http://gamingtrend.com
September 21, 2014, 02:07:55 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Ban on Gay Marriage a winner in 11 states.  (Read 16268 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
scubabbl
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 149


View Profile
« on: November 03, 2004, 07:35:31 PM »

Ah yes, we now have 11 states which voted for constitiutional ammendments to ban gay marriage.

<satire>
I for one welcome our new religious overlords. Please, lets mix more state and religion. Thats exactly the direction our country needs to go. No wonder Iran supported Bush. Although we are a different religion, any religious state must be good right?
</satire>

Discuss. Be nice.  Opinions? Suggested alternatives?
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2004, 07:49:33 PM »

Quote from: "scubabbl"
Ah yes, we now have 11 states which voted for constitiutional ammendments to ban gay marriage.

<satire>
I for one welcome our new religious overlords. Please, lets mix more state and religion. Thats exactly the direction our country needs to go. No wonder Iran supported Bush. Although we are a different religion, any religious state must be good right?
</satire>

Discuss. Be nice.  Opinions? Suggested alternatives?


I miss the Religion and Politics forum of GoneGold very very very much. frown
Logged
draegun
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 03, 2004, 07:50:12 PM »

Ironic don't you think that we're anticipating a war with Iran when our country seems to admire their politics so much.
Logged
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 03, 2004, 07:56:46 PM »

Quote from: "scubabbl"
Ah yes, we now have 11 states which voted for constitiutional ammendments to ban gay marriage.

<satire>
I for one welcome our new religious overlords. Please, lets mix more state and religion. Thats exactly the direction our country needs to go. No wonder Iran supported Bush. Although we are a different religion, any religious state must be good right?
</satire>

Discuss. Be nice.  Opinions? Suggested alternatives?


Disagreeing with gay marriage is not necessarily tied to religiious reasons.  People may have voted the way they did for a variety of reasons.
Logged
Calvin
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13895

President of G.R.O.S.S.


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2004, 08:00:17 PM »

Shameful, simply shameful. I thank..whoever, that I do not live in a state that has voted to legalize a form of bigotry. Amending a state constitution for this purpose is just vile. Every soon to be lawyer bone in my body rebels against this preposterous exercise in moral superiority run amok.
Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12485


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2004, 08:03:41 PM »

Mine was one of the states that voted to ban gay marriage.  Huge surprise in Utah, I know.  I was one of the 26% (last I checked) that vehemently opposed it.  

It completely disgusts me that 75% of people in this state feel that it is appropriate to write discrimination into law.  Funny thing is, I talked to a few people who were supporting the ban, and none of them could give me a reason other than "The Bible/Church says so" or the equivilent of "It's icky".   Well, being "icky" isn't a good enough reason to discriminate against an entire group of people, and wasn't the separation of church and state one of the founding principles of this country?   The supporters of the ban tend to squirm a little when you bring that sort of thing up.  

Here's my solution.  Separate the institutions of religious "marriage" and legal "civil union".   Make it so consenting adults can enter into a legal civil union that allows them the legal benefits we currently associate with marriage.  Tax breaks, benefits, etc., etc.  Take the entire religious aspect completely out of it.  Now, if those same people (gay or straight) want to get "married" in the eyes of whatever church they belong to, they are welcome to do so.  Now everybody gets the same legal benefits, and they are free to choose whether or not to make their union a religious affair.  Why is that such a stretch?
Logged

My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
Sepiche
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 723


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2004, 08:07:22 PM »

Quote from: "draegun"
Ironic don't you think that we're anticipating a war with Iran when our country seems to admire their politics so much.

Thanks man.  First smile I've had today. smile

s
Logged

And when he had failed to find these boons in things whose laws are known and measurable, they told him he lacked imagination, and was immature because he preferred dream-illusions to the illusions of our physical creation
draegun
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 03, 2004, 08:08:57 PM »

It'll never happen.   frown

The church is gaining back ground that it has fought for so long to hold onto:  The human spirit under its thumb.
Logged
draegun
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 03, 2004, 08:14:10 PM »

Quote from: "Sepiche"
Quote from: "draegun"
Ironic don't you think that we're anticipating a war with Iran when our country seems to admire their politics so much.

Thanks man.  First smile I've had today. smile

s


Glad I could be of some assistance  biggrin  

I was disappointed this morning by the news of Bush defeating Kerry -- didn't really want either, but the news of my own state passing such a Talibani law!!!  Geez.  I was righteously angry.  Can an agnostic be righteously anything, but hell, I was livid!!
Logged
Laner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4693


Badassfully


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 03, 2004, 08:22:23 PM »

Quote from: "Gratch"

Here's my solution.  Separate the institutions of religious "marriage" and legal "civil union".   Make it so consenting adults can enter into a legal civil union that allows them the legal benefits we currently associate with marriage.  Tax breaks, benefits, etc., etc.  Take the entire religious aspect completely out of it.  Now, if those same people (gay or straight) want to get "married" in the eyes of whatever church they belong to, they are welcome to do so.  Now everybody gets the same legal benefits, and they are free to choose whether or not to make their union a religious affair.  Why is that such a stretch?


Because the gay lobby has already shown they will not settle for "civil union".  They want to redefine marriage to mean whatever the heck they like... to the point of it meaning absolutely nothing.  Which is the ultimate goal.
Logged
scubabbl
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2004, 08:28:18 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"


Disagreeing with gay marriage is not necessarily tied to religiious reasons.  People may have voted the way they did for a variety of reasons.


Can you think of any logical reason to disagree with gay marriage and ammend discrimination into the constitution, either state or national?

Instead of ammending a ban on gay marriage, might it have better to add an ammendment that says gay couples can be united and gain the same protections and benefits provided by law to marriage?

Or what about changing the definition of marrage to read, between two people, instead of between an man and a woman?

I can think of a million ways to ammend the constitution to benefit, but I see no reason to segregate and discriminate. That's a step backwards if you ask me.
Logged
scubabbl
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2004, 08:31:22 PM »

Quote from: "Laner"

Because the gay lobby has already shown they will not settle for "civil union".  They want to redefine marriage to mean whatever the heck they like... to the point of it meaning absolutely nothing.  Which is the ultimate goal.


What ever they like would simply be, "marriage is defined by a union of two people, and can gain the benefits provided by the state, and national governments".

Does it mean nothing now? All it's saying is a marriage no longer is only Man and Woman, but instead, the Union of two consenting adults. What's so bad about that?
Logged
Jaddison
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1086


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2004, 08:34:31 PM »

Quote
Instead of ammending a ban on gay marriage, might it have better to add an ammendment that says gay couples can be united and gain the same protections and benefits provided by law to marriage?



Doesn't the very high divorce rate already indicate that many many hetrosexuals see marriage as meaning essentially nothing?  How is it the "gay lobby" is making this worse?  Gay couples actually want the same rights hetrosexual couples take for granted and frequently don't don't appreciate.  Or is the next ammendment to outlaw divorce to make sure we all take marriage as seriously as the relgious right thinks we should?[/quote]
Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12485


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: November 03, 2004, 08:44:13 PM »

Quote from: "Laner"

Because the gay lobby has already shown they will not settle for "civil union".  They want to redefine marriage to mean whatever the heck they like... to the point of it meaning absolutely nothing.  Which is the ultimate goal.


Damn, boss came in then everybody beat me to it.  But I'll state it again, just cause  smile

I’m not taking about civil unions just for gay couples.  I’m saying make every “marriage”, gay or straight, broken down into the legal portion (the Civil Union) and the religious portion (the Marriage).  

Besides, with the divorce rates among heterosexual couples in this country, I’d say that marriage already “means almost nothing”.   How would you feel about a consitutional amenment that bans divorce?
Logged

My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2004, 08:45:40 PM »

Quote from: "scubabbl"
Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"


Disagreeing with gay marriage is not necessarily tied to religiious reasons.  People may have voted the way they did for a variety of reasons.


Can you think of any logical reason to disagree with gay marriage and ammend discrimination into the constitution, either state or national?

Instead of ammending a ban on gay marriage, might it have better to add an ammendment that says gay couples can be united and gain the same protections and benefits provided by law to marriage?

Or what about changing the definition of marrage to read, between two people, instead of between an man and a woman?

I can think of a million ways to ammend the constitution to benefit, but I see no reason to segregate and discriminate. That's a step backwards if you ask me.


Many people (apparently from the vote results) consider homosexuality and acts of homosexuality to be immoral.  There is also the idea changing the definitions of words in order to better fit to a particular view (an extreme minority view at that) which I personally don't find to be a wise idea.  It's a bit too close to the idea of political correctness for me, an idea I disagree with.

At present homosexual individuals have the same protections and benefits of marriage, they simply must get married to members of the opposite sex in order to gain them (just as heterosexual couples are required to do).
Logged
NetGuy
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 74


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 03, 2004, 08:57:09 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"

At present homosexual individuals have the same protections and benefits of marriage, they simply must get married to members of the opposite sex in order to gain them (just as heterosexual couples are required to do).


That is the STUPIDEST argument I have ever heard for anything.
Logged
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: November 03, 2004, 09:02:30 PM »

Quote from: "NetGuy"
Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"

At present homosexual individuals have the same protections and benefits of marriage, they simply must get married to members of the opposite sex in order to gain them (just as heterosexual couples are required to do).


That is the STUPIDEST argument I have ever heard for anything.


That is one way of interpreting it, though I don't find the presentation of rebuttal to be particularly constructive or persuasive.
Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12485


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2004, 09:08:59 PM »

OK, but don't you agree that the term "equal rights" means something different now than it did 50 years ago?  Or should we still have seperate drinking fountains?  Times change, so do definitions.  

Your arguement is the equivalent of saying that blacks in the 50's had the same rights as whites, they just chose to be black.
Logged

My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
Tim Maynard
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 90


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2004, 09:14:29 PM »

The only reason I oppose gay marriage is the fact that I have numerous gay friends and if they were to get married that would really hurt my budget. I would have to take time from work to shop for their wedding gift plus I would have to ask for a lot of time off to attend these weddings. Why not make it equal and just ban marriage...that would help my wallet. biggrin

Seriously, If two individuals want to perform a ceremony to strengthen their bond then God bless them.
Logged
Falator
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 222


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2004, 09:15:39 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
Quote from: "scubabbl"
Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"


Disagreeing with gay marriage is not necessarily tied to religiious reasons.  People may have voted the way they did for a variety of reasons.


Can you think of any logical reason to disagree with gay marriage and ammend discrimination into the constitution, either state or national?

Instead of ammending a ban on gay marriage, might it have better to add an ammendment that says gay couples can be united and gain the same protections and benefits provided by law to marriage?

Or what about changing the definition of marrage to read, between two people, instead of between an man and a woman?

I can think of a million ways to ammend the constitution to benefit, but I see no reason to segregate and discriminate. That's a step backwards if you ask me.


Many people (apparently from the vote results) consider homosexuality and acts of homosexuality to be immoral.


They think this solely because of religion. Blame the parents for this stuff. I was watching some news special on Evangelical Christians and a 6 year old (i think) girl was talking about anyone who didn't accept Jesus as their savior would go to hell. She also said she was born again at 2 years old. Brain washing like that is sad. Just like the matrix, it takes a strong mind to break out instead of being a sheep.
Logged
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: November 03, 2004, 09:28:23 PM »

Quote from: "Gratch"
OK, but don't you agree that the term "equal rights" means something different now than it did 50 years ago?  Or should we still have seperate drinking fountains?  Times change, so do definitions.  

Your arguement is the equivalent of saying that blacks in the 50's had the same rights as whites, they just chose to be black.


I would say that the definition of equal rights has always been the same, though the enforcement or interpretation of it has varied.  The seperate but equal idea was a poor interpretation as it was not, in fact, equal in its seperateness.  Blacks in the 50's did have the same rights as whites, despite the actions of various local/state officials in southern states and elsewhere to impede the exercise of those rights.
Logged
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2004, 09:32:02 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
At present homosexual individuals have the same protections and benefits of marriage, they simply must get married to members of the opposite sex in order to gain them (just as heterosexual couples are required to do).
Jews had the same protections and benefits of national socialism, they simply had to stop going to synagogue and stop practicing their religion's beliefs to gain them.
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2004, 09:33:43 PM »

Quote from: "Falator"
Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"


Many people (apparently from the vote results) consider homosexuality and acts of homosexuality to be immoral.


They think this solely because of religion. Blame the parents for this stuff. I was watching some news special on Evangelical Christians and a 6 year old (i think) girl was talking about anyone who didn't accept Jesus as their savior would go to hell. She also said she was born again at 2 years old. Brain washing like that is sad. Just like the matrix, it takes a strong mind to break out instead of being a sheep.


I've no doubt that some people may base their negative views on homosexuality strictly from their religious view but I have difficulty accepting that religion is the sole or even prime reason for regarding homosexuality as immoral.
Logged
Falator
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 222


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2004, 09:35:34 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
Quote from: "Falator"
Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"


Many people (apparently from the vote results) consider homosexuality and acts of homosexuality to be immoral.


They think this solely because of religion. Blame the parents for this stuff. I was watching some news special on Evangelical Christians and a 6 year old (i think) girl was talking about anyone who didn't accept Jesus as their savior would go to hell. She also said she was born again at 2 years old. Brain washing like that is sad. Just like the matrix, it takes a strong mind to break out instead of being a sheep.


I've no doubt that some people may base their negative views on homosexuality strictly from their religious view but I have difficulty accepting that religion is the sole or even prime reason for regarding homosexuality as immoral.

Name other reasons then.
Logged
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2004, 09:36:37 PM »

Just as a side-note:

People like E_L_K are why R&P discussions should be banned on this forum.  Inevitably, internet R&P discussion attracts the scum of the earth who want to post violently unpopular ideas that would have them beaten to a pulp in public.  Scared and huddling in their parents' basement, they type their racist, bigoted fears out onto the computer screen in a hope of getting some kind of sick gratification when they have to defend their fetid, broken ideas.

There's a Klan out there for people like you, Koala.  Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if you weren't already a part of it.
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2004, 09:39:19 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
I've no doubt that some people may base their negative views on homosexuality strictly from their religious view but I have difficulty accepting that religion is the sole or even prime reason for regarding homosexuality as immoral.
Where do morals come from then, slugger?  Ads on TV?   :roll:
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
Butterknife
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 378


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2004, 09:39:34 PM »

I'm sick of the Age Discrimination that goes on in this country!  People can't vote until their 18, and it's not fair to people younger than that!  It's discrimination I say!

For that matter, what right do people have to define the word "adult" to mean "someone 18 or older"?  Since when?  I know plenty of people who act childish who are older than that, and several people who act maturely who are younger.

Not giving driver's licenses to people who are blind is discrimination, too!  Just because you have some sort of physical handicap shouldn't keep you from being able to have the same rights anyone else!  People who are mentally deficient (also known as "crazy") have a right to freedom, not to be locked away in an asylum for their entire lives, having committed no crime!

(For the less discriminating, the entire above post is tongue-in-cheek, meant to make a point, not sidetrack the thread or start arguments about age discrimination or some such)

Oh yeah, and Gratch -- I was one of the 75% of Utahns who voted for Amendment 3.  We should get together for a LAN party sometime.  I'm sure it would be fun, we'll just not talk about religion or politics, only games. smile
Logged
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2004, 09:39:49 PM »

Quote from: "-Lord Ebonstone-"
Jews had the same protections and benefits of national socialism, they simply had to stop going to synagogue and stop practicing their religion's beliefs to gain them.


I don't consider the two situations to be comparable.
Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12485


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2004, 09:40:37 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
Blacks in the 50's did have the same rights as whites, despite the actions of various local/state officials in southern states and elsewhere to impede the exercise of those rights.


Then I'm confused at why you think a State Constitutional amendment that impedes the rights of homosexuals is any different and somehow OK.
Logged

My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2004, 09:46:48 PM »

Quote from: "Falator"

Name other reasons then.


It could be that they are against it due to their own personal values and/or beliefs (independent of religion).  It could be a conclusion reached by rational thought and logic by some.  It could be a judgement instilled in some by their parents.
Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12485


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2004, 09:49:57 PM »

Quote from: "Butterknife"
I'm sick of the Age Discrimination that goes on in this country!  People can't vote until their 18, and it's not fair to people younger than that!  It's discrimination I say!

For that matter, what right do people have to define the word "adult" to mean "someone 18 or older"?  Since when?  I know plenty of people who act childish who are older than that, and several people who act maturely who are younger.


If your reasoning for not considering someone a legal adult was because your Bible said so, or because you thought 18 year olds were just gross, then I'd have a huge problem with that reasoning as well.

Quote
Not giving driver's licenses to people who are blind is discrimination, too!  Just because you have some sort of physical handicap shouldn't keep you from being able to have the same rights anyone else!  People who are mentally deficient (also known as "crazy") have a right to freedom, not to be locked away in an asylum for their entire lives, having committed no crime!


That's not really comparable.  A blind driver or violent mentally deficient person (usually the onle ones that are in asylums) pose a very real physical risk to everyone around them.  I don't see how 2 guys getting married poses any sort of risk to your well being.

Quote
Oh yeah, and Gratch -- I was one of the 75% of Utahns who voted for Amendment 3.  We should get together for a LAN party sometime.  I'm sure it would be fun, we'll just not talk about religion or politics, only games. smile


Sounds good, as long as you're not a BYU fan.  I do have to draw the line somewhere.  slywink
Logged

My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2004, 09:52:59 PM »

Quote from: "-Lord Ebonstone-"
Just as a side-note:

People like E_L_K are why R&P discussions should be banned on this forum.  Inevitably, internet R&P discussion attracts the scum of the earth who want to post violently unpopular ideas that would have them beaten to a pulp in public.  Scared and huddling in their parents' basement, they type their racist, bigoted fears out onto the computer screen in a hope of getting some kind of sick gratification when they have to defend their fetid, broken ideas.

There's a Klan out there for people like you, Koala.  Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if you weren't already a part of it.


Pardon me?  I have been nothing but civil during this discussion.  I'm debating a topic with others, I haven't put forth any personal views or attacked the personal views of others.  You, on the other hand, have allowed your feelings to get the better of you and flamed me rather blatantly.  For one who is attempting to label me as one who is intolerant, you are certainly painting a much better picture of yourself.  As that is the rather limited scope of your debating abilities, I have no wish to debate with one such as you any further.  Good day, sir.
Logged
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2004, 09:55:18 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
I don't consider the two situations to be comparable.
That's unfortunate, because they are.

I'm done jerking this guy's twisted sense of right and wrong off.  Next time a R&P ban discussion comes up, I'll point at him and this thread as reasons why we shouldn't allow it on these forums.
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2004, 09:56:53 PM »

Quote from: "Gratch"


Then I'm confused at why you think a State Constitutional amendment that impedes the rights of homosexuals is any different and somehow OK.


Which right is being impeded by the amendment?
Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12485


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: November 03, 2004, 09:58:33 PM »

Quote from: "-Lord Ebonstone-"
Just as a side-note:

People like E_L_K are why R&P discussions should be banned on this forum.  Inevitably, internet R&P discussion attracts the scum of the earth who want to post violently unpopular ideas that would have them beaten to a pulp in public.  Scared and huddling in their parents' basement, they type their racist, bigoted fears out onto the computer screen in a hope of getting some kind of sick gratification when they have to defend their fetid, broken ideas.

There's a Klan out there for people like you, Koala.  Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if you weren't already a part of it.


Wow, that was totally unneccesary.  I rather enjoyed having a civil discussion.  :sigh:

Although I completely disagree with ELK, I'm truly interested to hear why he thinks the way he does.
Logged

My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
Falator
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 222


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: November 03, 2004, 09:59:53 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
Quote from: "Falator"

Name other reasons then.


It could be that they are against it due to their own personal values and/or beliefs (independent of religion).  It could be a conclusion reached by rational thought and logic by some.  It could be a judgement instilled in some by their parents.

What rational thought or logic would make someone conclude that homosexual marriage is wrong? all your other reasons are religious based i think.

Name specific examples please.
Logged
Butterknife
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 378


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: November 03, 2004, 10:02:02 PM »

One other thing -- I did a quick ask around poll here at the office, and several of the people I work with, although not religious by any definition, voted for the marriage amendment.

I didn't ask them what their reasons were.  I'm sure they had them, though.  But I'm pretty sure it wasn't religious reasons.
Logged
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 03, 2004, 10:02:06 PM »

Quote from: "Evil_Lurking_Koala"
Pardon me?  I have been nothing but civil during this discussion.  I'm debating a topic with others, I haven't put forth any personal views or attacked the personal views of others.  You, on the other hand, have allowed your feelings to get the better of you and flamed me rather blatantly.  For one who is attempting to label me as one who is intolerant, you are certainly painting a much better picture of yourself.  As that is the rather limited scope of your debating abilities, I have no wish to debate with one such as you any further.  Good day, sir.
So you don't believe what you're debating?

If you're playing devil's advocate, congratulations.  If you honestly believe what you're saying, though, you're a racist, a bigot, a homophobe, and an exceptionally poor member of the human race.

I don't even need to bother to paint you intolerant--you've proven you are.  And I don't even mean to debate with you--you don't have a point to discuss, only personal insecurity, fear, and hate.

But like I said, I realize this is mental masturbation for such a sick individual as yourself, so I'm out.  I suggest you get the hell off these forums, though, and go back to the quarentined R&P section of the "other" forums where you belong.
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: November 03, 2004, 10:10:26 PM »

Quote from: "Falator"

What rational thought or logic would make someone conclude that homosexual marriage is wrong? all your other reasons are religious based i think.

Name specific examples please.


I can see and understand why you'd think all those reasons are tied to religion but more often than not they are independent of it.  Consider your own beliefs/values for a moment.  Are they inextricably tied to your religion?  

It's my belief that morality and religion are not necessarily bound together.  There are people who go to church every Sunday but act terrible the rest of the week.  On the other hand, there are those that hardly ever or never attend a church who are very nice people.  I've met several atheists who are very pleasant people.  Their lack of religion hasn't caused them to lack a strong moral core of beliefs, however.

From a logical/rational point of view, an individual (not myself) might consider homosexuality to be a genetic aburation...and therefore any sort "pairing" or "marriage" of such individuals to be a further symptom of that aburation.
Logged
Evil_Lurking_Koala
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 15


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: November 03, 2004, 10:13:25 PM »

Quote from: "Gratch"


Wow, that was totally unneccesary.  I rather enjoyed having a civil discussion.  :sigh:

Although I completely disagree with ELK, I'm truly interested to hear why he thinks the way he does.


Some people cannot help but personalize a debate, rather than enjoy the exchange of ideas maturely.  They are to be pitied, but they will not detract from our discussion.  We can still debate with each other if you'd like Gratch.  I've enjoyed the exchange as well smile
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.165 seconds with 102 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.042s, 2q)