America-Hye Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Stormig, I have been to Mykonos. Only a small portion of Myconos is Gay territory. The remainder isa playground for Europe's heterosexual populace young and old. Santorini (Thira) is another hedonistic place where I had a hot torrid romance with a young Greek woman visiting from Australia. Rhodos was another island I visited and spit into the ocean in the direction of Turkey. I would not set foot in that countyr until the fess up to what they did to my family in 1915. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Amerikanski, stick to the topic - you started out with Mykonos. I'm sure your accounts of hot torrid romances, even, can be tolerated - but nobody's interested in you spitting and sputtering. And be careful not to spit or piss in the wind. This was my wish for you to stick to anything with "gay" in it - over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Thoth after 15th page I think we should let the gay Armenians fight this out. Well Armat - I supose Armenians shouldn't have expected anything from enlightened Ottomans, Jews from enlightened Germans etc. Its a question of fairness, discrimination and rights in our society. But your correct - I really feel that I have pretty much answered all objections and made my case well - regardless of the (lame) protests to the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=VAHE=- Posted June 19, 2004 Report Share Posted June 19, 2004 Your a true Idealist stubborn and hardheaded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2004 But your correct - I really feel that I have pretty much answered all objections and made my case well - regardless of the (lame) protests to the contrary. Yes Thoth, you have and it makes me feel better when I know there are other people who have similar outlook on life as me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armat Posted June 19, 2004 Report Share Posted June 19, 2004 (edited) Anoushik I am dying to see your photo!No jokes.I will date you in a heart beat but...too late Edited June 19, 2004 by Armat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2004 Anoushik I am dying to see your photo!No jokes.I will date you in a heart beat but...too late Well... Do you play the cello? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Thoth, I fail to see what is your answers about. Anoushik, in your answer to Thoth, do you mean you are an anarchist as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 27, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 No, I’m not an anarchist. Just because I sympathize with the gay community and want everyone to enjoy equal rights doesn’t mean that I’m an anarchist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Yes Thoth, you have and it makes me feel better when I know there are other people who have similar outlook on life as me. Anoushik, I requote what you wrote above. I don't see the word gay here, do you? I sympathize with the blinds, but I oppose them to have a driver license. Now explain me how this isn't against "equal rights." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 I sympathize with the blinds, but I oppose them to have a driver license. Now explain me how this isn't against "equal rights." On the same token, if we extend my position, I would be for letting them drive, just as long as we don't call the thing they have a "driver's license" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 On the same token, if we extend my position, I would be for letting them drive, just as long as we don't call the thing they have a "driver's license" May I add, as long as I am not in the way of those drivers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 This argument keeps revolving around the theme wether marriage is a right. Driving is definitely a priviledge. That's why the blind person argument works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 That's why the blind person argument works. We think alike. No wonder I answered the same in the psychopath test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 I sympathize with the blinds, but I oppose them to have a driver license. Now explain me how this isn't against "equal rights." What a great analogy. <_< I'm done with this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 What a great analogy. <_< I'm done with this thread. It's a great analogy. Driving is not a right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Indeed driving is not a right. That's why on some very small islands you have driving prohibitions or limitations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Indeed driving is not a right. That's why on some very small islands you have driving prohibitions or limitations. Just like the limitations of marriage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Kinda like privileges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 It's a great analogy. Driving is not a right. Ok, not quite done. Domino, can you please tell me why blind people shouldn't drive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Because they do not meet the basic requirements for earning the priviledge of driving, set forth by the governing body (aka DMV). And it's not just the "blind" ... it would be anyone who can't pass the basic driving test. That is why they can't. To answer the question why they "shouldn't" ... in case of blind people it's because they literally can't drive. In case of someone who has been convicted of drunk driving or speeding a few times and had his license suspended or revoked, it's because they have demonstrated repeatedly they are not fit to have driving priviledges even though they may have the ability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted June 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 So we can say that they don't meet the requirements of driving because they can't drive. If they were to try to drive they could hurt others? There could be property damage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Blind people not driving has nothing to do with gay people marrying/not marrying - this should be obvious. A blind person behind the wheel of a car is adanger to others - a blind person does not have the capability to navigate a car on the road - I mean come now... Again marraige is about two people loving one another, commiting themselves to one another - becomming one (legally and in terms of familial and societal relationships) and establishing kinship bonds between families. There is no reason why such should not be extended to gay couples - who already do exist in our society - but are not given the legal rights and protections and who are not allowed the dignity of being able to call themselves a married couple. This is just unfair, descriminitory and yes - is a clear question of rights!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 This discussion is going completely the wrong way. Domino was NOT comparing blinds to gays. Domino was saying just because he doesn't think the blind should drive doesn't mean he is a blind hater or a blind non-sympathizer. Similarly, thinking gay unions do not constitute "marriage" doesn't mean one is non sympathetic to homosexuals or doesn't find their unions just as "special" as hetero unions. But if you are trying to say Domino should receive an ass kicking, I'm all for it ... no reason or justification needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 So we can say that they don't meet the requirements of driving because they can't drive. If they were to try to drive they could hurt others? There could be property damage? You can say it as you wish but they simply do not meet the basic requirements to receive a driver's license (yes, just like you, I'm setting myself up for you making the leap to gays but this is not the example to do it with). 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.