Almost Smart  

Go Back   Almost Smart > The Lounge > Debate & Politics

Debate & Politics Fight! Fight! Fight! Keep your arguments clean, and be constructive about getting your point across.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-03-2013   #21
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by foxyphoenix View Post


TO THE WAYBACK MACHINE: 2008



Weeeeeeeeeeeeee
^people change Foxy. I grew up, so bringing up something I wrote 5 yrs ago when I was an immature mysoginistic ass, to prove a point now, is a cheap liberal tactic. I'll respond more later when I have more time
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013   #22
Pittielynn
sweet, funny and down-right CUTE!
 
Pittielynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: History
Posts: 5,547
Rep Power: 96
Pittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by psychoDiablo View Post
do people in muslim forums discuss shit like this? gay marriage and drugs and abortions and gun control crap. i only know what americans do. so far they are the freest if i had to vote.
Oh absolutely. So many people are surprised when they realise how similar the people and the religions are. As it was explained by a friend of mine from Yemin, the fundamental difference between Islam and Christianity is that Muslims believe that God's word got changed/manipulated/mixed up/misunderstood after Jesus communicated it (and was later murdered). According to them, there was a second prophet, Muhammed, sent by god to fix that. This is one of the reasons why there are such strict controls of publications of the Qu'ran. Unlike the Bible, it has NEVER been changed. Not the wording, not the script, nothing. Most other differences are cultural things that are not in the Qu'ran at all.

As for Gay marriage, as far as I know it isn't as huge of an issue in Islam but it isn't accepted either. Actually, gay interactions are basically the only thing that would get a man killed in an honour killing by his family. How often do you hear of that happening?


I think when the word finally realizes that we are ALL Just people with similar needs, interests, and desires, things might actually change.
__________________


"Be strong while it's hard and laugh at it after it's over. You just gotta live." - Spadetje


All along I believed I would find you.
Time has brought your heart to me,
I have loved you for a thousand years.
I'll love you for a thousand more...
...One step closer.
o.O♠O.o

Almost Smart Store
Almost Smart Arcade
Pittielynn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013   #23
Comrade Marx
Member
 
Comrade Marx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Posts: 138
Rep Power: 26
Comrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
^people change Foxy. I grew up, so bringing up something I wrote 5 yrs ago when I was an immature mysoginistic ass, to prove a point now, is a cheap liberal tactic. I'll respond more later when I have more time
Liberal tactic? I have seen both Conservatives and Liberals bring up statements from people in the past to point out nonsense and hypocrisy. And just so you know it was George H. Bush that made this "Liberal tactic" more common place in the 1988 elections
Comrade Marx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013   #24
foxyphoenix
Ubi dubium, ibi libertas.
 
foxyphoenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Nature
Age: 31
Posts: 4,373
Rep Power: 107
foxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond reputefoxyphoenix has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Zanahoria_Picante View Post
That's why it seems to make more sense to just directly present the Christian view of marriage because that is, underneath the surface, what that lady wishes to argue, but wants to use secular logic to do so. And fails. Oh so profoundly:

There truly is so much wrong with that pamphlet, and much of the critique that fellow writes of it is accurate, sadly. The pamphlet is duplicitous, poorly written, poorly representative of Christianity, logically flimsy, and really just a single, continuous, nigh-on-coherent train of thought broken up into points, none of which are strong, independent reasons.
Precisely.
It also says a LOT about the strength of her argument that these were the BEST reasons she could come up with to oppose gay marriage from a secular stance.

Quote:
Originally Said by Zanahoria_Picante View Post
However, there was one point that she tried to make that made me wonder:

The issue of a child being denied a father or mother figure, not due to extenuating circumstances ("single parents, divorced parents, step-parents, and adoptive parents," all of which involve a loss or separation of some kind), but due to the desire of two people to be together, due to two people's sexual preference; because of those desires and preferences, a child is denied a mother or father. Isn't that selfish? It really does seem like something could be lost there other than tradition. Experience, perhaps. A type of relationship, perhaps. A complete picture and balance, perhaps. It's possible.
How is that any different than divorced parents' desire to be apart? Or a single parent who wants nothing to do with the other biological parent? Or two parents who don't want their child and give her up for adoption? Each of those is a desire or a preference that we already allow. While some may not think those are moral reasons either, it's discriminatory to allow some instances and not others.

Genetic contribution does not make a parent: the person(s) raising the child do(es). Also keep in mind, they may be "denied" one parent, but can gain another (similar to adoptive parents now).

Quote:
Originally Said by Funk*Sonic*7 View Post
^people change Foxy. I grew up, so bringing up something I wrote 5 yrs ago when I was an immature mysoginistic ass, to prove a point now, is a cheap liberal tactic. I'll respond more later when I have more time
How is it liberal? Or does "liberal" just mean "bad" in your mind?
My point was that, at some point in your life, you saw that love was love. Something in you changed, and it was not for the better: now you are full of hate.
__________________
o.O

"In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe."
-
Carl Sagan

"It is always advisable to perceive clearly our ignorance."
-
Charles Darwin

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, man would die from a great loneliness of the spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected."
-
Chief Seattle

Almost Smart Store

foxyphoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013   #25
Comrade Marx
Member
 
Comrade Marx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Posts: 138
Rep Power: 26
Comrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Okay Funk Sonic and Zanahoria_Picante lets try a Gedanken experiment

Image 2000 years ago the bible says that people who are near sighted are an abomination, are born sinners to God, and are dammned. Because of these words, we cast out anyone with vision problems. People that lose their eye sight are seen as sinners that are being punnished. We do not allow anyone with glasses to work as teachers, to marry, or adopt children because the bible says that they're not allowed and ultra Conservtive leaders preachs the hard line. We hear statments that "No one is born Near sighted" and "having poor vision is a life choice". We read about churches supporting lazer eye clinics to "fix the abomination" and "save them". Terms like "Four eyes" are very insulting and derogatory words.

So after 2000 years of unfiltered and sometimes violent hatred and contempt for near sighted people, we as a society allow people with vision problems to marry and have children. We as a society have advanced ourselves to make dececisions on our own without looking towards religion. But we still have people that are against people with vision from marring and having children because the bible says it is wrong for people to be near sighted. Wouldn't you as a human being at all think this is wrong? after all what are the people with vision problems doing that is wrong? they had no control over what happens to them. Do you really think that people want to be a part of a pursecuted minority?

I don't know why I am trying this, all I can forsee is this going past your head. Oh well, thats what happens when your in a military camp next to hickville.
Comrade Marx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013   #26
psychoDiablo
Thx for the memories
 
psychoDiablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 15,971
Rep Power: 200
psychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond reputepsychoDiablo has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to psychoDiablo Send a message via Yahoo to psychoDiablo
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Comrade Marx View Post
Okay Funk Sonic and Zanahoria_Picante lets try a Gedanken experiment

Image 2000 years ago the bible says that people who are near sighted are an abomination, are born sinners to God, and are dammned. Because of these words, we cast out anyone with vision problems. People that lose their eye sight are seen as sinners that are being punnished. We do not allow anyone with glasses to work as teachers, to marry, or adopt children because the bible says that they're not allowed and ultra Conservtive leaders preachs the hard line. We hear statments that "No one is born Near sighted" and "having poor vision is a life choice". We read about churches supporting lazer eye clinics to "fix the abomination" and "save them". Terms like "Four eyes" are very insulting and derogatory words.

So after 2000 years of unfiltered and sometimes violent hatred and contempt for near sighted people, we as a society allow people with vision problems to marry and have children. We as a society have advanced ourselves to make dececisions on our own without looking towards religion. But we still have people that are against people with vision from marring and having children because the bible says it is wrong for people to be near sighted. Wouldn't you as a human being at all think this is wrong? after all what are the people with vision problems doing that is wrong? they had no control over what happens to them. Do you really think that people want to be a part of a pursecuted minority?

I don't know why I am trying this, all I can forsee is this going past your head. Oh well, thats what happens when your in a military camp next to hickville.
*lol* wanna know what the people with vision problems are doing that is so wrong? They're boning each other in their butts.


I think that's a neat little experiment you got there. But if it comes right down to it, people do things like stealing food. Sure you can say it's "wrong," and cut off his hand, but a man has got to eat. If you really think about it, it's wrong that no one is sharing. lol now it's wrong that he's poor. Off with his head.
__________________
I wouldn't say I'm psycho only because I'm able to handle it.
Now learn patience

To chill is to be chillin.
Chillin is cooperating with your surroundings, unknowing'st of what everything is capable of; and all the while, as it happens and after, to accept without any thought of good or bad, but mainly, just enjoying rather deeply, the moment you had to sit and think. (Not thinking.)

|-Mr.MCR-|

Will you write
Will you love
Will you enjoy
Life when I am gone?
You will.
by Angelina

"I have lived life as horrible as it was, and as beautiful as it has become."
psychoDiablo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #27
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Same-sex/genderless "marriage" makes an implicit statement that motherhood and fatherhood (women and men) are interchangeable, and that sex (gender) is irrelevant to parenting. The burden of proof should be on those who make this strong, non-intuitive claim. Even homosexual couples believe sex/gender is relevant: the sex of their partners. For instance, a man caught up in open homosexuality will insist on a male sex partner. He is not satisfied with a female sex partner, no matter how masculine she may be. A woman caught up in open homosexuality (lesbianism) insists on a female sex partner, and even a very feminine man will not do. By doing this, they are acknowledging that there is a difference between the sexes, but then conveniently ignore the self-evident differences between men and women when it comes to arguing for so-called "marriage equality" and raising children. A worldview/ideology that can't hold up based on it's own philosophy exposes that it's not a worldview/ideology based on truth.

I just skimmed over some of the 'rebuttals,' if you can call them that. Here is the statement, "The claim that mothers and fathers are interchangeable will affect men and women differently." And here is the reply. "How exactly? This isn't a "reason." Stop saying you have "77 Reasons" when you've padded it out with s*** like this!"
So you consider that a refutation? No. that's just some knee-jerk trolling... "Rational-wiki" is guilty of false advertisement.

And sorry but the poor marriage culture argument is lost upon me as an act of pure idiocy. Pointing out that our marriage culture is bad in order to justify making it even worse and somehow think that is a solution rather than adding to the problem...I don't buy it. And though I don't like the fact that he has to swear, I agree with liberal atheist Adam Carrola; the substance of his argument here is spot on...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Zw4PIcjVNg

You can judge it as "hate" all you want, but my passion is freedom. I could care less who you want to form relationships with or what your lifestyle choices are, not my business. But the homosexualist side is intent upon making government our higher moral authority and turning our constitution upside down, and that's unacceptable to me. I will not surrender freedom, religious or otherwise to government dictate. The homosexualist arguments are fallacious; based on false presuppositions, euphemism, Orwellian double-speak, and victim-card rhetoric. No one is denying people who have sex with the same sex any freedoms or "rights," they are seeking special rights that trounce upon and demonize my religious freedoms and my values. The ONLY way you could legitimately argue for 'discrimination' (or 'inequality') would be if two men could marry, but two women could not (or vice-versa). But since marriage includes BOTH sexes (one of each), the accusation has no truth in it.

The change from gendered marriage to genderless "marriage" will bring about the most sweeping and uncompassionate power grab of the State into family life we have ever witnessed. It’s because we will be replacing an objective, pre-political reason for marriage (procreation of children, and public recognition of parents’ attachment to them) with a subjective, state-defined one (love, equality, time spent with the child, etc). Gendered marriage is the only institution we have that publicly recognizes and affirms the biological connection children have with their parents. Genderless "marriage" removes this. Thus, gendered marriage is far more compassionate than genderless "marriage."

Same-sex/genderless "marriage" redefines marriage to be about the wants and desires of adults rather than the rights of children. By design, it DELIBERATELY deprives children of either motherhood or fatherhood.
Two women can be great mothers, but never can be a great father. Two men can be great fathers, but never can be great mothers.

Can you also please tell me how legalizing genderless "marriage" won't encourage more instances where children will be DELIBERATELY deprived of either motherhood or fatherhood? (Keep in mind that with single parents, at least there's a chance that an opposite sex partner can come into the mix and help raise the child).

The French have this argument against homosexual marriage right. In late March, over one million French people from all sides of the aisle..leftists, the right, centrists, secularists, religionists, muslims, jews, christians..EVERY walk of life marched in Paris against homosexual "marriage." What brought these groups who are usually at odds with each other together? They understand that homosexual 'marriage' is not about homosexual 'marriage,' but about big business seeing an opportunity to commercial babies and children. Persons caught up in homosexuality need third parties to acquire children, and this what it’s all about, buying and acquiring children, and thus commercializing the child, reducing children to a transaction. And who’s backing Holland and France to push homosexual marriage? Big Money that stands to make a fortune from “designer” babies for persons caught up in homosexuality and liberals that want children outside the traditional mother/father relationship.
http://anonymousus.org/

If every person already can marry another adult of the opposite sex, how is it about "equality?"
If homosexuality is about love and not sex, why can't any two people who claim to love each other get the same legal marriage benefits that same sex couples will get via legalizing homosexual/genderless "marriage?"

There's already a case where two sisters are arguing in court with regards to taxes that they need to be treated like lesbians to get the better tax incentives. If homosexuality is about love and not sex (as they claim), then ANY two or more persons who live together and say they "love each other" should be entitled to tax benefits that a man and woman marriage gets. This will just add more burden on the tax payer overall...and further expand big government into our private lives. The homosexual activist movement is about anything but "keeping it in the bedroom."
http://www.democraticunderground.com...ss=102x2508565

Is anyone of the opinion that a majority of people really believe the biological definition of marriage is equivalent to racism and bigotry? No? So, how is it we are accepting that accusation without hardly blinking and eye -- not only accepting it, but falling under it's intimidation, even being willing to accept and concede government's moral authority to impose that lie by force. Under a humanistic worldview, there is no foundation for morality greater than the individual’s own wants, preferences, whims (that’s where the concept of relativism comes from) -- that makes human government their religion per se, the institution which enforces that worldview perspective of reality and governs our lives according to it's standards of tolerance and acceptance. The path to tyranny. Who’s trying to use the power of government to impose their moral beliefs? Those who concede government to be the authority to define the term marriage, or those who do not? I’ll give you a hint, those who don’t agree government holds such authority, are not the ones attempting to use it to impose their definition.
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias

Last edited by Funk*Sonic*7; 06-05-2013 at 06:37 PM.
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #28
Pittielynn
sweet, funny and down-right CUTE!
 
Pittielynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: History
Posts: 5,547
Rep Power: 96
Pittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

One of the biggest issues I'm aware of is that in states in which gay marriage is illegal, partners often find themselves without any say in their love one's medical issues. I've even read posts about people being thrown out of their loved one's room because they weren't "family."
Imagine the possibility of having lived with someone you love for ten years (or any length of time, really). They've shared their lives and their wishes with you, but your relationship is not recognized by the state in which you live and therefore the doctors are forced to ignore what you tell them. Imagine they have no other next-of-kin and the doctors are forced to follow the wishes expressed on an out-of-date will or DNR when your loved one's views or wishes have changed, you know that, but there is nothing you can say or do to make the doctors do something different.

On a different note, those arguments about gay marriage potentially ruining the sanctity of heterosexual marriage are truly quite ignorant. Divorce, cheating, polygamy, and so on have all existed long before gay marriage began to be debated, let alone thought of. Us heterosexuals ruined the sanctity of marriage all on our own. If anything, the recognition, understanding, and acceptance of homosexuality will probably actually help. There are plenty of people who married a person of the opposite sex because they were "supposed to" when they were actually gay. Guess what. Those marriages probably resulted in cheating and/or divorce. Guess what else. The misery of all parties involved in said situations could have been avoided if being gay was acceptable.
__________________


"Be strong while it's hard and laugh at it after it's over. You just gotta live." - Spadetje


All along I believed I would find you.
Time has brought your heart to me,
I have loved you for a thousand years.
I'll love you for a thousand more...
...One step closer.
o.O♠O.o

Almost Smart Store
Almost Smart Arcade
Pittielynn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #29
Comrade Marx
Member
 
Comrade Marx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Posts: 138
Rep Power: 26
Comrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond reputeComrade Marx has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
that makes human government their religion per se, the institution which enforces that worldview perspective of reality and governs our lives according to it's standards of tolerance and acceptance. The path to tyranny. Who’s trying to use the power of government to impose their moral beliefs? Those who concede government to be the authority to define the term marriage, or those who do not? I’ll give you a hint, those who don’t agree government holds such authority, are not the ones attempting to use it to impose their definition.
To funk
Just because the government is allowing gay people to marry and have children does not mean that the government is going to turn into a tyrannical state. And prior to gay marrage and allowing gay people to be parents, the "Tyrannical" governments enforced their definition of marrage. Governmetns prior to all of this forced their morale beliefs on others. The only reason that you think the "Tyrannical" government is enforcing beliefs on us is because you don't agree with them. If gay marrage or gay parenting was illegal, you would have no issue with it nor would you claim the government is on a path to an authoritiarian regime.

The conservative party of Canada gives tax breaks to corporations, guts environmental standards, and is facing more corruption scandles then the vatican. But I still will not call them a "Tyrannical" government nor are they moving to a tyranny. But this is the usual statements from a closed minded American, they say a buch of loaded words that they do not understanding what they mean. You use words like "Liberal", "Socialist", "Communist", "Marxist" as if they are the most evil words in the dictionary. When the government gives rights to a minority, you claim that they are "Tyrannical" and "Authoritiarian". Maybe you should actually read political philosophy before you use words that are to big for your arguement.
Comrade Marx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #30
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

If there's an issue with hospital visitation policies or laws, you can visit that issue to try and resolve it without changing the legal definition of marriage.

Your other response is like saying "two wrongs make it a right," and I already addressed it in the 3rd paragraph in my last post. You should also ask yourself why one has to keep pointing to the faults, shortcomings, and mistakes of society in order to justify homosexuality? That doesn't say much for homosexual behavior and genderless "marriage."

By the way, there is no such thing as "gay people," "straight people," "homosexuals," or "heterosexuals." These are fraud terms invented by one guy (Karl Kentberny) in 1860s Germany. Kentberny was a travel writer who was looking for a way to justify those feelings. He had no theological, scientific, or psychology background. Again, fraud terms that have created a fictitious socio-political construct. There are ONLY men and women...

http://therealsocialconstructisgay.w...age-and-terms/


Here is one of the most compelling arguments I've ever seen against same sex/genderless "marriage." In a nutshell: it violates the 13th amendment. Yea, the 13th, which is the amendment that abolished slavery. Written by a man with excellent credentials and part of the community that calls itself "gay." It's well worth the time to read, because he spells it all out very clearly. Some of what he's saying about the government's involvement in overriding the biological basis for who counts as a parent is already happening in same sex custody disputes. I keep harping on this issue for the exact reasons he outlines here. It's not only about homosexual behavior and it's consequences -- it's also about children, their parents, and the need to have a marriage policy that enshrines these biological and physiological connections above all others. Read it and you'll see what I mean...

http://englishmanif.blogspot.com/p/g...amendment.html
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias

Last edited by Funk*Sonic*7; 06-05-2013 at 06:29 PM.
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #31
Pittielynn
sweet, funny and down-right CUTE!
 
Pittielynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: History
Posts: 5,547
Rep Power: 96
Pittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

If you are going to go down that route, there is no such thing as a gender-less marriage either. Just like asking a gay couple "so who's the girl in the relationship?" is ridiculous. There is no girl in the relationship. That's the point.
__________________


"Be strong while it's hard and laugh at it after it's over. You just gotta live." - Spadetje


All along I believed I would find you.
Time has brought your heart to me,
I have loved you for a thousand years.
I'll love you for a thousand more...
...One step closer.
o.O♠O.o

Almost Smart Store
Almost Smart Arcade
Pittielynn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #32
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Zanahoria_Picante View Post
You can't stop what society does: Once "the people," or hoi polloi (in case you're interested in a Greek term I just learned), get an idea in their heads, there's no stopping its fruition, or otherwise its carrying-out-ness.

We are--Christians are--not called to judge the people; we're called to love the people. All people. Period. That will make all the difference in pointing people to God. All this judgement and trying to stop the actions and laws of society--a futile pursuit--is not the message of Jesus at all. God has his own laws and his message was to love your enemies, love the world without conditions of any kind, as he had demonstrated.

"Your love for one another will prove to the world that you are my disciples."

"But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Jesus himself associated with what were considered the "riff raff" of society by the Jews' standards (these "riff raff" were considered "unclean," among other things, by the Jews): Prostitutes, tax collectors, the infirm. It's something any Christian should consider.
Applicable to the every day average person, but when it comes to the political movement, I have to cite this article that parrallels with what your comments touch on Rachael...

http://clashdaily.com/2012/10/focus-...ssed-believer/
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias

Last edited by Funk*Sonic*7; 06-05-2013 at 07:41 PM.
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #33
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Pittielynn View Post
If you are going to go down that route, there is no such thing as a gender-less marriage either. Just like asking a gay couple "so who's the girl in the relationship?" is ridiculous. There is no girl in the relationship. That's the point.
Genderless "marriage" means that the redefinition of marriage implies that gender is no longer a prerequisite, because it implies that one or the other is meaningless with regards to child-rearing.
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #34
Pittielynn
sweet, funny and down-right CUTE!
 
Pittielynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: History
Posts: 5,547
Rep Power: 96
Pittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Funk*Sonic*7 View Post
Genderless "marriage" means that the redefinition of marriage that states gender is not important, because it implies that one or the other is meaningless with regards to child-rearing.
That's sad. When we redefined women's rights, we didn't have to make rights "genderless." We just changed the word from "man" to "persons." Seems pretty simple to change the law so that it says "two persons" can get married instead of "a man and a woman."

I'm generalizing overtly here, but basically I'm expressing my annoyance of the redefinition. From the way you described it, it appears that those rewriting the marriage laws still have no real understanding of what it means to be homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, or what have you.

Also it doesn't matter if those terms are made up... In all actuality all terms are invented at some point. But invented or not, these are the terms through which people now identify themselves and their sexuality. Who are we to say "oh you think you're homosexual? Sorry but that's a made up term. It's not real." The fact that someone is using that term at all to describe themselves or some aspect of their identity makes it real.
I'm studying ethnicity and identity as my career and I can say right now from my research, that's how all identities begin, even your own. At one point even the concept of being "American" was a far-fetched notion that became a reality. Now millions of persons identify themselves as Americans. What we are talking about is sexuality, not nationality but the point still stands that identity is identity. Everyone identifies themselves differently than the next person, and that's okay. Or at least in a perfect would it will be.
__________________


"Be strong while it's hard and laugh at it after it's over. You just gotta live." - Spadetje


All along I believed I would find you.
Time has brought your heart to me,
I have loved you for a thousand years.
I'll love you for a thousand more...
...One step closer.
o.O♠O.o

Almost Smart Store
Almost Smart Arcade

Last edited by Pittielynn; 06-05-2013 at 07:13 PM.
Pittielynn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #35
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

The primary business of the state is justice. Because children cannot be autonomous, adult society has an obligation in justice to provide institutional structures that protect their most basic interests. Your comparison doesn't add up, because the existence of men and women as persons is a self-evident truth. The issue of genderless "marriage" is behavior.
Different behaviors and lifestyles have different outcomes, and same sex couples DELIBERATELY deprive children of either motherhood or fatherhood. That's what gets codified as law by refining marriage. Respectfully, every one of your responses still sees marriage through the lens of being about adult desires instead of the needs of children. Children are entitled to a relationship with both of their parents. They are entitled to know who they are and where they came from. Therefore children have a legitimate interest in the stability of their parents’ union, since that is ordinarily how kids have relationships with both parents. Same sex/gnderless "marriage" legislates that it's not important. Children cannot defend their rights themselves. Nor is it adequate to intervene after the fact, after harm already has been done. Children’s relational and identity rights must be protected proactively. Marriage is society’s institutional structure for protecting these legitimate rights and interests of children.
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias

Last edited by Funk*Sonic*7; 06-05-2013 at 07:40 PM.
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #36
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Pittielynn View Post
Also it doesn't matter if those terms are made up... In all actuality all terms are invented at some point. But invented or not, these are the terms through which people now identify themselves and their sexuality. Who are we to say "oh you think you're homosexual? Sorry but that's a made up term. It's not real." The fact that someone is using that term at all to describe themselves or some aspect of their identity makes it real.
I'm studying ethnicity and identity as my career and I can say right now from my research, that's how all identities begin, even your own. At one point even the concept of being "American" was a far-fetched notion that became a reality. Now millions of persons identify themselves as Americans. What we are talking about is sexuality, not nationality but the point still stands that identity is identity. Everyone identifies themselves differently than the next person, and that's okay. Or at least in a perfect would it will be.
Where talking about an emotive-sexual feeling and behavior being portrayed as an identity here. Not skin color or ethnicity....there's no "closet" for a black person to come out of or go back in. This doesn't mean I'm saying their experiencing same sex attraction is not real. The point is, a socio-political identity from that same sex attraction and homosexual behavior is pure fiction. The historical facts of the homosexual activist movement proves as such. As a matter of fact, I would say no movement can be described as "Orwellian" as much as the homosexual ACTIVIST movement.
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias

Last edited by Funk*Sonic*7; 06-05-2013 at 07:34 PM.
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #37
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Listen to what this homosexual activist has to say about marriage and listen to the applause...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9M0x...&feature=share

This recording is of a group of genderless "marriage" advocates discussing their ideas of marriage from their perspective as homosexual activists. It is eye opening. Several of the major concepts that they discuss:

1. Monogamy is only an illusion, there is no such thing, and it is goodthat monogamy does not exist.

2. There is no problem with having 3, 4, or 5 legal parents for a child.

3. Marriage is oppression

4. Marriage is not a life long relationship

5. Marriage is inadequate and needs to be redefined

6. Fidelity needs to be redefined

7. Sex is more interesting than marriage

8. There is a need to separate the ideas of sexuality and intimacy

9. Commitment should not be equated with monogamy

10. Marriage should not exist

11. The institution of marriage will change with the advent of homosexual/genderless "marriage"

...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=Ebw3hEeU5KE
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #38
Pittielynn
sweet, funny and down-right CUTE!
 
Pittielynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: History
Posts: 5,547
Rep Power: 96
Pittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Funk*Sonic*7 View Post
The primary business of the state is justice. Because children cannot be autonomous, adult society has an obligation in justice to provide institutional structures that protect their most basic interests. Your comparison doesn't add up, because the existence of men and women as persons is a self-evident truth. The issue of genderless "marriage" is behavior. Different behaviors and lifestyles have different outcomes, and same se couples DELIBERATELY deprive children of either motherhood or fatherhood. Respectfully, every one of your repsonses still sees marriage through the lens of being about adult desires instead of the needs of children. Children are entitled to a relationship with both of their parents. They are entitled to know who they are and where they came from. Therefore children have a legitimate interest in the stability of their parents’ union, since that is ordinarily how kids have relationships with both parents. Same sex/gnderless "marriage" legislates that it's not important. Children cannot defend their rights themselves. Nor is it adequate to intervene after the fact, after harm already has been done. Children’s relational and identity rights must be protected proactively. Marriage is society’s institutional structure for protecting these legitimate rights and interests of children.
This goes back to what was said before, so for fear of being repetitive I will simply say that your argument discusses stability of a parent's union, yet we all are very well aware that heterosexual relationships are by no means stable in every case, yet the kids turn out perfectly fine. Your argument also talks about identity but assumes that the children's identity is "straight." But the sexuality of a child's parents does not determine the sexuality of the child. If it did, gay people wouldn't exist. In addition everything you are talking about children being harmed, is over-protective at the very least. Plenty of children have been harmed by heterosexual parents. People are people, we all make mistakes and harm can happen in any parental situation no matter the sexuality of the parents. I also know of plenty of homosexual marriages that produced heterosexual offspring. If you don't believe me, enjoy this video of a gay man's reaction to his son's news. But my point is that sometimes kids turn out perfectly "fine" after being raised by gay parents, if your definition of "fine" is "straight." Plenty of kids also turn out terribly from nuclear families. *cough* practically every serial killer ever. *cough* (over-generalization, yes. But the point is clear. Even the most perfect family can produce someone with issues. For lack of a better word.

You're right the government's main interest is justice, but it also has no real business getting involved in family business; a person's sexuality, and whether they should marry the person they love - and if they should have children. Unless you want to live in a society were people's family lives are controlled. Or worse, one in which the governmet sterilizes those it deems "unworthy" to reproduce.

But to repeat what has already been said, the definition of marriage that you are talking about - one based on procreation - does not exist for many people anymore. It's about wanting to spend your life with someone and choosing to devote yourself to them through an old tradition that is evolving. Just ask all the childless-by-choice couples out there.

Quote:
Originally Said by Funk*Sonic*7 View Post
Where talking about an emotive-sexual feeling and behavior being portrayed as an identity here. Not skin color or ethnicity....there's no "closet" for a black person to come out of or go back in. This doesn't mean I'm saying their experiencing same sex attraction is not real. The point is, a socio-political identity from that same sex attraction and homosexual behavior is pure fiction. The historical facts of the homosexual activist movement proves as such. As a mattef of fact, I would say no movement can be described as "Orwellian" as much as the homosexual ACTIVIST movement.
I'm assuming you posted this before reading the rest of my comment, so consider this text as filler if I go back and see that you've responded to the other part of my discussion.

EDIT: Nope, I guess not. But the last few lines in the comment of mine which you quoted, by the way, when you posted the second quote in this comment is already my rebuttal to said quote. I am not at all convinced that there is no socio-political identity related to sexuality. Like I said, people do identify themselves this way socially, and if you think they don't politically, well its strange that this topic is being discussed in politics then... Really, quite strange. Our identities and any interests or issues that arise from them permeate the political sphere and are therefore part of the term you are refuting.
__________________


"Be strong while it's hard and laugh at it after it's over. You just gotta live." - Spadetje


All along I believed I would find you.
Time has brought your heart to me,
I have loved you for a thousand years.
I'll love you for a thousand more...
...One step closer.
o.O♠O.o

Almost Smart Store
Almost Smart Arcade

Last edited by Pittielynn; 06-05-2013 at 08:36 PM.
Pittielynn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #39
Funk*Sonic*7
Im super cereal!
 
Funk*Sonic*7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Randomly by chance out of nowhere, b/c that's more plausible
Posts: 3,748
Rep Power: 62
Funk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond reputeFunk*Sonic*7 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

I have to take off, I will respond more later, but really quick, you don't see the flaw in the logic of using the fact that the institution of marriage being compromised over the years as justification for genderless "marriage?" It's like saying, a person who doesn't drink, his or her entire family are alcoholics, so he or she may as well start drinking too.
__________________
"God is the shaper of your heart. God does not display his work in abstract terms. He prefers the concrete, and this means that at the end of your life one of three things will happen to your heart: it will grow hard, it will be broken, or it will be tender. Nobody escapes." - Ravi Zacharias
Funk*Sonic*7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013   #40
Pittielynn
sweet, funny and down-right CUTE!
 
Pittielynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: History
Posts: 5,547
Rep Power: 96
Pittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond reputePittielynn has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Natural/Organic One Woman-One Man Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Said by Funk*Sonic*7 View Post
I have to take off, I will respond more later, but really quick, you don't see the flaw in the logic of using the fact that the institution of marriage being compromised over the years as justification for genderless "marriage?" It's like saying, a person who doesn't drink, his or her entire family are alcoholics, so he or she may as well start drinking too.
Ahahahahahahahahaha. No. No it's not like saying that at all. It's just saying that heterosexuals ruined the "sanctity" of marriage all on their own. Arguing that permitting homosexual marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage is illogical, since it's already been "ruined". What more harm can happen.

But anyway, relating that ridiculous logic back to what is actually being discussed. "It's [not] like saying, a homosexual person who doesn't have sex with the opposite sex, his or her family are all heterosexual, so he or she may as well start having heterosexual sex too."


Nevertheless, thanks for the riveting debate. This is fun!
__________________


"Be strong while it's hard and laugh at it after it's over. You just gotta live." - Spadetje


All along I believed I would find you.
Time has brought your heart to me,
I have loved you for a thousand years.
I'll love you for a thousand more...
...One step closer.
o.O♠O.o

Almost Smart Store
Almost Smart Arcade
Pittielynn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best/Worst Pickup Lines Wobbie Guys & Gals 73 12-17-2012 08:07 AM
Wise Man Say.... raven_rose2911 Jokes & Comedy 5 04-24-2005 11:36 PM
Pickup line Comebacks Wobbie Jokes & Comedy 15 09-16-2004 12:12 PM
he'll hit back superchicken002 Guys & Gals 69 07-25-2004 11:47 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2000 - 2006, Almost Smart