Actually there already is a federal law saying that marriage is only recognized as between a man and a woman, not sure who is feeding you such misinformation. Actually last time I checked when the majority of voters pass something it pretty much is law. Keep dreaming twinkle toes, enjoy your moment of sunshine because dark clouds are coming in November.

Did you make the choice to be straight?

I did not state an opinion either way. I simply pointed out that being gay is not the same property as being black or being a woman. Those are physical properties. Being gay is a matter of cognizance. Therefore, you can't argue that gay rights and civil rights are the same. They're not.

Furthermore, epistemology and modern genetics would suggest that you cannot be born gay. Sure, genetically you can have a predisposition towards being gay. But, you can also have a predisposition towards becoming an alcoholic or getting cancer. Doesn't mean that you will.

Since sexual preference requires cognizance, one would have to argue that in order to be born gay, it would have to have been aquired a priori. Even in the post Kantian era, that is a big stretch. The argument that one is born gay assumes that you can be gay having zero experience and zero knowledge of sex. Personally, I don't think you can be born straight or gay. It boils down to cause and effect. Not Biology.

Don't be stupid. The normality is heterosexuality. And don't bring up the whole "who are you to tell me what's normal". Look at the body of a female and a male and tell me what goes where. Homosexuality is an abnormality.

Ignore him, he's another idiot who's shifting a negative burden of proof on you. Ethersync, prove to me that you're NOT an idiot. And stop comparing same sex marriages to civil rights, it's a stupid comparison.

Yes look at the body of both. You think it is some coincidence that a penis fits perfectly into a vagina, mouth, ass and hand? If hand jobs, blow jobs and anal sex are so abnormal, perhaps we should ban marriage for those who have anything but just vaginal sex for purposes of procreation. Perhaps we should just put laws back on the books that make sodomy illegal. Get real. :thumbsup

There you go skipping off again. "pretty much is the law" unless it conflicts with other laws.

I said you can not strip rights from a minority by a majority vote. You have to follow a judicial process, or change the constitution.

Nowhere did I say anything about marriage.

We're not discussing same sex marriage right now, we're discussing normality. You asserted that homosexuals were just as normal as heterosexuals. I proved you wrong. Quit crying, bitch.:1orglaugh

Wow sure a lot of "closet" fags lurking here.....

The Demon is a closet fag.

You didn't prove jack shit Demon. You stated your homophobic opinion again.. That doesn't qualify as proof to anyone but yourself.

Of course that is what I am doing and it is in response to him doing the same:

So, why is it such a threat to you if two gay men or lesbian females get married?

When you prove Amputate's stupid ass wrong(always), or a liberal, you immediately get called one of the "keywords", one that elicits an emotional response from someone getting his ass handed to him. You're way too easy to deal with Amputate, I thoroughly enjoy putting you in your place:)

My mistake then, you aren't known to be actively doing something stupid like asking to prove a negative.

Fine and good Demon, but what you just said does nothing to either refute what I just stated nor "prove" your homophobic case any more than before.

EDIT: refute = refudiate.

You dodged my question: So, why is it such a threat to you if two gay men or lesbian females get married?

sure did ... like I made a choice of being a male .. and being 6 feet tall .... all a question of choices ... lol ...

is Cambaby = TheDemon ?

That's what Demon does. I've asked him many similar questions, and I believe that exact question, but he doesn't deal in answers, just shit-slinging and insults.

There's nothing for me to "prove". You must first prove I'm homophobic. Since that's just a retarded defense mechanism for someone who doesn't agree with you, you just can't.

I wasn't aware you had a question for me, my mistake. And ignore Amputate, everyone else does. Now to answer your question, I believe in marriage being between a man and a woman. No I'm not quoting the bible, no I'm not a bigot. Retarded liberals use words they don't understand to rationalize everything. I'll support civil unions for homosexual couples any day of the week.

Is directfiesta=thedoc=bft3k=amputate? Same intelligence level.

Your response to deanberkeley:

You didn't "prove" anything. You asserted another homophobic opinion. I do not need to prove you are homophobic, because I said your opinion was homophobic. It is. The only thing "retarded" about it is your inability to grasp a clue.

You just continue embarrassing yourself and making my job easier for me. Let me break it down once again since you just don't seem to possess an inkling of common sense. Our argument consists of what is natural and what isn't, that was it. You folloing there? You DO need to prove my opinion was homophobic because that's what normal people call a claim. There has been absolutely nothing homophobic about my statements. The only thing that exists is the fact that anyone that doesn't agree with you is a bigot, racist, etc.. All the keywords liberals use for the emotional effect. Keep trying amputate:)

In order for me to prove that homosexuality is normal to you, you must first prove what is normal. Without a control group, there can be no proving.

You love that word don't you demon. LOL

god you're a tool dude. I'm out again... :1orglaugh

I was 5 in 1966 and had a HUGE crush on Robin (Burt Ward) :thumbsup

If the majority of the world's population is straight and has always been straight, then homosexuality is ABNORMAL. You're like a retarded child who just sniffed paint and became even dumber. I'll assume that you'll use color as an attempt to refute my argument, not realizing how stupid you are. Thanks for playing, champ! Come back when you understand the burden of proof. And btw, I know you're slow but I wasn't asking you to prove anything regarding homosexuality. You're way too stupid to do that. I was asking you to prove my opinion was homophobic. I give you preps for the strawman argument though. :winkwink::winkwink::winkwink:

That does not really answer the question.

Why do you not believe in same sex marriages if you believe in same sex civil unions?

I believe I was clear dude, with the operative word being marriage.

Symmetry Of Homosexual Brain Resembles That Of Opposite Sex, Swedish Study Finds

Brain Study Shows Differences Between Gays, Straights

What the Gay Brain Looks Like

Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex

Brain responses differ in gay, straight men

Sexual Orientation: In The Brain

Yes, all inconclusive studies. And that's the point. I only looked at two links and none of them mentions it being hereditary. Your brain changes throughout your life so the study can prove just as well that through environmental interaction throughout one's life, the physiology of his brain changes and he becomes gay.

Saying you believe in marriage between a man and woman does not explain why you have a problem with homosexuals being married.

Are you parents very religious?

Were you raised to believe homosexuality is unnatural, evil or otherwise bad?

Do you believe in god?

If so, do you believe homosexuals are going to hell?

Are you kidding me? That's exactly what it means.

I've already explained that my beliefs have nothing to do with religion. I know you're not liberal but that's a very liberal thing to do, is to quickly point to religion as if that was the only reason.

In fact, your questions aren't even proper. If I believed that homosexuals are going to hell and/or homosexuality is a sin, I wouldn't be supporting civil unions now would I?

You posted 1 minute after I did... you couldn't have read much...

Polygamists are a minority too faggot.

No they aren't
No I wasn't
In god yes, in religion no
No I don't, I have gay friends

But I do believe that Marriage should be between a husband and a wife and a gay union should be called something else with the same benefit as being married, it's just a word,7 million voters feel like I do. That was obvious in the count on prop 8. One openly gay judge took away the vote of 7 million people over a title change and he should have removed himself from the court proceedings over conflict of interest.

Obviously some here have never read Kinsey's Reports.
" Dr. Alfred Kinsey, Wardell Pomeroy and others and published by Saunders. Kinsey was a zoologist at Indiana University and the founder of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction (more widely known as the Kinsey Institute)."

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

"Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behavior can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychological phenomena (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy). Instead of three categories (heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual), a seven-category Kinsey Scale system was used (an 8th category for asexuals was added by Kinsey's associates)."

Sorry to burst your bubbles. But human sexuality isn't black and white.

You can find reports and finding to prove any point,

America is the most grandiose experiment the world has seen, but, I am afraid, it is not going to be a success.
Sigmund Freud

LOL why do you keep bringing this piece of shit old ass "opinion research" up as if it is some kind of scientific fact like gravity?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...insey-Male.jpg

More and more states are also banning civil unions... Hawaii did so last month.

If you actually read the text of Prop. 8 it was designed to confuse. It also show's that if you throw enough money at something...in the "Great American Way" you'll accomplish what ever you want.

'The word "marriage" doesn't NOT belong to any special interest group. It is what it is.... a social union or legal contract between individuals that creates kinship. It is an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged in a variety of ways, depending on the culture or subculture in which it is found.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

If all 50 states allowed civil unions, retarded liberals wouldn't be bitching about marriage. Then again, once you give somebody something, they're going to want more.

Quit picking out sound bites....to suit your diatribe. It's a respected piece of science.

How people vote does not matter. No majority should have the right to take away rights of any minority no matter how small the minority is.

you're just mad cause there is a 1 in 8 chance you're a raging homo

if you want to find dirt on this book, remember that there is the female side of sexuality and that's pretty much the definition of how it works

Those against gay marriage are generally against civil unions... a big chunk of the country has gone beyond banning gay marriage and specifically banning recognizing any form of civil unions.

Or a single cell organism....that buds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Husband
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spouse

Everything you are trying to convey is against tradition, marriage is a tradition

If you give civil unions the same exact rights as marriages, then the word Marriage becomes a title, a title of a husband and wife.

And traditions change over time...as man evolves. Because I am sure you don't walk on all four's.

Well, this is where I would disagree with my conservative brethren.

I'm all for civil unions and against Gay marriage, you're speculating

But I'll be labeled a homophobe because of peoples intolerance for not thinking as they do.

Pretty narrow minded if you ask me

Traditions shouldn't be removed by one judge with a conflict of interest over 7 million voters that want the
tradition

How does walking on all fours compare to a tradition? You're reaching on that one