal with this matter as they wish, it's their own rights to ban something they find inappropriate; but such a ban should stay within their own borders, and should never imply any civil law of the state
- I'd fully allow also child adoption by gay people
ok.. organized religion is just that ... organized.. no one has a right to say that someone can or cant get married. We have a choice of relgions, just as we have a choice on who to marry. If you have a religious background.. of course marrage is sacred. BTW... so are cows in India. I am not trying to generalize but its just that .. a choice. My wonderful... loving and amazing sister... got married in Vermont to her long time girlfriend of 15 years. They have just had my first niece a few days ago. Why is it such a big deal? Who the hell cares! Religion is an opinion .. and a choice, let marriage be the same.
God hates fags and all who support them. :)
I should have expected nothing other than a bunch of hippie, liberal douchebags on this forum.