Last reply wins!

[scoutcallie]

Next person to say anything after me is stupid!

 

[Zeno]

Preparing to write some 6 paragraph rants over the next few days

I have things I want to say.

 

[XxGagaxX]

Preparing to write some 6 paragraph rants over the next few days

I have things I want to say.

Zeno, why did you not play Karaoke last night??!

 

[scoutcallie]

Lol you guys are both stupid...

 

[XxGagaxX]

Lol you guys are both gay...

Problem with homosexuality?
A fair amount of this community may be gay.
darkai202

 

[Zeno]

Lol you guys are both gay...

Don't be insensitive and use 'gay' as an insult. It is a personal choice, not something to be used as a negative term.

Zeno, why did you not play Karaoke last night??!

Mah mama said, "NO MOAR PUTER 4 U BOI"

 

[scoutcallie]

Dude why are you even talking about being gay. no one ever said anything about that.

 

[Zeno]

Dude why are you even talking about being gay. no one ever said anything about that.

*sigh*......

 

[scoutcallie]

I have nothing against being homosexual, but I do have something against gay marriage. If two men are allowed to marry each other, other people will start saying "if two men can get married, then why can't I marry my dog!" And so on until people will be marrying objects.

 

[Zeno]

I have nothing against being homosexual, but I do have something against gay marriage. If two men are allowed to marry each other, other people will start saying "if two men can get married, then why can't I marry my dog!" And so on until people will be marrying objects.

See, THESE are the kinds of conversations I was hoping to have in this thread XD

I have to say that I disagree with you. Though I myself am not gay, I am in support of personal choice and gay marriage. I do not see that union of two people as a path towards marriage with different species and inanimate objects, in fact it requires an already twisted line of thought to think of that. To believe that this marriage would lead down that road would require the preordained thought that the marriage was something hideous, abominable, and inhuman. Thus, an argument against gay marriage is spawned from the very fact that you are against gay marriage in the first place, thus creating a vicious cycle of self imposed rules about what is proper.

Personally, I do not see any problem with gay marriage. Though I am not inclined in that direction, I believe that they should be able to follow their longings and make the choice for themselves. There is no reason why they should not be able to, and the idea that laws should be made to prevent it is truly preposterous. The thought that magistrates can control another person's life in the firs place is ridiculous, and their reasons for it merely compound the farce. This idea you've raised about it being a gateway to strange, inhuman things is one of them, yet makes no sense, as that has not happened in the thousands of years that gay marriage has existed (ever since being greatly encouraged by the Greeks and Romans, and valued even more than heterosexual marriages).

The main argument that is bandied about by people against gay marriage is that it will disrupt 'the traditional family structure'. And to this I must reply by asking, what is it that dictates this 'traditional' structure? The only answer I can think of is religion, as no other set of traditions forbids the idea of gay marriage (as I mentioned earlier, it was heavily encouraged by the Greeks and Romans, as well as many other cultures throughout the ages). If we agree that it is religion that delineates this tradition, and is the root cause of the attempt to ban gay marriage, then I must bring up the section of the constitution describing the separation of church and state. By the law of the United States, and many other countries as well, the church is to have no part in the policies of law, and thus this attempt to control the lives of people through legislation due to a religious motivation is wholly illegal. By all rights, gay marriage should be fully legal, and would remain so were it not for the church and its undeniable (though illegal) involvement with the state.

To sum up my opinions on the matter, any man or woman should have the freedom to marry whoever they. Please, even if that person is of the same sex. There may be many arguments against it, but they all seem to rely on the assumption that gay marriage is inherently wrong, and thus they invalidate their own arguments. Truly there should be no resistance against gay marriage and personal choice were it not for the illegal interference of the church, and thus gay marriage should still be full legal, both ethically and legally. People should be able to make choices as they wish, and follow their own longings, without having to follow the sway of a certain group of people or be shunned.

See, G33ke isn't the only person who can make long posts

 

[soggypickle]

See, THESE are the kinds of conversations I was hoping to have in this thread XD

I have to say that I disagree with you. Though I myself am not gay, I am in support of personal choice and gay marriage. I do not see that union of two people as a path towards marriage with different species and inanimate objects, in fact it requires an already twisted line of thought to think of that. To believe that this marriage would lead down that road would require the preordained thought that the marriage was something hideous, abominable, and inhuman. Thus, an argument against gay marriage is spawned from the very fact that you are against gay marriage in the first place, thus creating a vicious cycle of self imposed rules about what is proper.

Personally, I do not see any problem with gay marriage. Though I am not inclined in that direction, I believe that they should be able to follow their longings and make the choice for themselves. There is no reason why they should not be able to, and the idea that laws should be made to prevent it is truly preposterous. The thought that magistrates can control another person's life in the firs place is ridiculous, and their reasons for it merely compound the farce. This idea you've raised about it being a gateway to strange, inhuman things is one of them, yet makes no sense, as that has not happened in the thousands of years that gay marriage has existed (ever since being greatly encouraged by the Greeks and Romans, and valued even more than heterosexual marriages).

The main argument that is bandied about by people against gay marriage is that it will disrupt 'the traditional family structure'. And to this I must reply by asking, what is it that dictates this 'traditional' structure? The only answer I can think of is religion, as no other set of traditions forbids the idea of gay marriage (as I mentioned earlier, it was heavily encouraged by the Greeks and Romans, as well as many other cultures throughout the ages). If we agree that it is religion that delineates this tradition, and is the root cause of the attempt to ban gay marriage, then I must bring up the section of the constitution describing the separation of church and state. By the law of the United States, and many other countries as well, the church is to have no part in the policies of law, and thus this attempt to control the lives of people through legislation due to a religious motivation is wholly illegal. By all rights, gay marriage should be fully legal, and would remain so were it not for the church and its undeniable (though illegal) involvement with the state.

To sum up my opinions on the matter, any man or woman should have the freedom to marry whoever they. Please, even if that person is of the same sex. There may be many arguments against it, but they all seem to rely on the assumption that gay marriage is inherently wrong, and thus they invalidate their own arguments. Truly there should be no resistance against gay marriage and personal choice were it not for the illegal interference of the church, and thus gay marriage should still be full legal, both ethically and legally. People should be able to make choices as they wish, and follow their own longings, without having to follow the sway of a certain group of people or be shunned.

See, G33ke isn't the only person who can make long posts

TL;DR - Zeno disagrees with gay marriage and is also Mexican.

 

[eshancowee]

See, THESE are the kinds of conversations I was hoping to have in this thread XD

I have to say that I disagree with you. Though I myself am not gay, I am in support of personal choice and gay marriage. I do not see that union of two people as a path towards marriage with different species and inanimate objects, in fact it requires an already twisted line of thought to think of that. To believe that this marriage would lead down that road would require the preordained thought that the marriage was something hideous, abominable, and inhuman. Thus, an argument against gay marriage is spawned from the very fact that you are against gay marriage in the first place, thus creating a vicious cycle of self imposed rules about what is proper.

Personally, I do not see any problem with gay marriage. Though I am not inclined in that direction, I believe that they should be able to follow their longings and make the choice for themselves. There is no reason why they should not be able to, and the idea that laws should be made to prevent it is truly preposterous. The thought that magistrates can control another person's life in the firs place is ridiculous, and their reasons for it merely compound the farce. This idea you've raised about it being a gateway to strange, inhuman things is one of them, yet makes no sense, as that has not happened in the thousands of years that gay marriage has existed (ever since being greatly encouraged by the Greeks and Romans, and valued even more than heterosexual marriages).

The main argument that is bandied about by people against gay marriage is that it will disrupt 'the traditional family structure'. And to this I must reply by asking, what is it that dictates this 'traditional' structure? The only answer I can think of is religion, as no other set of traditions forbids the idea of gay marriage (as I mentioned earlier, it was heavily encouraged by the Greeks and Romans, as well as many other cultures throughout the ages). If we agree that it is religion that delineates this tradition, and is the root cause of the attempt to ban gay marriage, then I must bring up the section of the constitution describing the separation of church and state. By the law of the United States, and many other countries as well, the church is to have no part in the policies of law, and thus this attempt to control the lives of people through legislation due to a religious motivation is wholly illegal. By all rights, gay marriage should be fully legal, and would remain so were it not for the church and its undeniable (though illegal) involvement with the state.

To sum up my opinions on the matter, any man or woman should have the freedom to marry whoever they. Please, even if that person is of the same sex. There may be many arguments against it, but they all seem to rely on the assumption that gay marriage is inherently wrong, and thus they invalidate their own arguments. Truly there should be no resistance against gay marriage and personal choice were it not for the illegal interference of the church, and thus gay marriage should still be full legal, both ethically and legally. People should be able to make choices as they wish, and follow their own longings, without having to follow the sway of a certain group of people or be shunned.

See, G33ke isn't the only person who can make long posts

o-o *slow clap*

But seriously. I would write a essay like Zeno buuut it's 5am. There's nothing wrong with being gay, Gay marriage or any type of homosexuality. You're not forced to be gay, You're not forced to do anything. It's how some people are. It's exactly the same as racism, Dont discriminate, or we are going to have a biiiiig problem