Gay marriage.

On to page two:

This is an apparantly-common logical fallacy. Individuals can also choose to be republicans in a democratic community, or christians in a community of muslims. Just because the choice is both poor and unpopular does not mean that it will not be made.

It is apparant that the homosexual, in this case, ceased to use proper verbal channels first. Flattered? Why? Are you homosexual, too?
Also, you fail to mention what’s wrong with beating a homosexual.

That’s not what was said at all. In fact, race and religion are irrelavent to the situation.

That reference doesn’t even make sense. Perhaps you’re thinking of a different Thomas Jefferson.

However, the relavent definitions of prejudice are as follows:
An adverse judgement or opinion formed without knowledge or examination of the facts.
The act or state of holding unreasonable preconcieved judgements or convictions.
Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.
None of these apply here. Your statement of prejudice is irrelavent to the point of being off-topic.

In all likelihood, this hasn’t really been brought to the attention of anyone around here. For example, I rarely hang out in the “lobby” or “hang out” or “pub” or such sector of forums; in fact, I don’t even recall going to the lobby back at DreamViews; I mostly hung out in the dream journal and beyond lucidity sections.

Don’t understand how peeps could stand to have sex with their own sex? I hear you loud and clear. The very concept is quite disgusting.
Real love between two minds: You neglect two important factors:

  1. Male and female minds work differently.
  2. The mind and body must work together, in close harmony.
    Marriage celebrates love: I concur. Note, however, that homosexuals haven’t the slightest idea as to what love is, and so are effectively undeserving of marriage.

I have to agree with you on this one, though I know that you won’t like it: civil unions for homosexuals are incorrect; homosexuals shouldn’t even get that.

Did you consider other religions AT ALL? Plenty of religions realized long ago that marriage is between a man and a woman. What about Judaism? What about witchcraft? What about Paganism?

While I’m on it, just because a religion believes in something doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be enforced. Christianity also says to not kill and not steal. So, laws against murder and against theft should be abolished, right?

Moving on…

DreamAddict started ranting and said:

Spouse’s decisions supercede those of anyone else? Shouldn’t you be leaving that up to the individuals involved?

OK, marriage isn’t directly an institution for procreation. Mating is the biological method for procreation, and is impossible between two of the same gender. However, marriage is an institution for proper, long-term mating and dedication.
Gays adopt. This is just an unfortunate fact of society. It should be hoped that, someday, proper background checks can be established and utilized to protect the children, but, for now, we’ll have to settle for them at gunshops only.

re-quoting, for clarity:

You seem to be confused. Homosexuality has everything to do with sex and nothing to do with love. Homosexuals are in it for the pleasure. Also, as I have said many times before, homosexuals are incapable of feeling love.

You’re kidding, right? A homosexual hitting on someone is like someone telling another, well, I’m not big on insulting people, but insulting him very strongly, while adding that he hates him and all of his people. These are, effectively, “fighting words,” and are likely to get the insulter (or hitter-on) beaten to a pulp.

This is another point that everyone seems to be missing. Homosexuals are not truly “happy.” They are basically getting pleasured, and that’s it.

Oh, hey, I reached the end. I guess that it’s a good thing.
Of course, I expected this one to take less long, since several posts were off-topic (where are the Oklahomans, petiphilia, bestiality, etc.).


While I’m typing, I’ll reply to the most recent post:

I can’t say that I’m sad to see him go. Well, I could say it, but then I’d be lying.
Grammar: it’s “may we never meet again.”

I second that: nightowl, you’re an uncaring bastard, and I never want to encounter you again.

EDIT: Edited “quote” coding.

That is the biggest bullshit i have ever heard!
Actually recent studies shows that there are actually some physical differences in the brain of homosexuals. A gay person does not choose to be gay…
You can even see the issues in alot of young gay kids, that they actually act/behave like their opposite sex.

Alot of gay people wish they were not born gay.

Edit:
After reading rest of your replies in this thread, i have come to the conclusion that you are so narrowminded, that i wont even bother wasting time discussing this with you.

I will just ignore you from now on :smile:

Same here, although I will continue to read over this topic. This person’s uncivil manner, immature attitude, irrational hatred, and advocating violence is appalling. Writing words on a message for board for him to interpret is a total waste of time.

goes off to debate this with the brick wall

To Tomas and DreamAddict:
I find your irrational closedmindedness unsettling, though not unexpected.
You see me as being well, to quote you two:
Tomas:

DreamAddict:

However, you do not consider the situation in full. I have many times attempted to see the situation from both sides. I looked at why one would dislike homosexuals, and why one would allow, or even promote, their behavior. In the end, the educated conclusion was reached that homosexuality is quite wrong, in any rational light.

I will now refute your slanderous statements.

Tomas wrote:

Technically, no one is born with a sexual orientation. Before sexual maturity, there is no concept of sexual pleasure, so they cannot be heterosexual nor homosexual.
Besides, many individuals regret what they have done, but that does not make their decisions right.

DreamAddict blasphemed:

Actually, I have gone about this in as civilized of a manner as possible. The lot of you, on the other hand, become overly emotional in defense of a highly arbitrary ideal.

DreamAddict blasphemed:

Again, my attitude has been quite mature. If anyone has been immature, it has been nightowl, as well as Tomas and DreamAddict. nightowl forfeit the very idea of discussing the issues, and has left the thread altogether. Tomas and DreamAddict have now chosen to ignore what I have to say, and have gone about with their name-calling, as though that would solve anything.

DreamAddict blasphemed:

Actually, my hatred toward homosexuals is entirely rational and justified. I would also like to point out that perhaps you should feel greater anger toward those who are secretly hateful, and who do not speak their minds.

DreamAddict blasphemed:

Actually, I have not yet advocated violence.

It would be better, for the general health of the debate, if you stopped making things up about me.

Tomas blasphemed:

Again, I would like to point out that I have taken great care to weigh both sides of this issue before coming to any conclusion. I am also ensuring that I consider perspectives presented here. Unfortunately, no one has yet provided any new information, so it may appear that I am giving little to no consideration, simply because I know the problems with the homosexually-sympathetic arguments.

I would also like to point out that it seems that my views are very unappreciated. Earlier in the thread, it seemed that some were disappointed that no one was presenting a contrary view to that of those who are homosexual, are bisexual, or who support homosexuality while not being homosexual themselves.

When you (Tomas, DreamAddict, and potentially nightowl) decide to grow up and debate this issue like ladies (or maybe gentlemen, though I doubt it), I will still be here.

And yes, that was a shot.

Dreamscaper’s arguments are impossible to prove false because they are based on religion, which in itself is illogical. Saying homosexuality is a choice is bullshit that people say to make themselves feel better about their homophobia. No non-biased independant reasearch has ever concluded that homosexuality is a choice.
See this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_orientation

I think it would be good for your general health to remember the words you type here:

This is what I define as “uncivil” and “advocating violence.”

Calling you irrational is not nearly as “blasphemous and slanderous” as someone calling Gay’s “not people” and “uncapable of love.”
This is what I define as “irrational.”

You call people in your first reply here “feeble minded” and a 2nd time in another thread.
This is what I define as immature.

Instead of debating with us personally, why don’t you tell us what your ideas of homosexuality are? What is wrong with it? What is the harm gay people cause?
If it’s “not right” … then what is the alternative solution other than understanding and care? Beating them? Murdering them? This is what the Nazi’s thought about Jew’s and retarded people. Are you a Nazi?
Do you think “gay ness” is a disease that is contagious? have you met someone that caught this “disease?” Have you met someone that’s been cured?

Gay people are here, so how should we react to that?

OK, now it seems that you’re all just out to get me. Going in order:
baconmastermind said:

On the contrary, my arguments are completely unrelated to religion. I have never once cited religion in my arguments, except as an outside party.
Also, religion is not intrinsically illogical, although many religions are.

Also, your link fails to state that it is a non-choice. While there are many factors to affect the probability, the final decision remains a choice.

I would also like to point out that, unlike you implied, I am not a homophobe. To clarify: homo-: a prefix indicating, in this case, something related to homosexuality; -phobia: a suffix indicating a fear. I do not fear homosexuals.

DreamAddict said:

Actually, I do not advocate violence in that statement; rather, I simply point out that it was not mentioned. Also, I see nothing uncivil about it.

DreamAddict said:

Now you’re just being opinionated. Also, I mentioned repeatedly that I wouldn’t argue the non-people part of my statements; that’s an opinion. As far as their being incapable of love (and it is “incapable,” by the way), I suppose that that could be construed as a conjecture based on the fact that no homosexual has ever been known to love anyone or anything.
You also fail to say why my statements are irrational; they are very much logical and thought through.

DreamAddict wrote:

OK, I’m sorry about that small bit of name-calling. It is just rather upsetting to see:

  1. That no one is actually thinking these things all the way through.
  2. That there are so many homosexuals and sympathizers.
  3. That I am outnumbered all-vs.-me out here.
  4. That no one will even listen to me.

DreamAddict wrote:

OK, this is getting quite bothersome. I hate some humans for their beliefs and actions, and I am suddenly equated to someone who hates them for their genetic heritage (though the “retarded people” one is new). There is quite a difference, if anyone would take the time to bother to look.

DreamAddict wrote:

Well, it seems that it has come down to a one-on-many debate.

As far as your other questions, I’ll try to get to them later (it’s late when I’m posting this; maybe tomorrow morning).

One more thing:
baconmastermind, you seem to be acting very spiteful and childish about this. Every post that you make seems to be a targeted response intended to arouse the ire within those reading/posting here. It would probably be better if you just “spoke” in normal tones.

Also, I see that a mod edited my post on how I don’t know how to quote; I’ll try to repair my quotes later, now that I know how.

I’ll jump on the bandwagon:
Responses To Dreamscaper:

I didn’t know you could call a tree a person. I really do think person pertains only to a human being.

No need to be an asshole about it. Sorry, that really was a cheap shot to DA.

EDIT: Ohmygosh I never knew this forum had a filter, hehe

  1. There’s an edit button.
  2. Immature threat, thank you.
  3. You may not be religious, but hating gays for their sexual preferences is much like hating religious people for their religion. You said somewhere that discriminating against gays was okay because it was their choice to begin with. I agree that they have made the choice themselves, but saying it’s okay to harass gays is like saying it’s okay to harass people of other religions. I know you may think that’s also okay, but it’s frowned upon by the general society we have today, and that’s what matters. By today’s standards you can’t crap on someone because they believe in a different religion, so why can you crap on gays? And no, there’s no difference. Sexual orientation and religion are choices, you cannot restrict the practice or any particular belief in either.

Come on come on, let’s see who wins. I love debates.

This is confusing? You don’t fear homosexuals? You said:

If you really believe that homosexuality is a “pollution” … then you are in fact by definition a Homophobe. You are “afraid” that Homosexuality is spreading and contagious. However, I get the idea that you are too chauvinistic to ever agree that you “fear” anything.

This is what is illogical and irrational, you are presenting your opinions as facts. What facts do you have of Gay’s being unable to love? I know a few Gay people with children that would be very offended by that comment. Are you saying they “can’t” love their own children? The problem with that statement is that love can’t be put in a bottle and tested. You can never say this as fact.
Also, someone that seems filled with so much hatred is rarely a good representation on what true love is.

same here, it is upsetting to see:

  1. That no one is actually thinking things all the way through.
  2. That the few anti-homosexual and homophobes inflict their beliefs on all society.
  3. That the only opposition to this thread seems to be an irrational radical that adobts the same practices as Nazis.(Gay’s are infidels unworthy of life, and should have no rights at all.)
  4. That someone seems to not interpret our words the way we intended.

We are more similar than you’d like to imagine.

So, are you saying if homosexuality was genetics it would be “ok?”
One could easily argue that EVERYTHING is about genetics. The food you like, the cars you prefer, the colors you like to wear … could all be based on your genes.
Have you ever noticed how some gay men act very feminine. They can’t change this, it is the way they are. Have you ever met a lesbian with a moustache? Some do, and some are more manly than some straight men. Why? because it’s of genetics.
So yes, you are equal to those that hate others because of one’s genetic heritage. Or, you are hating something about someone that they cannot change.

If you know how to turn gay people straight, then I’m wrong. Please tell us how. Have you ever met anyone to turn “straight” … well, if you have, you will learn that these “ex-gays” never lose their attraction to the same sex. It is a daily struggle. They are living a lie because of similar attitudes as your own … for fear of losing their rights or being beaten to a pulp.
Is that the right thing to do? no!

How about people that are born with no sex, or intersexed? Government, laws, and society force them to be either “male” or “female” … however, they can’t be labeled as either … and current laws force them to be labled as male or female … and then they face hurdles with marriage issues because some paper says they are a gender of which they are not.

Face reality. It’s not all black and white. Humanity is a large spectrum of variance, and homosexuality is a consensual agreement between two people. Why should anyone else be involved in that decision?

Must… not… mock… whoops

[mock]
I call this: The case for cheese (or… Why Lactose Intolerant people are evil and should be punished)

Dreamscaper! You’ve made me see the light, your baseless accusations and conspiracy theories have won me over! But are you aware of an even MORE sinister plot than homosexuality? Following your exact logic pattern I picked it up - Lactose intolerance.

Sure they SAY that its not a lifestyle choice and that its genetic, and I have scientific proof to back it up - people (if you could even CLASS them as that) choose to not eat tasty cheese, and they deserve to be beaten for it.

Just look at the definition!

Sure, it SAYS its congenital - but thats just a product of the immoral political bias of the cheese hating dictionary writers. I’d rather use my own definition - I know better than everyone else!

Are you aware that most countries don’t even persecute these vile beings? I used to like these countries, but I don’t think I can stand to support a society that accepts lactose intolerance to widely. I can’t wait for the politics of the world to be repaired!

Lactose intolerant “people” have been telling me that they have a right not to eat milk-products as it keeps them happy (and alive). But I say they cant be happy - they’re just deluded. I’m sure you see the logic here? No need to argue it any further people have a knack for not accepting my baseless accusations. Crazy!

I mean, I really don’t get why cheese-haters can live in this society. Isn’t it clear that cheese was MADE for the mouth? It’s blaspheming (and disrespectful to all those starving people) to turn it away from its rightful place.

Just think, if we let people CHOOSE not to eat cheese… what next? They might CHOOSE to murder people! They might CHOOSE to murder YOU!

Sure, you might not see too many people with my opinion, but thats 'cause the cheese haters have poisoned everyone psychically.

[/mock]

Ok I got bored. Its fun what you can do with NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. Please present actual arguments except waving around baseless accusations.

In fact we don’t need to start with stuff as difficult as that.

Why not just tell us:

-Why homosexuals are bad (and don’t qualify as people)?
-What gives you the moral high ground to judge?
-What makes you ignore all evidence to the contrary?

Remember “because I say so” doesn’t count. And if you do find evidence, try not to get it from something dating pre-1990. Medicine/science only gets better as we go on afterall.

-spoony

That’s an incredibly cheap way of trying to avoid my arguments.

Why is homosexuality (chosen or not) wrong?

Also, if you had a child who was a homosexual, wouldn’t you want him/her to have all of the same rights that you do?

It seems that all of your arguments are basless and and all you do to support them is show irrelevant comparisons (i.e. a homosexual is a person, but so is a dead body). I mean, come on!

sigh
Here we go again. I’m rebutting against the 4 posts after my latest one (I mention this because it looks like it will take so long that someone else will post in the meantime).

Why does everyone keep bringing this up? I have said repeatedly that my opinions relating to what a “person” is are not up for debate. I did try to clarify them, but I’m not making an effort to justify them. It is really off-topic.

I know that. I was just making a quick reply, which is faster than going through “edit.” I have a life outside this thread, unlike some individuals here; I had to go do something.

Actually, I would like to point out that you misquoted me. You put my comment about homosexuality as a choice immediately before, and in the same statement as, my “threat.”
While I’m at it, I’ll point out that some of you are probably interpreting this as a death-threat. It is nothing of the kind. Rather, it is a promise that, when his death comes, given that the conditions are satisfied, it will be ensured that the death is as slow and painful as possible, though not to the point of saving his life.
Furthermore, you do not strike me as the type who would consider any threat to be “mature,” so your statement is rather meaningless. Even if that’s not the case, I really don’t care.

Finally, someone agrees with me on something here.

Actually, I didn’t specifically say that it was OK to harass them. Of course, I don’t think that it really matters what any of us think on that; individuals harass each other for lesser things than that.

Actually, I’m not “afraid” of any such thing, though it does bring me much sorrow. I currently believe that pollution scenario to be, in all probability, the case, though it is not a firm belief. Note that I said that it is likely, not definite.
Also note that I said that I wasn’t going to argue the point.

Now, I can see why you think that I’m chauvanistic, but I’m not going to deebate that with you, either. I will point out, however, that any such chauvanism on my part, real or implied, is irrelavent to whether I fear anything.
Furthermore, I would like to point out that I rid myself of fear quite a long while ago.

I’m starting at the end here:
I am not “filled with” hatred, as you put it. While I hate homosexuals and a very few other things, I am not filled with hate. My hatred for homosexuals arises directly for my caring for most other things.

Now, about the homosexuals’ loving “their children”:
Love, as I said previously, is created by a mixture of all of the other emotions. However, homosexuals have only ever shown signs of hatred. Hence, with this gaping void where the other emotions should be, there is insufficient emotion to generate love.

Also, with your last sentence (again):
I do not serve as a representation of what love is. If you want a representation of love, I’m sure that I could find some deities to reccomend to you.

OK, now you’re just trying to piss me off.

It’s only an infliction because you resist so much. This would be much easier if you would just gain an understanding of the nature of things.
Also, I ask that you think of this as “tough love;” we’re doing this for your own good.

OK, I have acted quite rationally here. I am only a “radical,” as you put it, because I’m against the majority. Also, I don’t adopt the same practices as the Nazis.

  1. I don’t hate Jews.
  2. I never called the gays infidels.
  3. I never said that they were unworthy of life.
  4. I never said that they should have no rights.

I can’t read your minds! Of course, the way that you think, I’m not sure that I’d want to. If you want to say something, then I’ll need you to say it.

You are mixing ideas that are intrinsically separate.

Then DreamAddict starts to rant for a while…

Most women with facial hair are heterosexual, just like how most women are heterosexual. What’s your point?

Plenty of heterosexual women act more many than straight men. What’s your point?

You haven’t even supported that statement logically. You suppose that everything is caused by genetics, but you don’t prove it.
Also, it is something that they CAN change. You seem to have stopped listening at this point.

OK. Next, let’s ask a buddha to “tell” us how to reach enlightenment.
I don’t necessarily “know” how to correct them. However, there are innumerable possibilities; the homosexuals just don’t try.

First of all, if they still have their attraction to their same sex, then they are not truly straight. Also, they can easily be “ex-gay” and still be attracted to their own gender if they are bisexual. This is a lesser problem that could potentially also be corrected.

Actually, the correct thing to do would be consider them to be what they are: no-gendered or two-gendered. In this case, the two-gendered individual could logically be attracted to either gender, since they themselves have both. The no-gendered individual, on the other hand, could also be attracted to either gender, though that would arise from a redundant instinctual nature causing them to be so.
Besides, this is really off-topic. The closest thing to a same gender for those with no or two genders would be another of the same, which is almost never encountered, anyway.
Think of it this way, if it helps you: An impotent man can still be attracted to a woman, right? Well, then a neuter human could also still be attracted to someone. The transexual applies the same logic.

That really depends on what you mean. Homosexuality, as in the decision to be homosexual, is the choice of one individual. Homosexual sexual misbehavior is frequently a consent, though you neglect rape, etc. Homosexual civil unions (or marriages, in some areas) are almost always consent, with exceptions whenever you would find them as exceptions for marriages (“shotgun weddings,” etc.).

OK, I’m splitting this into 2 (or maybe more) posts because:

  1. The posts themselves are getting very long
  2. This is taking up quite a bit of my time.

Remember: There are so many of you that it’s as though one of you was spending several hours at a time here, and asking me to do the same.
I have a life, you know. I’m on a quest, I’m getting an education, I’m trying to lucid dream (I’m trying to not forget the function of the ld4all forum), and I’m trying to gain power, just to name a few time-consuming things.
Sheesh

Dear Dreamscaper: (excuse my english it is not my first language)

First of all, let me point out that this post is not ironical.

I am sorry to announce to you that you are gay. Yes, you read well. I think it is time to quit typing arguments that only make you feel accepted by a society that has surely harmed you phsycologically.

I have met hundreds of people like you. I dont hate you nor I want to attack your arguments, because I know why youre doing this. I truly care about you. This is not irony.

You enjoy the life of an alternative reality (internet) where you can act like a straight guy (at last, right?) and feel, just for a few moments that you have “your place under everyone’s sun”. I understand you. However, please quit, because everyone here knows what you are - even you, without accepting it.

I know you would want to hang out with guys, drink beers, talk about chicks and stuff without holding yourself not to kiss them, right? I can imagine how it feels, but once you kiss a guy and find your true self, trust me, you will forget all the games you like to play here :smile:

You are fantaboulous my friend. Accept that you are gay and stop posting these lies to feel better. Many gay have done this. It doesnt do any good for you nor it leads anywhere. You are great! So, LIVE.

Instead, put on “I will survive” and dance like there’s no tomorrow! I am sure you will feel better, and discover your true self (because, lets face it, we all know you are a hidden gay person)

Kissess everywhere!!! xxxxxxxx

P.S. Making witty remarks about the typos or grammatical errors in my post will not do anything for me sweety :wink:

OK, now you’re actually trying to hurt me. However, I would like to point out that I, long ago, ceased to care what others thought of me. Note that this doesn’t mean that I don’t care what others think - were that the case, then I wouldn’t be trying to make the lot of you see what’s right.

Alex C:
Your sarcasm is not appreciated. You’re bad at it, too: much of what you said sounded serious. I would prefer if you stuck to straight arguments, rathern than trying to slander me.
These are what I mentioned earlier as “fighting words.”

Note that I wish you an agonizing, non-prosperous life, ending with a dishonorable death.

I’ll give you another chance to argue with me, if you can keep it real. If you make such false accusations against me again, I’ll be forced to mostly ignore anything else that you have to say here.

Your enemy forever
-Dreamscaper

EDIT: I just wanted to point out that I WAS going to put up the second part of my multi-part post up. However, you’ve upset/angered me too greatly. I’m taking a break to go for a walk now. Perhaps I’ll post after I come back and get other stuff done. If not, it will have to wait until tomorrow.

I was serious. I was never ment to be sarcastic to you. I repeat: I u-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d you! I stressed out that my post was NOT ironical.

I am trying to help you over here, please co-operate with me to achieve better self-knowledge and to enjoy a REAL life. Please.

Moreso, stop the little game with “physical attacks” because darling, if we -hypothetically- met, you would change your mind since second #1. So, accept my interest and answer logically. PM me if you wish.

However, if you still wish to come and meet me (to kick my a*s) I live in Attika, Athens, 7, Tinou street and my phone number is 210-8676361

Feel free to pay me a visit.

p.s. your threat was reported to your I.P. server. have a good time with the lawyers!

kisses

Alex C, you make a good point.

I mean, what better way to make yourself feel better about who you really are than to deny it outright. And what better way to do that than to create outrageous, false, and basless criteria and pin it to homosexuals so that you in no way can be deemed one. Come on dreamscaper, stop shaking the christmas gifts and get out of the closet.

After giving it a great deal of thought, I have come to the logical conclusion that I shall cease to post on this thread.
Besides being the safest decision for me, it also takes the least effort and consumes the least amount of my time and energy.

These posts have taken away many hours of my day, to no avail. The only measureable accomplishment was a setback: nightowl left, with hurt feelings, as opposed to staying and being converted.
NOTE: No, I’m not “converting” like how religious zealots convert heathens; it’s more like converting a democrat to a republican, or something.

I also find that many (I didn’t say all) individuals automatically switch to “defensive mode” whenever I challenge their ideas, rather than listening to what I have to say.

I WAS going to finish my multi-part post. I WAS going to find that evidence that I mentioned. I WAS going to answer all of those questions that everyone had for me.
I AM going to stop posting here, or even looking at the thread after a time. I AM going to redouble my efforts locally, rather than trying fruitlessly to correct those individuals across which I run online.

Some of you may consider this a “victory” on your part. However you think of it, jusr realize that I don’t consider it a loss.

If you had evidence, then why didn’t you post it? It would have been much more constructive to have actually posted your evidence when you first made your claims. If you have evidence, then by all means post it so we can see your viewpoint more clearly. You can’t just say something and expect us to automatically accept it, and call us close minded if we don’t.

If you’re truly leaving this debate, I’d like to point out that you were the most intelligent person I’ve ever seen arguing against giving gays freedom, if that’s anything to you.

But let me respond:

Let me rephrase that. We don’t restrict people from practicing a particular religion, but should we restrict the rights of gays who want to practice homosexuality? Some of us may think it’s wrong but it wouldn’t hurt us at all to give them marriage. No sanctity of marriage arguments are allowed.

Anyways I was hoping this debate would turn out to be a little bit more friendly myself, but heck, people on both sides (including me with the three stars up there) contributed to hostility. I think I’m leaving too…

Nice to see the majority here on this board is in favor of freedom.

Sounds a lot like something my parents used to say when I wanted something that they did not want me to have. “I was going to let you have______ but now that you misbehaved I changed my mind” Now even as a child I knew my parents had no intention of giving it to me.

OK that was off topic but then this hole page is off topic.

Dreamscaper you have stated a lot of things as fact yet you failed to provide any evidence to support your conclusions.

However, even if you did “prove” your “theories” that would still be totally irrelevant. This thread is about should gay marriage be legal. Even if all your “theories” were proved correct that still would not be an effective argument against gay marriage. We are supposed to live in a free and open society where all groups have the same right and privileges as others. Put simply every one is supposed to be treated equal. Permitting gay marriage would not be detrimental to society any more then interracial marriage(many of your arguments at one time were used against that). The bottom line it that allowing gay marriage would not in anyway effect the health or welfare of society. Therefore in my opinion there is no reason why it should be illegal.

To shamelessly repeat a line from a TV show “Government has no business defining love and they certainly should not ill define it."

If you have any reason why gay people should not be allowed to get married if they want (other than because you hate them) say so. Cause everything else you said is just spin.