-=VAHE=- Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 Also heres a question why don't we let people marry horses or even goats? That won't hurt anybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 Also heres a question why don't we let people marry horses or even goats? That won't hurt anybody. I think it would be more appropriate to ask that question to Robinson Crusoe and Calicula. PS. dont ask me to explain why, please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=VAHE=- Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Edward jan I don't really know what you mean but you don't have to explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Vahe, Robinson was so lonely in his island (accept for native goats) he fell in love and had a "relationships" with them. It’s very widely known, in case of Caligula he experienced every despicable act (sexual) including sleeping with his horse, its very well documented but seldom talked about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExtraHye Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Vahe, Robinson was so lonely in his island (accept for native goats) he fell in love and had a "relationships" with them. It’s very widely known, in case of Caligula he experienced every despicable act (sexual) including sleeping with his horse, its very well documented but seldom talked about. Would you happen to have a link to support all this? It just seems impossible to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=VAHE=- Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 It's just that all these stupid issues do is open up more stupid issues. You can't really blame the gays because it's in their self-interest. Their's also the Godless people who have would say anything to oppose the church just to oppose the church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Would you happen to have a link to support all this? It just seems impossible to me. Amy jan, check the discovery chanal often,thats where got to know about those. also on google do some searching, I'm sure there are lots of information regarding this, Caligula was know in Rome as "madnam" for his extavanate lavish parties, he drayned rome from its trasurty for above mantioned reasons and senators had to kill him after 4 years from him becoming an emperor there is a movie which was made by Bob Guchiony 1980 starring peter o tool and many famuos acters, but I should advise you not to watch this movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Thoth jan that is a democratic way of deciding things and democracy obviously has it's flaw's but that is the system around here. Also when a person who has already died is being eaten is he harmed and if so in what way? That is subject to the consent of the deceased and/or his relatives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Also heres a question why don't we let people marry horses or even goats? That won't hurt anybody. I'm not sure animals can give consent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 I'm not sure animals can give consent. True, we can't compare a gay union with bestiality. But I do believe we can compare it with poligamy or other unions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 True, we can't compare a gay union with bestiality. But I do believe we can compare it with poligamy or other unions. yes, and your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 yes, and your point? There is no more point than the point made in that post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 There is no more point than the point made in that post. well Ok - perhaps I could agree with that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 True, we can't compare a gay union with bestiality. But I do believe we can compare it with poligamy or other unions. That's what I've been doing all along, although "compare" isn't quite it. However, it is called the "slippery slope fallacy"... I mean, come on now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=VAHE=- Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 I'm not sure animals can give consent. No wait a moment I know some people who feel as if animals like their dogs can just as well give there consent be it in another form other then speaking. Why do you have to deny their right in the belief that animals are just as good as men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Please, let's just stop this nonsense. Gay marriage has nothing to do with polygamy and marrying animals and such other garbage. <_< If you have no real arguments regarding this issue it's best that we just leave it be. Gay marriage will be legalized in most places anyway sooner or later. And so what? It's not harming anyone and you don't have to morally accept it if you don't want to. But it is very childish of you to compare gay marriage with marriage with animals, polygamy - even cannibalism! Grow up! (And if people want to marry their pets in the future maybe they'll start advocating to legalize animal/human marriage. Nonetheless, these are separate issues and linking it to gay marriage just shows how immature you are.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Please, let's just stop this nonsense. Gay marriage has nothing to do with polygamy and marrying animals and such other garbage. <_< If you have no real arguments regarding this issue it's best that we just leave it be. Gay marriage will be legalized in most places anyway sooner or later. And so what? It's not harming anyone and you don't have to morally accept it if you don't want to. But it is very childish of you to compare gay marriage with marriage with animals, polygamy - even cannibalism! Grow up! (And if people want to marry their pets in the future maybe they'll start advocating to legalize animal/human marriage. Nonetheless, these are separate issues and linking it to gay marriage just shows how immature you are.) I agree with you concerning bestiality, but not poligamy. How gay marriage would be different to poligamy? Adult consent individuals wanting to unite... why would that be any different than a gay couple wanting to unite? Look, I have no problem with a gay union and giving them all the rights... my concern is about adoption and as well as if it worth all the trouble and conflict over a word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Please, let's just stop this nonsense. Gay marriage has nothing to do with polygamy and marrying animals and such other garbage. <_< If you have no real arguments regarding this issue it's best that we just leave it be. Gay marriage will be legalized in most places anyway sooner or later. And so what? It's not harming anyone and you don't have to morally accept it if you don't want to. But it is very childish of you to compare gay marriage with marriage with animals, polygamy - even cannibalism! Grow up! (And if people want to marry their pets in the future maybe they'll start advocating to legalize animal/human marriage. Nonetheless, these are separate issues and linking it to gay marriage just shows how immature you are.) Anoushik jan i suppose in certain ways these things can be compared.. but its useless to talk about in the sense of working against it, sooner or later it will be, gay marraige will be natioanallu recognized and excepted by government... that is not to say that even a majority of america has agreed upon it.. its bound to happena and its prophecied .. wait.. i coulda swore iv said this before???? anywho.. lol... how do u feel about gay marriage anoushik.. if it were up to you? im just curiouse if you dont mind ps: keep in mind there is noone else that would love more than anything to not even have to awknowledge the meaning of homosexual.. or have to admit its gonna happen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=VAHE=- Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 It's not that I'm immature Anoushik jan it's just that you don't have anything else to say because whatever I said is valid. I personally have no problem with same sex unions but to call it a marriage is wrong and unacceptable for me. Marriage is for people who could procreate under normal circumstances. Like if they didn't have such a disease. Gays don't have that option at their healthiest naturally. It's just that the argument you and your gay or straight buddies are using can be used for poligamy and if really needed to could be used for beastiality as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=VAHE=- Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Also heres a question would you support poligamy and beastility when they advocate for that as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Marriage is for people who could procreate under normal circumstances. Like if they didn't have such a disease.... It's just that the argument you and your gay or straight buddies are using can be used for poligamy and if really needed to could be used for beastiality as well. If marriage is only for people who could procreate then every couple should undergo a fertility test and unless they pass (meaning they can procreate) they shouldn't be allowed to marry. Also, married couples shouldn't be allowed to use contraceptives. The arguments about gay marriage are different from arguments for poligamy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Also heres a question would you support poligamy and beastility when they advocate for that as well? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 ...how do u feel about gay marriage anoushik.. Good question. First, I want to say what I think about homosexuality and why I think people are homosexual. I’ve wondered about that ever since I learned there is such a thing as homosexuality. I realized that I’m so confident with my own sexuality that if I was the last heterosexual on this planet and everyone else around me were lesbians there is no way in hell that I would find myself attracted to a woman! Therefore I came to realize that homosexuality is not a choice. Who in their right mind would choose to be attracted to the same sex? I guess since I'm attracted to men I kind of understand why a gay man would be attracted to men. But a woman attracted to a woman? It doesn't make sense. What is it about women that makes us attractive anyway, even to men? Well, as I said I think homosexuality is something that people are born with. Therefore it is not contagious (no, the majority of the population won't suddenly turn into homosexuals if gay marriage is accepted). And if it's something that people are born with then it's not fair to discriminate against the gays and deprive them of the same rights that others take for granted, like marriage. Like Domino I used to think that gays are just fighting for a word. But marriage is much more than that. It is a legal contract that gives the couple a certain status. Married couples are offered protection and benefits, like the right to take leave from work to care for a family member, Social Security benefits, Medicaid, the right to sponsor a spouse for immigration purposes. They are protected from testifying against each other and providing evidence against each other. It has happened that a gay person has been hospitalized for a very serious illness and the hospital has prevented the partner to come to the hospital. Instead the hospital is forced by law to contact the patient's family and relatives, even if these people have become estranged a long time ago. And as a revenge these family members ignored the wishes of the gay couple and went against their moral beliefs when seeking treatment for the patient. I think things like these deal with the basic rights that we all have as individuals. If you really think about it Gevo, this has not much to do with gay rights but more to do with basic human rights. We're all born only once and no one should dictate to another person how they should live their lives if the person they're trying to change doesn't have much choice in their behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 hmm interesting .. nicely put by the way.. your good and debating not arguing .. hehe.. ok well.. infact i do agree with allll of those things you said.. BUT.. this is one thing that you base your arguement on which atleast "MAY" not be true... that is.. You state for certain that homosexuality is an eternal defect from birth... now.. i canargue against that ofcourse, because i dont feel the same way about it, perhaps because i am refrencing to the Bible for the origination of homosexuality.. and if you care to know i would be glad to tell you... so.. if it were true that homosexuals are born that way then you are exactly right! and really cant be argued... but.. for the simple matter how will we prove who is born in what way?... thats the issue now I think that the civil union term which gays were fighting for would be better than calling it marriage, in any case... i just dont feel comfortable about calling two guys married.. its rediculous.. lol.. PS: You dont know what guys are attracted to in girls?.. we've had millions of "turn ons" posts about this.. lol.. but to sum it up.. at first its body ... then smile then.. well for me at first would be eyes.. either way :)hehe then character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 I Marriage is for people who could procreate under normal circumstances. Gays don't have that option at their healthiest naturally. Don't be so sure that this might not be possible int the future. SCIENCE! ..yeah - then what? Would you admit then that you have no real argument against? Like if they didn't have such a disease. Wern't you one of the ones who was claiming homosexuality as a mental illness and such? If not - sorry - but all of these anti-gay arguments are sort of running together/seem very much the same.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.