Gay marriage: where do you stand?

[Half-n-Half]

Is religion not a corner stone of culture?

Would you prefer a theocracy, then? Laws should not be based on cultural/religious values insofar as they needlessly impinge on the rights of the people or a certain group of the people. What benefits does the State gain by limiting the rights of homosexuals?

How can I not bring up beastiality then? It's a biblical law that is currently enforced in the US, should we legalize this as well? Even if serious diseases evolve from this practice, they can always wear a condom right? There wouldn't be that many people that would jeopardize their community by not doing so right?

This is a false equivocation. How does gay marriage potentially jeopardize the community?

 

[nahadef]

How can I not bring up beastiality then? It's a biblical law that is currently enforced in the US, should we legalize this as well? Even if serious diseases evolve from this practice, they can always wear a condom right? There wouldn't be that many people that would jeopardize their community by not doing so right?

Whenever homosexuality is compared to beastiality, this is not something to blame on religion, this is straight up bigotry. There is no way the two are comparable. One is a consensual act, the other is not. It's not really worth continuing the conversation, but...

I think it's strange that liberals consider their own group to be 'evolving' or 'progressing.' The entire mindset of humanity is not evolving to all think alike. If you know anything at all about history, you would know that factions with their own mindsets always exist and they are always vying for political power. You are a faction, and you are attempting to gain the majority. Your mindset is not the evolution of humanity.

I would say equality is the direction of humanity. In the past, it was whites over minorities, men over women, and straights over gays. There is a solid shift in history where people have been gradually willing to treat those in a lesser power position with fairness. The people who discriminate against homosexuals now will be on the losing side of history, along with those that aimed to keep votes from women, or keep colors from intermingling. They are an embarrassing part of the past.

Whether Brian can see that or not is irrelevant. It just the way it is.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

One is a consensual act, the other is not.

Sorry def, but that is nonsense. Animals are not always raping each other, or failing to get consent from eachother. Inter-species relations do happen with non-verbal consent and do not always involve humans. Guess what? Animals like sex too! In fact, most animals are not rapists, and there is good reason to think most bestialists are not abusers, anymore than the gay scares of the 1950s tried to paint homosexuals as abusers (and they did. Boise homosexuality scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

As far as the discussion of rights and victimless crimes go, bestiality is a fine point. Some countries are erasing their laws on bestiality for exactly those reasons, which are similar reasons to erase laws criminalizing homosexuality. And gay marriage is related to the movement toward freedom from these sex negative theocratic pundits and their general anti-sexual freedom agenda.

The problem is that while homosexuality has gained acceptance, bestiality has not on the same scale. And given the posting history of BrianLewis, we have good reason to suspect he just wants to equate homosexuals with bestialists to demean them and promote trampling them again. Perhaps next he will bring up age of consent offenders and try to drag pedophilia into this too?

There is a solid shift in history where people have been gradually willing to treat those in a lesser power position with fairness.

There might be a shift, but I would not call it solid. Plenty of things were overlooked in the past that are now either frowned upon or can downright land your butt in jail. Mostly the names have changed, but the story is the same. Consider the freedom to smoke wherever you want. Or how new the laws on marijuana and cocaine are.

 

[nahadef]

Sorry def, but that is nonsense.

I already knew that we agreed to disagree on this point. I won't stray off-topic as to why the consent of an adult is different than the consent of a dog, but it seems quite clearly different to me.

Anyway...

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I already knew that we agreed to disagree on this point. I won't stray off-topic as to why the consent of an adult is different than the consent of a dog, but it seems quite clearly different to me.

Anyway...

I know but I had to say it. You don't know how much you are siding with BrianLewis and his type of thinking when you speak so generally and negatively about bestiality. That is why I don't play his game.

He brings up drug laws, I say we should be free to use drugs so long as there is no harm. He brings up bestiality. I say we should be free to practice so long as there is no harm. The minute we start giving into to weak excuses for banning freedom that does no harm, we give Brian Lewis type thinking traction, and that is why there are so many needless checks on our freedom.

Aside, I once saw some monkeys doing it at the zoo. When the male was done, he laid down. The female turned around and started picking at his fur (lice, fleas, I don't know). Then she took two steps away and bend over, butt facing the male. That is called consent. A dog humping your leg? That's consent. Consent is consent, verbal or non-verbal, and when you have it, you have it. YOu may not want it, but you have it.

---------- Post added at 13:39 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------

How does gay marriage potentially jeopardize the community?

There seems to be no limit to the paranoia of some people. The world seems to be populated with Chicken Little's and governments take full advantage of them. As much as my fellow Americans go on and on about freedom and how their forefathers fought and died for it, and how we fight and die for it in Afghanistan, so many of them seem to be positively scared to death of freedom and see dire consequences everywhere.

Its quite the paradox.

 

[nahadef]

That is called consent. A dog humping your leg? That's consent. Consent is consent, verbal or non-verbal, and when you have it, you have it. YOu may not want it, but you have it.

If an adult accidentally starts a fire and kills someone, they may be held criminally negligent. If a monkey accidentally starts a fire and kills someone, they won't. Animals do not participate in the adult world as equals, and it gives no benefit to the BrianLewis' of the world to clarify that.

As much as I'm a fan of illegal drugs, it is in no way comparable to homosexuality either, because it is a voluntary lifestyle, not a genetic truth.

By spelling out the nonsense in his comparisons, we can deflate his argument. But I see no reason to involve unrelated issues in the topic.

The closest comparison I can make is interracial relationships, which were formerly illegal. That was 100% unjustifiable, as is his discrimination against homosexuals.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

But I see no reason to involve unrelated issues in the topic.

Its not unrelated. It qualifies as an analogy. Freedom where there is no harm should be legal. Prevarication about that is not good at all.

The closest comparison I can make is interracial relationships, which were formerly illegal. That was 100% unjustifiable, as is his discrimination against homosexuals.

I completely support that as the better analogy for many reasons, including the fact that BrianLewis will not try to support anything racist as he might feel free to support anything anti-bestiality. But seriously, neither is valid on those grounds. Its just that one is popular to condemn these days and the other is popular to support.

Popularity is not valid. Popularity is bull$#!T.

Anybody shows me 100 percent harm, and I will support a 100 percent ban. Its just that simple. Neither bestiality or inter-racial marriage ever harmed anyone 100 percent.

Hell, I even support certain types of theft, such as squatting, because if anyone did not notice someone using their property for years, they don't need it and there is no harm.

Harm is even more important than consent. Plenty of things happened in my life I did not consent to, but I did in fact enjoy and am thankful for.

 

[BrianLewis]

As much as I'm a fan of illegal drugs, it is in no way comparable to homosexuality either, because it is a voluntary lifestyle, not a genetic truth.

What's genetically true about gay's? What is more 'lifestyle choices' than the choices you make about your lifestyle? I have seen no 'gay gene' proven by the medical community. There will be no resolution to any debate if people just invent things like this, and spout it off like it's a fact.

I bought up beastiality because it was an example of a law brought up in the US based on biblical law. I also wanted to see if Mark Of Zorro would be for legalizing it. Being a progressive demands that all freedoms are liberated, correct? Are you going to draw the line at Zorro and his furry friend?

 

[nahadef]

What's genetically true about gay's? What is more 'lifestyle choices' than the choices you make about your lifestyle? I have seen no 'gay gene' proven by the medical community. There will be no resolution to any debate if people just invent things like this, and spout it off like it's a fact.

Oh. So you think you chose to find women attractive, and gay people chose to be aroused by the same sex. Because it's fun to be gay.

I realize there are people in the world who think this way, but I find it astonishing all the same.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Are you going to draw the line at Zorro and his furry friend?

You are going to be a dumb@$$ all your life if you continue like this.

Being a progressive demands that all freedoms are liberated, correct?

More labeling.

I am not talking about freedoms because I want to fit in with progressives. I fit in with progressives because I am all for freedom where it harms no one, including animals.

But surely, it cannot be that I say these things because I just believe in justice and fairness. Surely I must have a selfish ulterior motive, right? So putting together all my positions, I am a teenage Muslim Black and Asian man/woman, cigarette and marijuana smoker and cocaine user, and squatter, who wants to marry and have sex with a juvenile male animal of unspecified species.

I suppose we can throw ladyboy in there too, even though I have yet to defend them. (sigh)

---------- Post added at 18:41 ---------- Previous post was at 18:31 ----------

Oh. So you think you chose to find women attractive, and gay people chose to be aroused by the same sex. Because it's fun to be gay.

I realize there are people in the world who think this way, but I find it astonishing all the same.

You might be surprised, but I do not believe that choice plays zero role. I believe in genetic predisposition, environment/ experience factors and the choice of exploring certain paths as all having an influence on people becoming gay, bestialists, transvestites, minor attracted, etc. etc. and every gay person etc. has their own balance of all the above.

Mind you that this does not conflict with my belief that we are all born as blank slates that could go any of the above directions, including bi, even despite genetic predispositions. In fact the main genetic predisposition I believe in is the tendency to flip society the bird and go ones own way, or to just go the opposite way to stick it to society.

So yes, I do believe choice plays a factor with some gay people, although it was not a matter of waking up one morning and saying "Hey! I will be gay today!".

Not that it matters either way. Freedom where it harms no one. The rest is just an interesting side show.

 

[nahadef]

You might be surprised, but I do not believe that choice plays zero role. I believe in genetic predisposition, environment/ experience factors and the choice of exploring certain paths as all having an influence on people becoming gay, bestialists, transvestites, minor attracted, etc. etc. and every gay person etc. has their own balance of all the above.
Mind you that this does not conflict with my belief that we are all born as blank slates that could go any of the above directions, including bi, even despite genetic predispositions. In fact the main genetic predisposition I believe in is the tendency to flip society the bird and go ones own way, or to just go the opposite way to stick it to society.
So yes, I do believe choice plays a factor with some gay people, although it was not a matter of waking up one morning and saying "Hey! I will be gay today!".
Not that it matters either way. Freedom where it harms no one. The rest is just an interesting side show.

I think there is room for choice, but it's really slim. You hear stories of a molested child who grows up to do the same as an adult, and it that case there is some deep emotional damage which defines the roles the person conceives of. But I don't see that as sexual in nature. And some people develop fetishes based on something in their childhood when they start developing sexually, but generally the gender a person likes is evidenced very early on.

I haven't talked to a gay person in years (I live in closeted Japan), but the ones I knew when I lived in the West knew so at a very early age, like 6 or 7. And I was quite interested in girls from a very early age. It's not scientific, but I think there is a genetic impulse to lust. But I would put it 90/10 nature over nurture.

By the way, I may have asked this before, but have you read about Psychopathia Sexualis? Fascinating stuff, getting into genuine fetishes, of which I would not consider homosexuality whatsoever. Richard von Krafft-Ebing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Haziq]

I am against it because if gays are allowed to get married then more and more people will follow.and eventually its possible that the population of that country will drastically decrease.since there will be no reproduction unless its male and female.
anyway that is just my opinion.

 

[nahadef]

I am against it because if gays are allowed to get married then more and more people will follow.and eventually its possible that the population of that country will drastically decrease.since there will be no reproduction unless its male and female.
anyway that is just my opinion.

So you're saying, if your friends are gay, you'll be gay too? Wow. No matter how many gays marry, I won't put a schlong in my mouth. I guess I'm just not a follower. That's incredible that you think straight people will become gay because of gay marriage though.

I have to say, of all the arguments against gay marriage, population decrease is the poorest one. Overpopulation is one of the biggest problems on the planet, so it seems like this would be a great way to reverse this destructive trend, by your accounts.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I am against it because if gays are allowed to get married then more and more people will follow.and eventually its possible that the population of that country will drastically decrease.since there will be no reproduction unless its male and female.
anyway that is just my opinion.

I think its fascinating that we have two Middle Eastern men clinging to the same unfounded opinion. Not to bash them for their backround though. On the net I run across plenty of North Americans sharing unfounded irrational opinions too. And in fact, unlike Haziq and Hezam, the North Americans tend to be more rude about expressing their unfounded opinion. Me? I am just rude!

Having said that, I hope no one feels I am being bigoted, because I am not. All I am saying is that culture can really blind people, and every culture has their blind spots. They have theirs. We have ours.

So you're saying, if your friends are gay, you'll be gay too?

Too simplistic. As homosexuality becomes more tolerated, more people will engage in homosexual behavior. Don't doubt it. Look at the ancient Greeks where it was an institution. You may not ever put a schlong in your mouth def, but that is only because your indoctrination is set. Had you grown up in a pederastic society though...I would lay odds that you, me and most guys would enjoy sucking schlong.

But that is not to say we would fail to procreate. We wouldn't necessarily and that is where Haziq has made the blunder. Like the ancient Greeks, we would essentially be bi-sexuals. And if we weren't? We would still make babies just like so many gay men do.

There is no way humanity, or even a nation, would become extinct for tolerance of homosexuals or widespread homosexual behavior.

 

[nahadef]

As homosexuality becomes more tolerated, more people will engage in homosexual behavior.

I would argue that those people would want to engage in that behavior regardless. They simply would not succumb to societal pressures not to. In my 20's I attempted to "deprogram" myself, for lack of a better word, pushing myself to do things for the sake of it. I was an artist of sorts, and had a lot of belief in the power of ideas. And the end result I came to? I like what I like. It's not that liking women is socially acceptable, I just don't get into things that vary off that blueprint much. At the same time, I was not a masculine child, I sucked at sports and hated GI Joe. Still I had crushes at age 6.

My experience tells me there's a genetic imprint to lust.

Anyway, none of this is about gay marriage, and the unbased fear that it will destroy the human species.

 

[Haziq]

Actually its not really culture .you see i am a Muslim and in my religion homosexuality is considered a grave sin .and strictly forbidden.
And also in our religious book .it says that there was once a civilization to whom a prophet was sent named Looth ( i dont know what he is called in English so im going with the Arabic name) now the reason he was sent to those people was because they were homosexuals .they did not listen to him so the book says that god told him to leave that place and that after he left all of those people were wiped out.
And since im a muslim i have to obey what my religion says.
if anyone is offended by what i wrote then im sorry but that is what my religion says.
thank you.

 

[nahadef]

Actually its not really culture .you see i am a Muslim and in my religion homosexuality is considered a grave sin .and strictly forbidden.
And also in our religious book .it says that there was once a civilization to whom a prophet was sent named Looth ( i dont know what he is called in English so im going with the Arabic name) now the reason he was sent to those people was because they were homosexuals .they did not listen to him so the book says that god told him to leave that place and that after he left all of those people were wiped out.
And since im a muslim i have to obey what my religion says.
if anyone is offended by what i wrote then im sorry but that is what my religion says.
thank you.

That has nothing to do with what you wrote about the danger to the human race. That was just incorrect.

I don't agree with people discriminating based on religion, but I believe it's their personal right. If you believe what you believe, then I don't think you need to be friends with homosexuals or try to make them part of your life. If it comes to their right to exist as equals in any society, I don't think religion is an excuse for legal discrimination. I don't think God, whatever one you believe in, would like you to act as their judge on earth.

This is why secular states are important. Religion is a personal thing, not something to be enforced.

 

[Haziq]

Actually, it does have something to do with it you see when i found out about the said story in our religious book i thought why was it forbidden then i kept getting reasons from either the internet or the newspaper.that is when i figured out that if more people tolerate it then women will be left and the population will decrease.
when i wrote of that story it was to give an idea as to why was it forbidden .
but i guess only Muslims would believe that story so that isn't possible
anyway think for yourself what would happen if most males of a country are gay.
anyway this is my last post regarding this topic so whether you people are with it or against i just have to say that think before making a decision.
well that's it for me regarding this topic
Thank you.

 

[Abdur Rahman]

I am against because of ethical ، religious and social reasons

 

[nahadef]

Actually, it does have something to do with it you see when i found out about the said story in our religious book i thought why was it forbidden then i kept getting reasons from either the internet or the newspaper.that is when i figured out that if more people tolerate it then women will be left and the population will decrease.
when i wrote of that story it was to give an idea as to why was it forbidden .
but i guess only Muslims would believe that story so that isn't possible
anyway think for yourself what would happen if most males of a country are gay.
anyway this is my last post regarding this topic so whether you people are with it or against i just have to say that think before making a decision.
well that's it for me regarding this topic
Thank you.

Claiming that gay marriage will lead to most males being gay is simply untrue. There is nothing logical about it. Honestly, would you become gay if your friends were gay (besides it being against your religion)?

I know for a fact that I don't find men attractive. There is no rule from God that keeps me from having sex with men. Actually, I'm totally okay with people being gay. My home country is 95 percent okay with it. And the men there have not all become gay.

As I said, you are welcome to your religious belief, but you shouldn't say things that are factually untrue. God can't approve of that.

 

[BrianLewis]

I have known at least 3 gays that enjoyed their straight dating life. However, the constant was that they had plenty of gay friends and went clubbing at gay bars with them and decided to 'try' being gay in the end. I have yet to see one that did it on their own. That would suggest a social connection, not a genetic one. Furthermore, I have never seen any genetic proof that there was any genetic links to any of this behavior.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I have known at least 3 gays that enjoyed their straight dating life.

We call those bi-sexuals, not gays.

However, the constant was that they had plenty of gay friends and went clubbing at gay bars with them and decided to 'try' being gay in the end.

I cannot make any sense of this sentence. Decided to try being gay? What?

That would suggest a social connection, not a genetic one.

Well, if a person grew up raised by and surrounded metallic robots only, they would not figure out that they are gay or straight no matter what genetic predispositions they had.

Social connections with other humans are necessary to trigger predispositions.

---------- Post added at 11:57 ---------- Previous post was at 11:55 ----------

Claiming that gay marriage will lead to most males being gay is simply untrue.

He may actually mean males engaging in homosexual and bisexual behavior, rather than becoming true gays? It would not be the first time someone made the mistake of mixing behaviors and with mindsets, especially when it came to sex related concepts.

 

[nahadef]

I have known at least 3 gays that enjoyed their straight dating life. However, the constant was that they had plenty of gay friends and went clubbing at gay bars with them and decided to 'try' being gay in the end. I have yet to see one that did it on their own. That would suggest a social connection, not a genetic one. Furthermore, I have never seen any genetic proof that there was any genetic links to any of this behavior.

That's called being in the closet.

How many gay friends would you personally have to have before you 'tried' being gay? It's a serious question, since you are arguing it's a culturally learned trait. How many gay friends would you need?

And all those gay high school kids who commit suicide because they hate their life, you think they chose to be gay... Remarkable.

 

[BrianLewis]

We call those bi-sexuals, not gays.

They have not gone back. So 'transition' would be accurate.

And all those gay high school kids who commit suicide because they hate their life, you think they chose to be gay... Remarkable.

Ever heard of a teenager committing suicide for being a drug user? Reasons for suicide can easily be acquired in a short amount of time.

That's called being in the closet.

Does that preclude that they did not enjoy themselves straight? Would a woman in the closet attempt to entice a man into a relationship with her, while no other people were around if she did not desire that man? Or does 'in the closet' mean that they enjoy their straight life, go gay, and deny the fact that they did? I call that selective memory.

Well, if a person grew up raised by and surrounded metallic robots only, they would not figure out that they are gay or straight no matter what genetic predispositions they had.

Social connections with other humans are necessary to trigger predispositions.

Again, prove any genetic disposition. You guys can say the same thing 3 times in one thread, but can't post any evidence of this?

 

[nahadef]

Gay teens in America commit suicide at four times the rate of straight teens, despite being 1/20 or so of the population. You think they choose the lifestyle. I think that opinion is willful ignorance.

You also won't answer how many gay friends you'd need before 'trying' gay, since anyone could do it, in your estimation. If it's not genetic, you should be able to acknowledge the possibility of being deeply and sincerely aroused by other men. I can't. That's one way I know it's built in. But you disagree. The only conclusion I can draw from that is...

I think it's quaint that you met some formerly gay people at church, and now you think you know gay people. But those people are probably deeply in denial, and not representative of the whole. Just a repressed minority, who have shamed themselves back into the closet.

I hope you never have gay children, for their sakes.