Your beliefs on marrage.

[el Chi]

If we don't force the gays to conceive children, how are we ever going to continue the species?!

Edited for solution to problem.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

But everyone knows it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a lesbian to get pregnant.

HUMANITY IS DOOMED!

 

[kirovman]

Yes, you must admit that those stats prove that every one of us will become gay. Including Dario D.

 

[Dario D.]

Someone say something serious... I'm waiting to see if I should post again before going to bed.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Ok:

-Your maths fail to present any indication of an increasing trend.

-You have failed to demonstrate even an anecdotal example of a child turning gay automatically because his/her parents are.

-You are claiming that the population will become 100% homosexual if they see gay people on TV, which is retarded.

-You are claiming the population will become 100% suicidal if they see suicides on TV, which is retarded.

-You're basing your ideology on the arbitrary morality of fictional space monsters and/or videogames.

-You are using these 'reasons' as an excuse to deprive people of their inalienable freedoms.

For those reasons, you fail at smarts.

 

[gick]

Someone say something serious... I'm waiting to see if I should post again before going to bed.

Sorry, but your entire argument has been dismantled, and comprehensively proven wrong. It is only right that you are ridiculed.

 

[Dario D.]

-Your maths fail to present any indication of an increasing trend.
1990: 2.8%
2000: 9.7%
= an increasing trend.

-You have failed to demonstrate even an anecdotal example of a child turning gay automatically because his/her parents are.
My aunt is homosexual. Her lesbian partner has two children - a brother and sister. They are both gay.

-You are claiming that the population will become 100% homosexual if they see gay people on TV, which is retarded.
100% of population doesn't want to be homosexual after watching TV. TV doesn't suddenly change everyone's mind. ...but by nature of the human mind, the more you see something, the more you get used to it. It doesn't mean the more you LIKE IT... but you less you hate it. Think about the trend. It's like putting ice out into room-temperature air, or a red-hot iron. Eventually it cools, until it's right in the middle. That's what I'm saying. Culture is slowly drifting toward the middle zone. See the numbers for details.

-You are claiming the population will become 100% suicidal if they see suicides on TV, which is retarded.​

Not at all, but certain people get ideas, and so the trend rolls on...

-You're basing your ideology on the arbitrary morality of fictional space monsters and/or videogames.
The alien was simply intended to provoke a serious thought. If it doesn't work for you, forget the alien, and find another way to ask yourself if homosexuality benefits humanity or not... but now I know your answer, if you intend to say that it's perfectly okay to leave it unchecked.

-You are using these 'reasons' as an excuse to deprive people of their inalienable freedoms.
First, no, I'm not. Second, adoption is a privelege, not a right. Some normal people aren't allowed to adopt. They don't qualify. Third, and most precious of all, you just can't strip a child of the chance to be "normal", "natural", and "human, of it's original design". You just can't. It's against nature. Darwin would turn in his grave.

-For those reasons, you fail at smarts.

 

[ríomhaire]

-Your maths fail to present any indication of an increasing trend.
1990: 2.8%
2000: 9.7%
= an increasing trend.

1 pair of statisics can not be taken a trend.

-You have failed to demonstrate even an anecdotal example of a child turning gay automatically because his/her parents are.
My aunt is homosexual. Her lesbian partner has two children - a brother and sister. They are both gay.

Congradulations, you proved it happens once. Based on your logic all women with blonde hair have 3 children as my mother, who has blonde hair, has 3 children.

-You are claiming that the population will become 100% homosexual if they see gay people on TV, which is retarded.

100% of population doesn't want to be homosexual after watching TV. TV doesn't suddenly change everyone's mind. ...but by nature of the human mind, the more you see something, the more you get used to it. It doesn't mean the more you LIKE IT... but you less you hate it. Think about the trend. It's like putting ice out into room-temperature air, or a red-hot iron. Eventually it cools, until it's right in the middle. That's what I'm saying. Culture is slowly drifting toward the middle zone. See the numbers for details.

But we are subjected to heterosexual imagery the WHOLE DAMN TIME, much more than homosexual. Surly that means that the heterosexual imagery will counter-act the homosexual. Unless homosexual is naturaly more attractive to humans.

-You are claiming the population will become 100% suicidal if they see suicides on TV, which is retarded.​

Not at all, but certain people get ideas, and so the trend continues...

Generaly when sucide is shown it is usualy acompanied by the aftermath, crying family members and such. Surly this would discourage suicide.

-You're basing your ideology on the arbitrary morality of fictional space monsters and/or videogames.
The alien was simply intended to provoke a serious thought. If it doesn't work for you, forget the alien, and find another way to ask yourself if homosexuality benefits humanity or not... but now I know your answer, if you intend to say that it's perfectly okay to leave it unchecked.

If you wish to invoke serious thought in a political debate you might want to steer clear of aliens, computer games, fanaticism etc.

-You are using these 'reasons' as an excuse to deprive people of their inalienable freedoms.
First, no, I'm not. Second, adoption is a privelege, not a right. Some normal people aren't allowed to adopt. They don't qualify. Third, and most harrowing, you just can't strip a child of the chance to be "normal", "natural", and "human, of it's original design". You just can't. It's against nature. Darwin would turn in his grave.

**** nature. Humanity has turned its back on nature long ago, we out for ourselves and we all know it. Farms, technology, clothes. What is 'natural' only ever matters to us when it suits us. Oh and BTW, gayness happens to animals too, thereby, natural.

-For those reasons, you fail at smarts.
Hey, I'm not the one who can't count.

You're the one who has no idea how to put together a good case.

 

[Dario D.]

-1 pair of statisics can not be taken a trend.
Then what are statistics for? ...And, do you think the rate is gonna go down?

-Congradulations, you proved it happens once. Based on your logic all women with blonde hair have 3 children as my mother, who has blonde hair, has 3 children.
First of all, it's obvious that it would happen, and second of all, it happened in my own family, with both children, even though they were NOT adopted, and were born to a HETEROSEXUAL couple, back before the mother was lesbian (I assume - not knowing anything about the father), and I also assume they were raised gay by her example alone. Not knowing the family's details, I think it's very safe to say this isn't the only case of gay parents = gay kids (not adopted even). I predict that this is the case with most gay couples. If I'm wrong, it was a great guess. "Gay couple? Gay kids? Figures."

But we are subjected to heterosexual imagery the WHOLE DAMN TIME, much more than homosexual...
That's right, and most people are infact straight. ...But look at the stats again, and think about it. The pot is leaking, regardless.

Surly that means that the heterosexual imagery will counter-act the homosexual. Unless homosexual is naturaly more attractive to humans.
Regardless of your logic, the pot is still leaking... it only takes a small amount of thought to have predicted it, even though I agree that it seems like whoever has the majority should theoretically stamp the other out of existence eventually, but it's happening the other way around... which was why I suggested sweeping it under the rug, so it can fade.

Generaly when sucide is shown it is usualy acompanied by the aftermath, crying family members and such. Surly this would discourage suicide.
The news is not allowed to talk about suicide because it gives people the idea of killing themselves in order to get on the news, or the idea of killing themselves to get pity.

If you wish to invoke serious thought in a political debate you might want to steer clear of aliens, computer games, fanaticism etc.
You aren't supposed to insult someone in a debate.

Oh and BTW, gayness happens to animals too, thereby, natural.
Being born with three limbs also happens. Useful in any way? No. Product of evolution? No. Did anybody even choose it? No. So is it still natural to be born with three limbs? Is it still natural to be born gay?

You're the one who has no idea how to put together a good case.
I don't think you're reading it; just reacting to it.

 

[ríomhaire]

-1 pair of statisics can not be taken a trend.
Then what are statistics for? ...And, do you think the rate is gonna go down?

Anomolies happen. The level could be changing the whole time. You can not base a case on one piece of information and expect people to accept it.

-Congradulations, you proved it happens once. Based on your logic all women with blonde hair have 3 children as my mother, who has blonde hair, has 3 children.
First of all, it's obvious that it would happen, and second of all, it happened in my own family, with both children, even though they were NOT adopted, and were born to a HETEROSEXUAL couple, back before the mother was lesbian (I assume - not knowing anything about the father), and I also assume they were raised gay by her example alone. Not knowing the family's details, I think it's very safe to say this isn't the only case of gay parents = gay kids (not adopted even). I predict that this is the case with most gay couples. If I'm wrong, it was a great guess. "Gay couple? Gay kids? Figures."

Would this not be evidence for it being genetic? And again, 1 case.

But we are subjected to heterosexual imagery the WHOLE DAMN TIME, much more than homosexual...
That's right, and most people are infact straight. ...But look at the stats again, and think about it. The pot is leaking, regardless.

Surly that means that the heterosexual imagery will counter-act the homosexual. Unless homosexual is naturaly more attractive to humans.
Regardless of your logic, the pot is still leaking... it only takes a small amount of thought to have predicted it, even though I agree that it seems like whoever has the majority should theoretically stamp the other out of existence eventually, but it's happening the other way around... which was why I suggested sweeping it under the rug, so it can fade.

This is, before it was under the rug. More people are just OPENLY gay now because they won't get bloody persecuted.

Generaly when sucide is shown it is usualy acompanied by the aftermath, crying family members and such. Surly this would discourage suicide.
The news is not allowed to talk about suicide because it gives people the idea of killing themselves in order to get on the news, or the idea of killing themselves to get pity.

I thought people kill themselves to end their misserable lifes. And I find it sad that the news in America won't report suicide.

If you wish to invoke serious thought in a political debate you might want to steer clear of aliens, computer games, fanaticism etc.
You aren't supposed to insult someone in a debate.

It tends to happen on the internet, espectially when someone brings the above into it.

Oh and BTW, gayness happens to animals too, thereby, natural.
Being born with three limbs also happens. Useful in any way? No. Product of evolution? No. So is it still natural to be born with 3 limbs?

You didn't reply to my other point. People only use nature as an excuse when it suits them as you are doing now.

You're the one who has no idea how to put together a good case.
I don't see what's wrong with it.[/QUOTE]
You are using single cases to assert an arguement. You are hiding behind the image of non-natural. You are f*cking well bringing aliens into it.

 

[Dario D.]

ROFL @ Comic#32, first one I read... hilarious.

Anyway, everything has been said already, and I don't feel like wasting the time it takes to bat down these down... It's very rapidly leaving the heart of the matter, and floating up into details and things we've already said.

However, if you need me, I'll be reading your comics and working on my mod, so you can request a reply via PM if you really want to, and I'll send it just to you. :cheers:

"Good thing I'm safe in my fort." LOL

 

[Ennui]

Do not imply that you support the lynching of homosexuals ever again on this website, Dario. If you do it'll be the last thing you say here.

 

[DeusExMachina]

ROFL @ Comic#32, first one I read... hilarious.

Anyway, everything has been said already, and I don't feel like wasting the time it takes to bat down these down... It's very rapidly leaving the heart of the matter, and floating up into details and things we've already said.

However, if you need me, I'll be reading your comics and working on my mod, so you can request a reply via PM if you really want to, and I'll send it just to you. :cheers:

"Good thing I'm safe in my fort." LOL

Is this your way of waving a white flag?

 

[Dario D.]

Do not imply that you support the lynching of homosexuals ever again on this website, Dario. If you do it'll be the last thing you say here.

Quote it please.

 

[Raeven0]

Aah! More violent anti-gay morons!

/me hides

But, yes. Given the basic premise that gay==bad, we can deduce everything Dario's said to be true. Unfortunately, that premise is retarded. No logical backing whatsoever.

Here's my nod toward the actual topic of this thread. Dario D., will you marry me?

 

[brink's]

Quote it please.

he quickly edited his post ..I should have quoted him

here's the gist of what he said:

Originally Posted by DeusExMachina
It wasn't nonexistent. Gays were practically crucified 50 years ago, they kept to themselves because they didn't want to get lynched by the local mob.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarioD
so you know where I'm getting at

 

[Dario D.]

Attention
After some discussion, some seem to think that "swept under the rug" means the same as "kill" [faints]. I'm referring to TV, and public displays... I'm not talking about the people. My entire post is referring to the issue itself, not the people. I was saying, "Sweeping the public display under the rug is good way to help it fade, etc, etc..." My view on the matter is mild and suggetive (not the way you interpret it). You should be able to say, "Oh, okay... well that's comforting," because that's that's the way it is. A mis-interpreted point that sounds extreme, and is not. It took me a while to understand what was going on with all these negative replies, but now I got it... and it shouldn't be that way.

[unsubscribes from thread]

 

[Ennui]

Quote it please.

You edited your post. I'm going on the testimony of other people I trust and consider friends

edit: and there Brink's has it.

 

[FieryGoose]

So what is the purpose of marriage? Is it some sort of contract to allow you to make babies, or is it an expression of love between two people?



Why is it wrong and immoral? Give me one, one, logical, secular reason why it is wrong. I'd like to see you try.



Why should they not be allowed to be married? How does two guys getting married effect you in any way? What right have you got to govern their lives? It has not been intolerable since the beginning of time. I suggest you actually pull your head out of your own backside, and learn some history on the subject. In some of the most respected and influential aincent cultures homosexuality was regarded as normal, even desirable. Look it up. And besides, even if it was regarded as intolerable 'since the beginning of time', how does that prove anything? Throughout most of history, women have been considered 'inferior', but that didnt make it true did it?



Because they are perfectly entitled to 'push their rights to the limits'. Again, I'd like to hear one good reason why they shouldn't.



There is absolutely no reason to suggest that is the case.

So, well done for proving yourself to be a bigoted, illogical, hate filled ignoramus!:thumbs:

Firstly you proved nothing.
All you said is that i can't give any logical reason why two gays shouldn't be together/married. Don't tell me that i can't prove anything when you can't either, for instance you didn't even name the culture that accepted being gay as normal...i don't doubt that there was one out there but i'm pretty sure that they were wiped off the face of the planet for a reason(the great flood ). The secular world is the one that supports gay rights how can i make an argument against gay rights that's secular? The only thing that i can think of is giving you an estimated "best fit line" for what the world is coming to in regards to who can marry who: People will marry animals and have sex with them(it will be widely accepted by people like you), people will have sex with dead people and be able to marry them(necrophiliacs). Your right when you notioned to the fact that sex isn't the only thing marrage is for but the fact is that the sex has alot to do with keeping a marriage together and if you really consider gay sex the way things are supposed to happen you've got problems. Its almost like asking a mentally retarded person to run in government positions, basically we're letting semi-retarded people gain rights that you licentious people don't understand is wrong.
You cannot generalize our medical practitioners as being in agreement that gays have mental problems: oh so lets just say their different, well don't we call mentally disabled people different or special?:dork:
Don't you guys honestly think that gay people get all sorts of diseases from doing eachother in the butt for a reason? The answer is right in front of you all and you don't see it, how can i be more clear. Opposites do and always will attract just how it's ment to be in nature, until someone can prove me otherwise my beliefs and thoughts are completely logical. A few things to think about:
With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach this perversion as the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.
The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. Because homosexuals are rarely monogamous, often having as many as three hundred or more partners in a lifetime(some studies say it is typically more than one thousand).
We’ve already seen evidence from the Scandinavian countries that de-facto homosexual marriage destroys the real Mc Coy. These two entities cannot coexist because they represent opposite ends of the universe. A book could be written on the reasons for this collision between matter and antimatter.
These are just a few "logical" arguments i dug up.

 

[DeusExMachina]

You are ****ing retarded. Your lack of intelligence offends me.

 

[FieryGoose]

You are ****ing retarded. Your lack of intelligence offends me.

off topic. secondly i have not seen one intelligent remark come from you regarding your beliefs either, since when do people not have freedom of speech, i think your the type of person you resorts to degrading remarks in order to silence to opposition, not intelligence.
ha, i laugh at pro-gay marriage people.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

1990: 2.8% + 2000: 9.7% = an increasing trend.

You need an absolute minimum of three data points to even estimate a trend.

My aunt is homosexual. Her lesbian partner has two children - a brother and sister. They are both gay.

That's called anecdotal evidence, and it is useless as bad math when you're trying to chart a worldwide trend.

Think about the trend. It's like putting ice out into room-temperature air, or a red-hot iron. Eventually it cools, until it's right in the middle. That's what I'm saying. Culture is slowly drifting toward the middle zone.
See the numbers for details.

The numbers are bad math. Also, those are false analogies.
=Being gay is not the same as being a metal bar.
Metal bars are proven to cool.
-Your doomsday prophecy is based on bad math.
Also, you are acting as though hating gays is a good thing.
Also, you are acting as though imagined higher numbers of gay people somehow damage society. They don't.

Not at all, but certain people get ideas, and so the trend rolls on...

There is no trend, as your math fails to express a trend. Also, you are arguing that all forms of homosexuality are a choice, without any evidence of that claim.

The alien was simply intended to provoke a serious thought.

LOL

ask yourself if homosexuality benefits humanity or not... but now I know your answer, if you intend to say that it's perfectly okay to leave it unchecked.

It makes gay people happy and causes no quantifiable harm. That is a textbook description of a benefit.

The United States Government is based around "checking" only things that do harm. You have failed to prove any such harm.

First, no, I'm not [trying to remove essential freedoms from homosexuals for no good reason].

You have stated repeatedly that you wish to remove all gay access to media, that they should not be allowed so much as near children, and that they should be forced to die out.
And, in general, that they should be segregated out of society.

Second, adoption is a privelege, not a right.

Removing access to a privilege from an entire group of people for no logical reason is called segregation, and is not legal.

Third, and most precious of all, you just can't strip a child of the chance to be "normal", "natural", and "human, of it's original design". You just can't. It's against nature. Darwin would turn in his grave.

Hi! My name is The Naturalistic Fallacy.
Darwin wouldn't like you because he's a scientist who uses detailed observation and logic.
You are using nearly every known fallacy and are basing your data off a single digit and your aunt.

I would presume Darwin would also not appreciate misguided eugenics conducted in his name.

You are a eugenicist.

I am becoming very tired of running into eugenicists.

 

[DeusExMachina]

off topic. secondly i have not seen one intelligent remark come from you regarding your beliefs either, since when do people not have freedom of speech, i think your the type of person you resorts to degrading remarks in order to silence to opposition, not intelligence.
ha, i laugh at pro-gay marriage people.

Then you obviously did not read my post a few pages back. You are the type of person who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. I mean Dario's reasoning was dumb, but your "logical proof" is just unexplainable. I'm all for freedom of speech, but you are just a hate monger. Like I said before, its fine if you disapprove of homosexuality, but you don't just disapprove of it, you see it as a disease, a mental disorder, something that's going to end the goddamn world :|.

I laugh at anti-gay people because they completely destroy what logic is in their arguments.

 

[FieryGoose]

Then you obviously did not read my post a few pages back. You are the type of person who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. I mean Dario's reasoning was dumb, but your "logical proof" is just unexplainable. I'm all for freedom of speech, but you are just a hate monger. Like I said before, its fine if you disapprove of homosexuality, but you don't just disapprove of it, you see it as a disease, a mental disorder, something that's going to end the goddamn world :|.

I laugh at anti-gay people because they completely destroy what logic is in their arguments.

Well as far as i'm concerned you have not disproved me yet? What you are saying about me believing gay marriage is going to end the world is partially true, how are we going to populate the world with intelligent people when we can reproduce. and when we do the children are either impotent or are retarded, a mentally retarded person will be without a doubt formed when a guy does another guy and then does a lady. I really don't mind if guys have relationships but they will never have marriage in my eyes, they need to think of a different word for thier bond, but it is not marriage.
Someone says marriage is not just about sex its about love well: "Love is a sensation, caused by temptation, when a guy sticks his location in a girls destination, in order to increase the population of the next generation"(comedy central), This thread deffinently needs a little humor.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Don't tell me that i can't prove anything when you can't either, for instance you didn't even name the culture that accepted being gay as normal...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

Africa:
Though often denied or ignored by European explorers, homosexual expression in native Africa was also present and took a variety of forms. Representative examples:

Anthropologists Murray and Roscoe report that women in Lesotho have engaged in socially sanctioned "long term, erotic relationships" named motsoalle.

E. E. Evans-Pritchard reported that male Azande warriors (in the northern Congo) routinely married male youths who functioned as temporary wives. The practice had died out in the early 20th century but was recounted to him by the elders.

An academic paper by Stephen O. Murray examines the history of descriptions of "Homosexuality in traditional Sub-Saharan Africa".

Americas:
In North American Native society, the most common form of same-sex sexuality seems to centre around the figure of the two-spirit individual. Such persons seem to have been recognised by the majority of tribes, each of which had its particular term for the role. Typically the two-spirit individual was recognised early in life, was given a choice by the parents to follow the path, and if the child accepted the role then it was raised in the appropriate manner, learning the customs of the gender it had chosen. Two-spirit individuals were commonly shamans and were revered as having powers beyond those of ordinary shamans. Their sexual life would be with the ordinary tribe members of the opposite gender. Male two-spirit people were prized as wives because of their greater strength and ability to work.

East Asia:
In Asia same-sex love has been known since the dawn of history. Early Western travellers were taken aback by its widespread acceptance and open display.

Homosexual relations in China, known as the pleasures of the bitten peach, the cut sleeve, or the southern custom, have been recorded since approximately 600 BCE. These euphemistic terms were used to describe behaviours, but not identities. The relationships were marked by differences in age and social position. However, the instances of same-sex affection and sexual interactions described in the Hong Lou Meng (Dream of the Red Chamber, or Story of the Stone) seem as familiar to observers in the present as do equivalent stories of romances between heterosexuals during the same period.

Homosexuality in Japan, variously known as shudo or nanshoku, terms influenced by Chinese literature, has been documented for over one thousand years and was an integral part of Buddhist monastic life and the samurai tradition. This same-sex love culture gave rise to strong traditions of painting and literature documenting and celebrating such relationships.

Similarly, in Thailand, Kathoey or ladyboys have been a feature of Thai society for many centuries, and Thai kings had male as well as female lovers. Kathoey are men who dress as women. They are generally accepted by society, and Thailand has never had legal prohibitions against homosexuality or homosexual behaviour. The teachings of Buddhism, dominant in Thai society was accepting of a third gender designation.


Europe:
The earliest western documents (in the form of literary works, art objects, as well as mythographic materials) concerning same-sex relationships are derived from Ancient Greece. They depict a world in which relationships with women and relationships with youths were the essential foundation of a normal man's love life. Same-sex relationships were a social institution variously constructed over time and from one city to another. The practice, a system of relationships between an adult male and an adolescent coming of age, was often valued for its pedagogic benefits and as a means of population control, and occasionally blamed for causing disorder. Plato praised its benefits in his early writings, but in his late works proposed its prohibition, laying out a strategy which uncannily predicts the path by which same-sex love was eventually driven underground.

The Roman emperor Theodosius decreed a law, on August 6th, 390, condemning passive homosexuals to be burned at the stake. Justinian, towards the end of his reign, expanded the proscription to the active partner as well (in 558) warning that such conduct can lead to the destruction of cities through the "wrath of God." Notwithstanding these regulations, taxes on homosexual boy brothels continued to be collected until the end of the reign of Anastasius I in 518.

During the Renaissance, cities in northern Italy, Florence and Venice in particular, were renowned for their widespread practice of same-sex love, engaged in by a majority of the male population and constructed along the classical pattern of Greece and Rome. But even as the majority of the male population was engaging in same-sex relationships, the authorities, under the aegis of the Officers of the Night court, were prosecuting, fining, and imprisoning a good portion of that population. The eclipse of this period of relative artistic and erotic freedom was precipitated by the rise to power of the moralising monk Girolamo Savonarola. Throughout all of Europe, fierce conflicts, dating back to the early Middle Ages, raged between proponents and opponents of same sex love.

Middle East and Central Asia:
Among many Middle-Eastern Muslim cultures, homosexual practices were widespread and public. Persian poets, such as Attar (d. 1220), Rumi (d. 1273), Sa’di (d. 1291), Hafez (d. 1389), and Jami (d. 1492), wrote poems replete with homoerotic allusions. Recent work in queer studies suggests that while the visibility of such relationships has been much reduced, their frequency has not. The two most commonly documented forms were commercial sex with transgender males or males enacting transgender roles exemplified by the koceks and the bacchas, and Sufi spiritual practices in which the practitioner crossed over from the idealised chaste form of the practice to one in which the desire is consummated.

In Persia homosexuality and homoerotic expressions were tolerated in numerous public places, from monasteries and seminaries to taverns, military camps, bathhouses, and coffee houses. In the early Safavid era (1501-1723), male houses of prostitution (amrad khaneh) were legally recognized and paid taxes.

A rich tradition of art and literature sprang up, constructing Middle Eastern homosexuality in ways analogous to the ancient tradition of male love in which Ganymede, cup-bearer to the gods, symbolised the ideal boyfriend. Muslim — often Sufi — poets in medieval Arab lands and in Persia wrote odes to the beautiful Christian wine boys who, they claimed, served them in the taverns and shared their beds at night. In many areas the practice survived into modern times (as documented by Richard Francis Burton, André Gide, and others).

In Central Asia, on the Silk Route, the two traditions of the east and the west met, and gave rise to a strong local culture of same-sex love. In the Turkic-speaking areas, one manifestation of this were the bacchá, adolescent or adolescent-seeming male entertainers and sex workers. In other areas male love continues to surface despite efforts to keep it quiet. After the American invasion of Afghanistan, Central Asian same-sex love customs in which adult men take on adolescent lovers were widely reported.

Other forms are less well documented. It is reported that in the oasis of Siwa boy marriages were the norm until the middle of the twentieth century, a practice which was coupled with a minimum age for heterosexual marriage of forty for the men, a measure presumed to have been taken to avoid overpopulation. Finally, sexual relations between older and younger boys are said to be frequent in the Middle East as well as in the Maghreb.

The prevailing pattern of same-sex relationships in the temperate and sub-tropical zone stretching from Northern India to the Western Sahara is one in which the relationships were — and are — either gender-structured or age-structured or both. In recent years, egalitarian relationships modelled on the western pattern have become more frequent, though they remain rare.

South Pacific:
In many societies of Melanesia same-sex relationships are an integral part of the culture. Traditional Melanesian insemination rituals also existed where a boy, upon reaching a certain age would be paired with and older adolescent who would become his mentor and whom he would ritually fellate over a number of years in order to develop his own masculinity. In certain tribes of Papua New Guinea, for example, it is considered a normal ritual responsibility for a boy to have a relationship in order to accomplish his ascent into manhood. Many Melanesian societies, however, have become hostile towards same-sex relationships since the introduction of Christianity by European missionaries.

i don't doubt that there was one out there but i'm pretty sure that they were wiped off the face of the planet for a reason(the great flood ).

Even if the stupid flood were real (where did the water come from?) all these things happened before, afterwards, and have continued to happen (to varying degrees of persecution) ever since.

The secular world is the one that supports gay rights how can i make an argument against gay rights that's secular?

Exactly.
There is no logical reason to for our secular government to discriminate against gays in the manner you wish to.
Unless you want theocracy, your argument fails.
Keep your faith in church, where it belongs.

People will marry animals and have sex with them(it will be widely accepted by people like you), people will have sex with dead people and be able to marry them(necrophiliacs).

So, in your view, consenting gay adults are no better than animals and/or corpses?

Or are you saying that animals and corpses have the ability to consent?

This is a FALSE ANALOGY FALLACY.
Also, it is an example of the SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY.

It is therefore not a basis for any just law.

if you really consider gay sex the way things are supposed to happen you've got problems. Its almost like asking a mentally retarded person to run in government positions, basically we're letting semi-retarded people gain rights that you licentious people don't understand is wrong. [...] oh so lets just say their different, well don't we call mentally disabled people different or special?:dork:

So, now you're saying that intelligent rational homosexuals are just like the "semi-retarded"
This is a FALSE ANALOGY FALLACY again.

Also, the notion that gays have a "mental disease" is not supported by known fact. You must provide proof of this claim, unless you want to look stupid.
This is called the BURDEN OF PROOF.

Don't you guys honestly think that gay people get all sorts of diseases from doing eachother in the butt for a reason?

If you are claiming STDs sre caused by god in order to punish gays, that is an example of the ANIMISTIC FALLACY.

ALL forms of sexual contact carry a risk of STD transmission, so obviously god hates straight people too.

Opposites do and always will attract just how it's ment to be in nature, until someone can prove me otherwise my beliefs and thoughts are completely logical.

This is an example of the NATURALISTIC FALLACY.
A bear devouring your face is natural. Natural does not equal good.
The majority of known species reproduce via "same-sex" asexual practices.

The LARGE BOLD LINKS show how you fail at logic.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

A few things to think about: With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach this perversion as the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.

Calling something a "perversion" for no logical reason, and then discriminating against it, is an example of the WISDOM OF REPUGNANCE FALLACY.

It is also fallacious to support something purely because it is "traditional". This is the APPEAL TO TRADITION FALLACY.

The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. Because homosexuals are rarely monogamous, often having as many as three hundred or more partners in a lifetime(some studies say it is typically more than one thousand).

Which studies? Failure to name these studies is a negelect to the BURDEN OF PROOF.

Even if these are valid peer-reviewed studies that have successfully analyzed the sexual habits of gay parents, you have not presented any reason to believe multiple sexual partners somehow harm children. You have nothing at all.

We’ve already seen evidence from the Scandinavian countries that de-facto homosexual marriage destroys the real Mc Coy.

No we haven't, because you have presented no such evidence of causality or even of any effect. Remember: BURDEN OF PROOF.

Name one country that has no straight marriage because it was "destroyed".

These two entities cannot coexist because they represent opposite ends of the universe. A book could be written on the reasons for this collision between matter and antimatter.

Sexuality is not made of antimatter. This is a FALSE ANALOGY.

These are just a few "logical" arguments i dug up.

Once again, the BOLD LINKS show where you fail at logic.

If you cannot use logic, your beliefs have no place in our secular legal system.

 

[ComradeBadger]

I don't understand the objection to gay marriage really..

Can someone summarise it in one key point?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Can someone summarise it in one key point?

Dario did that, actually:

no offense intended, but being realistic, if aliens from outer space saw it, they'd label homosexuality as a disease in the human species.

The basic gist of all homophobia is the belief that some fictional invisible power hates gays, and that the power is more important than all science and logical thought.

Dario D. has the (strangely anthropomorphized) space aliens.
Foxhound666 has a particularily petty God.
Even non-religious homophobes use their alleged nausea as a "spidey-sense" to predict what is right and wrong.
Others just credit "mother nature" with gay-hate.

In any case, it's always inherently "because I said so," with fake authority figures invented to support the argument because no real ones exist.

 

[Hectic Glenn]

I don't understand the objection to gay marriage really..

Can someone summarise it in one key point?

Homophobia? When the law was passed recently, i was surprised we didn't have that option originally in this country, glad its there now, i fully support it. A gay couple adopting children is another issue i'd need to think about. A loving couple could easily bring up a child, i'm just considering psychological issues.

On a more basic level to this thread, i hope one day i get married, i'd love to as i think its means quite a bit (to me anyway).

 

[el Chi]

Someone says marriage is not just about sex its about love well: "Love is a sensation, caused by temptation, when a guy sticks his location in a girls destination, in order to increase the population of the next generation"(comedy central)

You know a man is a true debating genius when he cites flippant rhymes from comedy shows as if it were some kind of sensible line of thinking.

"That doesn't back up what you're saying AT ALL."
"Oh but it's funny!"
"Well, that's contentious at best, but it STILL doesn't back up any of the claims you've made."
"Oh but it's funny!"
"Sorry, what?"
"This thread needs some comedy."
"Are you going to make a sensible counter argument?"
"Yes, the world's ending and it's all the gays' fault."
"Yes, you're right, the human population really is on the decline isn't it."
"I'm glad we agree."
"I see... You do realise that you're not making any sense, right? You're just making repellently bigotted remarks and then calling everyone else stupid if they don't agree. That's bad debating technique."
"No it's not. I'm not retarded. Gays are retarded."
"Interesting - you base that on what exactly?"
"They don't want to procreate."
"They may want to raise kids though - that's more than a lot of striaght couples want."
"Yeah but then the kids will turn out to be fruits."
"Why is that true? Straight parents don't always raise straight kids."
"Yeah but if they're exposed to the gay then they'll get the gay and be gay. It's only mentally unwell people and the vastly impressionable who go gay."
"So you don't suppose it's at all possible to have a different sexual preference than that which is purely functional, despite the fact that homosexuality and bisexuality have both been observed in other animal species? And then they can STILL be a fully autonimous, sensible, intelligent memberof society."
"They don't deserve to be 'married'. If they must be, it should be a different label, because it threatens straight marriages."
"Why?"
"Because it devalues them."
"Why"
"Because it's not normal."
"Genius."
"Thank you."

 

[Mechagodzilla]

So far, Foxface8000 has used (at least) the following fallacies:

1 - FALSE ANALOGY FALLACY.
2 - SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY.
3 - BURDEN OF PROOF REVERSAL FALLACY.
4 - NATURALISTIC FALLACY.
5 - WISDOM OF REPUGNANCE FALLACY.
6 - APPEAL TO TRADITION FALLACY.

Here, I will use the same fallacies to prove Foxhouned420 is, in fact, a satanist who plans to destroy America w/ his satanic powers:

Foxhound worships the fallen angel satan, and this is definitely true.
First of all, Foxhound hates gays, which is a famous satanic conversion tactic discovered by anthropologists in 1980. (3)
By attempting to pervert our children's minds with disgusting anti-gay talk, (5) Foxhound attempts to draw them closer to Satan - at which point he will brainwash them and then certainly molest them while they are away from Christ. (2)

The ability to be homophobic is UN-NATURAL, and has not been shown in any other species in nature. (4) We can only conclude then that being a homophobe is directly caused by Satan's cruel manipulations, which have been documented by many italian scientists. (3)

So, to summarize: I have proven foxhound is using the guise of homophobia as an excuse to molest children in the name of Satan. We must do the correct thing we have always done, and throw stones at him until he dies of a shattered body. (6)


This is why logic exists. To prevent you from being stoned to death for being a witch.
I hope you see the point.

 

[Eg.]

DAMNITT MECHA CAN YOU PLEASE STOP SHITTING ON THESE THREADS!

Your logic and reasoned repsonses are not welcome! Take your educated arguements with supporting evidence somewhere else!

But serisously, I couldnt care less about gay couples getting married because of two things:

1. If they love eachother, more power to them
2. Their gayness isnt going to magically spread and over take my household

 

[baxter]

So far, Foxface8000 has used (at least) the following fallacies:

1 - FALSE ANALOGY FALLACY.
2 - SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY.
3 - BURDEN OF PROOF REVERSAL FALLACY.
4 - NATURALISTIC FALLACY.
5 - WISDOM OF REPUGNANCE FALLACY.
6 - APPEAL TO TRADITION FALLACY.

I don't know whether you do it on purpose but you owe me a cup of coffee, the one I have just spit out due to laughter, excellent, keep it up.

 

[Masterdebator101]

Author Unknown

I know that many of you have heard Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell and others speak of the "Homosexual Agenda," but no one has ever seen a copy of it. Well, I have finally obtained a copy directly from the Head Homosexual. It follows below:

6:00 am Gym
8:00 am Breakfast (oatmeal and egg whites)
9:00 am Hair appointment
10:00 am Shopping
12:00 PM Brunch

2:00 PM
1) Assume complete control of the U.S. Federal, State and Local Governments as well as all other national governments,
2) Recruit all straight youngsters to our debauched lifestyle,
3) Destroy all healthy heterosexual marriages,
4) Replace all school counselors in grades K-12 with agents of Colombian and Jamaican drug cartels,
5) Establish planetary chain of homo breeding gulags where over-medicated imprisoned straight women are turned into artificially impregnated baby factories to produce prepubescent love slaves for our devotedly pederastic gay leadership,
6) bulldoze all houses of worship, and
7) Secure total control of the INTERNET and all mass media for the exclusive use of child pornographers.

2:30 PM Get forty winks of beauty rest to prevent facial wrinkles from stress of world conquest
4:00 PM Cocktails
6:00 PM Light Dinner (soup, salad, with Chardonnay)
8:00 PM Theater
11:00 PM Bed (du jour)"

 

[Masterdebator101]

so what exactly do gay people dream about during the work hour anyway, a special dildo in the shape of a butt that they slam on their queer, mutilated, womenly dicks, that is not how it is supposed to go. obviously the but is a one way exit. so queers should close their buts and not be such fairies.

 

[Masterdebator101]

what, nothing to say

 

[FieryGoose]

When people choose a path, they should be willing to walk it.. And to me, part of the "path" of homosexual liasons and partnership is that a decision has automatically been made to accept the basic fact that reproduction isn't possible, and so should not be an issue...
a male and female... are meant to reproduce, by every standard u can think of.. When this can not occur and solutions are found, it doesnt mean that these solutions should be exploited for purposes which they were not originally designed for..


How is our country going to be populated if our world turns into homosexuals. We need to fear for the children of our country that get adopted by these same sex couples for eventually our world will be overun by the filth of their "parents".Canada is leading the way on this revolutionary path. I could cite dozens of examples indicating that religious freedom in that country is dying. Indeed, on April 28, 2004, the Parliament passed bill C 250, which effectively criminalized speech or writings that criticize homosexuality. Anything deemed to be “homophobic” can be punished by six months in prison or by other severe penalties. So this is what you guys want our rights to come down to, grinded down and slimed by a legal cut down of freedoms.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

When people choose a path, they should be willing to walk it.. And to me, part of the "path" of homosexual liasons and partnership is that a decision has automatically been made to accept the basic fact that reproduction isn't possible, and so should not be an issue...

Reproduction is plenty possible. Obviously you have never heard of a surrogate mother.

Also, that is like saying you chose to be straight, and therefore you should forced by law to have six kids.

No one "deserves" to have their reproductive organs placed under government control for no good reason.

You have shirked the BURDEN OF PROOF and failed to provide a reason.

Actually, in place of reason, you've really just started ranting:

a male and female... are meant to reproduce, by every standard u can think of..

Uh, no. Not by every standard, obviously.
If it were every standard, you wouldn't be so angry at logical thought and an entire group of people.
This is another case of the NATURALISTIC FALLACY, I am fairly certain.

When this can not occur and solutions are found, it doesnt mean that these solutions should be exploited for purposes which they were not originally designed for..

Adoption is designed to provide parents for children.
Since it is currently legal for gays to adopt, that is what adoption was designed for.

This is a faulty APPEAL TO TRADITION.

How is our country going to be populated if our world turns into homosexuals. We need to fear for the children of our country that get adopted by these same sex couples for eventually our world will be overun by the filth of their "parents".

Filth?
This forum is for discussing politics. NOT to propagate hate speech.

You honestly think the world will become 100% gay in the future?
It is like you are filled with a massive amount of self-loathing if being straight is so undesirable to you.

In any case, that sounds like more of the SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY.

So this is what you guys want our rights to come down to, grinded down and slimed by a legal cut down of freedoms.

LOOK OUT!
If you aren't careful you might not be allowed to call people filth and rally to take their freedoms away.
The law exists purely to remove that fascistic attitude that attempts to segregate our nation.

This looks like the WISDOM OF DISGUST fallacy again, as well as some APPEAL TO EMOTION.

Maybe you should calm down a bit.
You really are getting worked up over something you have absolutely no reason to believe.

Logical thought wins.

so what exactly do gay people dream about during the work hour anyway, a special dildo in the shape of a butt that they slam on their queer, mutilated, womenly dicks, that is not how it is supposed to go. obviously the but is a one way exit. so queers should close their buts and not be such fairies.

Wow. Nice knowing you.

No-one is reading the logical fallacy thread.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

For those of you that hadn't worked it out already, Masterdebator101 is also Foxhound888.

He's now banned for life - both accounts.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Go figure.
Mister Morality broke the rules in an attempt to senselessly persecute a minority group.

I wonder if there is a lesson here...?