Marriage is overrated anyway ;-)

heheh touche.

No, not really.

I don't think gays want any special rights.. or anything that anyone else doesn't have. Just the IVF access/adoption/marriage/spousal rights etc. that other citizens get... so talking about "special rights" is a bit of a strawman..

Great.. you just failed my 'are you straight?' test.

like your right to try and get a dvd player for longest thread heheh :)

Hmm, you are an odd little fellow.

Thanks! :thumbsup

Mr. Thumbs is GFY's resident stalker.

Well...I am not a constitutional expert so I don't know if gays have a constitutional leg to stand on when they demand the right to be married under the law.

You probably know more about this issue being brought before the Federal Supreme Court than I, as I do not know if this issue has been decided by the Supreme Court.

I suspect this issue may never be overcome by the gay community, but it will depend upon the Supreme Courts interpretation of the constitution.

If I were a Christian (which I am not), as the majority of the people of this country profess to be, I would be against it, based upon my understanding of the Christian Bible.

This may be an area where gays are wanting special recognition, as by tradition through out all of history, marriage has generally been, if not always, between couples of the opposite sex.

I for one find homosexuality abhorrent, but I recognize that the sexual preferrences of an adult should be that of the individual.

Yes, I am married and have been for 36 years.

That's a lot of qualifying text Pathfinder: "this may", "you probably", "I suspect", "I don't know if"

Are you agreeing with me or not?

He's just right: and you know it!

No I am not agreeing. I am ambivalent about the subject of gays being married. I really don't care one way or the other, but it will be up to the Supreme Court and their interpretation of the constitution.

Gays have the equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex like everyone else.

Innocent until proven guilty!

pathfinder et al

the premise of your is that homosexuality is 'abnormal'. This is incorrect. It is incorrect if for no other reason that homosexuality would have died out in the human population ages ago and clearly this has not happened.

Homosexuality is a 'normal' as heterosexuality.

I follow the argument that there is predisposition towards homosexuality on the part of some aka 'the gay gene'

As more and more studies point to the genetic basis for human and indeed all mammalian behaviour, one should be asking oneself what genetic advantage is gained by being homosexual for clearly there is some advantage otherwise the predisposition would have died out if it were 'abnormal'

I can think of many advantages for our ancestors to have gay people in the tribe....not the least of which the the artistic/scientific component that has been pointed out above.

As to the legal arguments raised above about gays wanted special rights.... again the premise of that argument is flawed. Gay people are not looking for special rights, they're looking for the same rights enjoyed by their fellow citizens. Anything less than that is legally authorized discrimination.

Rights? Homosexual rights? Homosexual pride?

In case nobody here took biology 101, the point of "sex" is reproduction. Period.

Penis was not made for anus. Vagina was not made to rub on other vaginas.

Homosexuality is an aberration.

Homosexuality is an evolutionary dead end. It is mother natures way of population control.

And I am talking of true homosexuality, not fad homosexuality.

I want you to name MORE advantages of having homosexuals in the "tribe".

What about all the scientists and artists in the past that were not homosexual? That truly is one of the most bizarre and probably irrelevant arguments I have ever heard for homosexuality.

We need homosexuals cause they are more creative.

Speechless.

You don't have to call it marriage, just give two gay people the same rights as two heterosexual people who are married, call it partnership.

One more thing, I know that freedom of religion is pretty big in US, if gay people would start gayism :) where the norm is that people of the same sex get married, would it be breaking the constitution not to give them that right?

We are living in the 21st century, you don't have to have sex to make babies...A planet full of gay people could survive...

Merriam Webster's Delux Dictionary:
abnormal: deviating from the normal or average.

But I have stated that it can be argued that it is normal to have a certain percentage of the population be abnormal.

There are abnormalities in all of nature, so it is normal to have a certain amount of abnormality.

I would think that when couples of the same sex are asking to be married under the law, they are asking for special rights. As has been pointed out by another poster they already have the same rights of marriage as any citizen. They can marry whoever they choose of the opposite sex.

heheh that was a pretty lame argument archer. I was going to take you up on it until labret stepped in with his usual subtlety :)
im sure he's taking notes for his next anthro thesis.. heheh
there are very heavy environmental factors leaning on the "creativity" in the gay community... as well as the fact that i would wager that any inherent creativity comes not from being a homosexual but being wired a little differently ergo a bias towards "not thinking like the rest" which may result in either creativity or differing sexuality or both or other attributes that may arise.. in fact I would just as easily say being creative means you have a tendency to be able to become/realise you are gay as being gay means you have a tendency to become/realise you are creative.

There are cities/states that have approved partnership rights, but the gays also want the right for same sex couples to be married under the law.

Well...Mormons cannot legally have multiple wives, as used to be part of their religion, so freedom of religion still has to be within the boundaries of the law.

:1orglaugh

a "special" right would be a right that only homosexuals would be entitled to would it not? if the law was passed then pathfinder you too as a heterosexual would have a right to marry a person of the same sex.. the same right evry citizen would have.. and therefore not a "special" right

what kind of a right is being able to marry a person of the same sex to you??? i'd wager just as useful as the right for a homosexual to marry a woman. currently by your reasoning YOU are the one with "special rights".

I guess I just don't see the point.. who gives a fuck who marries who? and it's not only a religious thing either.. civil celebrants marry the non-religious every day.

Well the current law is that homosexuals cannot marry, so they are asking for a special law to be created that would allow same sex marriages, but you are correct that if such a law were to be passed then that right under the law would apply to all citizens.

perhaps instead of "special" you mean "additional equalising" law

I have already stated this in a previous post.

We only have rights under the law and the laws in this country are required to adhere to the Constitution. Until laws are passed covering a specific subject, either yea or nay, we do not have a right.

Heterosexuals currently have the right, under the law, to marry the opposite sex, homosexuals do not have the right to marry someone of the same sex. Homosexuals are asking that a new law (a new right) be made. I don't know if the matter has gone before the Supreme Court or not, but if it has the Court ruled it not to be Constitutional, or ruled that it falls under the realm of States Rights to adjudicate the matter.

I would like to see us set aside an Island for the gays to live on.
Lets see how well they clone babies and populate using a science lab. What a joke. We could take bets on what wipes them out first. Aids, or their inability to get the clones right.
You really think a gay-only planet or country would thrive?

France and Greece seem to do quite well.

LOL I stand corrected.

If im correct it's mainly the heterosexuals that spread aids these days...and yes i would think a gay planet would work, just give them modern technology and they'll do just fine.

what is it with these guys and their homo islands? every time this subject comes up it's ass-play in the tropics. you guys. seriously.

well as the resident homo i guess i should post huh

.... i think the whole pride thing is lame. i have no shame about the fact im into guys, but i also have no shame about the fact that i like coke, prefer my steaks medium well, dislike broccoli, and always sleep on the right side of the bed.

but im not gonna go around waving rainbow flags and banners saying i want recognition because i belong to a certain group. fuck that. i am who i am and i dont need society to "recognize" me like those lesbo's at the basketball game.

:2 cents:

id like to see us set aside an island for all the dipshit morons to live on. lets see how well they populate using their tiny little dicks. what a joke. we could take bets on what wipes them out first. their own stupidity, or their inability to wipe their own asses. you really think a moron-only planet or country would thrive?

Canada does quite well.

Eat a dick Dawgy...er no wait, you would enjoy that. Why don't you lick a pussy!

Sir Alec Guiness was gay ?

fuck :BangBang:

Dont believe the hype. Liberals and lefties and the rest of the rainbow ilk have labeled just about everyone in history of any importance a homosexual. Everyone from Jesus to Ghandi.

i rest my case.

I remember gays saying Robin Hood was gay, and England was upset because it ruined his image. When you think about a guy wearing tights with his "merry men" it does spell out gay. Wish I had saved the article somewhere it was really funny.

how so? i dont own any tights. i dont have any merry men, but i do have friends who are as loyal to me as robin's merry men...

stereotypes are funny, but when u take them seriously you expose your own homophobic stupidity
:thumbsup

It was GAYS who said Robin Hood was gay and it angered STRAIGHT people.
It was Gays playing on a stereotype.
Shit I wish I could post the story but it was years ago I read it.

gay people know how to make fun of themselves & watch the general public squirm :)

All is good, truce. :)

I never knew that Fred Flinstone was gay.

I guess the lyrics prove it though.

Someday maybe fred will win the fight
Then the cat will stay out for the night
When you're with the flintstones
Have a yabba-dabba-doo time
A dabba-doo time
We'll have a gay old time
We'll have a gay old time yeah

:eek7 :ugone2far

hey frog, wanna fuck? lmk

I really do not see the big deal in someone standing up for what they believe in and getting noticed. People do it all the time and if it bothers you turn the other cheek and ignore it. I was raised to be vocal and stand up for my beliefs whatever they may be. I have been the watcher of activists groups, a participant and sometimes even started a uproar or two myself, ohhhh ahhhhhh.

What I really love about growing up in the US is that WE, EVERYONE can do this. You can stand up and be seen for whatever you want. You can start a group or following for any reason.

If it wasn't for people standing up or even sitting down on the back of a bus, people would still look at African Americans as inferior and not be given the same opportunites as whites. So being seen and heard does get things done.

Look........by that group of Lesbians standing up and kissing made this thread go on this long. It will probabaly go on for a while. With good comments and bad, but it made everyone come together and notice. They did what they wanted/needed to do to get noticed and it worked.

Well I will get off my soapbox now that i said my piece.