Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

This had better not pass

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 10>
Author
newport View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Guested. inapproproate links take 3

Joined: 14 May 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 1874
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote newport Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 5:05am
Originally posted by Justin98 Justin98 wrote:

my good reason for not agreeing for **edited** marriage is good enough for me and many others.



Care to share with the class?

Back to Top
Savage93fvss View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 677
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Savage93fvss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 8:12am

mmmmmmmmmmmmmm........eye candy.....

I to am a conservative, No, I dont like **edited** marriage, but to deny that to somebody just based on the sex they like is wrong, hell, who is to say that heterosexual marriage is right? Show me a law that hetereosexual marriages are the official marriage

Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 8:24am
Originally posted by brihard brihard wrote:

Fundanmentally, homosexuals are humans, and thus are entitled to human rights, ...and freedom to enter contract if adult and metnally sound.


I dont have enough time to rebuke everyons post or even every part from your post.. I'll have to do that later. But I'll go head on into this one.


Lets take the off chance that you ARE born like that.

It's your brain, for lack of a better word, screwing up, correct? It isnt 'natural' because the purpose of sex is to reproduce.


So, born with it, brain screwed up. Where am I going with this?

If the brain is screwed up, it's a mental disability.

If it's a mental disability, they arent mentally sound.

If they aren't mentally sound, they cant enter into a contract.




I love loop-holes. (A stretch, I know.. but you guys do it too)


Originally posted by Brihard Brihard wrote:

You can be against homosexual marraige becuase you choose to be, but you cannot claim that you can justify it or ratioanlize it by any moral standards notdependent on a religious blind faith. Morality must have some tangible foundation in the good and harm that it does people, and your views cannot in any way be justified. You simply hold them for whatever ignorant reason you do.


You go from being rational to being a bigoted asshole.

Not once did I say anything about morals in my post. Not once did I say anything about religion in my post.

Please.. show me where I said I hold my values on this from a moral or religious standpoint in any of my post in this thread.


Originally posted by Brihard Brihard wrote:

You claim that there is 'proof' that it is a choice, when in the vast majority of situations, it is not. Certainly some women choose to be lesbians, but that is free will as opposed to biological determinism.


Buddy.. I will say it once again.

Just becasue SOME scientist say they have proof that people are born with it doesnt make it so. Just as many say there is no proof to back up that claim.


It goes both ways and I'm surprised you are blind to that FACT. You are a smart guy and youre letting something so obvious slip by your logical mind.



PS--- I'm hearing Alabama just passed a ban on it....

Edited by Linus - 07 June 2006 at 8:27am

Back to Top
kuhndog599 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Strike 1, Language 5/4

Joined: 13 December 2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Status: Offline
Points: 1015
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kuhndog599 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 9:47am
dude this reminds me of a story my brother told me. he went into a bar (it was kinda a biker bar but not neccesarily) and him and his friends had a few drinks. then a guy comes over and asks if he can buy them a round. they were like..... uhh... sure. and then like 5 minutes later another guy comes over to the guy that brought them drinks and french kisses him. so my bro and his friends said that they needed to go to the car and get some cigarretes. yeah they hightaled it out of there.
model 98 - homemade handguard
solid stock - opsgear mag
polished internals
homemade sling - paintjob
operator barrel
progressive barrel
opsgear mag - stock
Back to Top
phillll227 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1056
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote phillll227 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:03am
There is an easy solution to this

Mairrage was originally a function of the church. Why not return it to the church? Let the church decide who marries and who doesn't.

From a government point of view, all legal implications of mairrage would be handled through legal unions. Mairrage would no longer have any legal implications, it would essentially be replaced by civil unions.

The right would be happy because the sanctity of mairrage would be preserved, the left would be happy because everybody would have equal rights under the law.





Back to Top
Cedric View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Unit

Joined: 24 November 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 4240
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cedric Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:06am
Homosexual's brains aren't screwed up...

Back to Top
Dazed View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Romped around naked in thorn bushes

Joined: 13 February 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3876
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dazed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:12am
Yes the state did vote it in, unfortunately. I voted against it, but apparently most of the Christians here don't understand why they shouldn't pass laws like that.

Your Jesus preached love and tolerance for those outside his beliefs. The ONLY time he ever got upset (that I can find reference to, biblically) was when believers were abusing the house of god. Do you comprehend the precident your SAVIOR set? Love and compassion for those outside of your faith, and firm dealings with those inside your faith.

Jesus would have hung out with homosexuals, and would have told them "go, and sin no more." if and ONLY IF they came to him and asked for salvation, he wouldn't force himself or his moral stances on anyone not claiming to be of his faith.

The plain facts are that homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone in the general sense(society is a different beast all together), doesn't affect on our government's international standings, and doesn't affect internal trade. It shouldn't be "governed" one way or another federally. It shouldn't be an issue at all at the national level. Bush and the GOP are just drumming up mid-term voters after the horrible job done by-and-by by the incumbents.

Personally, I think the government should just remove the word marriage from its vocabulary. Make all Civil Unions the same, as long as its two people of legal age and sound mind they shouldn't care who is applying for the license. Leave the "Marrying" up to the local churches and their own moral standings. After all, "Marriage" in its contemporary form is a Christian thing, isn't it? If I were an active Christian, I would be pissed that the government was regulating a religious ceremorny, even if I agreed with it. It sets a frightening precident.

Edited by Dazed - 07 June 2006 at 10:14am
Back to Top
choopie911 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Commie Canuck

Joined: 01 June 2003
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 30745
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote choopie911 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:23am
Originally posted by phillll227 phillll227 wrote:

There is an easy solution to this

Mairrage was originally a function of the church. Why not return it to the church? Let the church decide who marries and who doesn't.


Because the church and the government are two very different things, and its a sad, scary thing when one gets involved with the other.




Linus, I can't beleive you honestly think homosexuality is a mental disability....thats absurd.

You say that the purpose of sex is reproduction right? So other than urination, thats all the genitals are for, anything else is just wrong in your books. You better not masturbate then... and if you EVER go on a date, you two better not do ANYTHING until sex, otherwise you're breaking your own rules.
Back to Top
Dazed View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Romped around naked in thorn bushes

Joined: 13 February 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3876
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dazed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:27am
^Not to mention the fact that he had better not ever have sex unless he is actively trying to reproduce.

We won't even bring up the thought of heterosexual couples that can't reproduce for one reason or another. That just doesn't happen.
Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:36am
Once again, Linus is not arguing for his point, but rather against others', and it is getting him nowhere.

He has managed to avoid the most pressing matter at hand, again, and is only picking apart certain aspects of posts that he feels he can argue with.

Plenty of people have asked "what have homosexuals done that is so terrible that they should be denied the liberties that hetero people have", and it has been ignored by everyone who is for banning **edited** marriage.

Originally posted by Dazed Dazed wrote:

^Not to mention the fact that he had better not ever have sex unless he is actively trying to reproduce.

We won't even bring up the thought of heterosexual couples that can't reproduce for one reason or another. That just doesn't happen.


And contraceptives dont exist.

Originally posted by Hades Hades wrote:

Does anyone else find it strange the only people following Jesus around were dudes? And why werent there any ladies at the last supper? Didnt any of them have wives? Isnt is strange for 13 men not to have any wives? Hmmmm... Maybe someone editted the reasoning out of the bible to better push their agenda.


And the one woman involved was considered a whore and a prostitute, and was a bad person.

Originally posted by Justin98 Justin98 wrote:

I don't want to hear "zomg it scares me how close minded you conservatives can be." shut up. its reality. it scares me how far this country has moved away from its roots. stop being liberal sissy's.


OMG WE HATE AMERICA

Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:36am
Question for the supporters of <**edited**> Marriage. What is the next established social norm that will be deemed discrimination and judicially sanctioned.

How about pedophia, there are those discriminated by established law who by choice prefere young children as sexual pardners, why do we discriminate against them. The same arguements that are used for <**edited**> marriage could be used in this case also.

As for the seperation of church and state, still have not found that passage in the US Constitution, unfortuanately for many our government is based on judeo-christian fundimentals of law and behavior.

There is a book out there which I will find the title that documents the fall of all of histories great "empires" and the destruction of established social norms is found to be the start of the downward spiral of that society.

Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:54am
Choopie.

Here, read this please.

Originally posted by Article Article wrote:

Some psychologists attribute mental illness to organic/neurochemical causes that can be treated with psychiatric medication, psychotherapy, lifestyle adjustments and other supportive measures; however, many of the causes of mental illness are still unknown. The battle between "nature" and "nurture" goes on as it has for years. Neuroscience and genetics are still unable to fully explain the effects of genetic inheritance and developmental environment.




If it isnt natural, ie, more then 50% have it, then it's a disability, or a mutant gene.

Schizophrenia is a mental illness, and you wont argue that. But you will argue that homosexuality is neither a mental illness, nor a choice.

So what is it?

Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:58am

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

.


Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of my ass.

fixed

 

Actually OS the age of consent in Canada is 14 or something like that, so lowering our age of consent would have precedent.

The slippery slope idea is what concerns me. I have no problem with the couple down the road who've lived together for 20 years being married(This is MA, so they are). They can run their pottery shop and fly their rainbow flag all they want.

However, if a court is going to interpret this as "The government has no right to question a marrige" instead of "The government cannot discriminate against marriges based on race, ethnicity or gender" we could have other problems. I mean, if the libs can have homo marrige, the fundamentalist hillbillies will want legalized incest to keep their bloodlines pure. Slippery slope stuff scares the crap out of me.

Also, I totally agree that this is a non-issue. And an old non-issue at that. Brought up solely to motivate the evangelicals to vote in the mid terms. Apparently the only way the republicans can think of to get their evangelical base to vote is by exploiting their intolerance.

Back to Top
Dazed View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Romped around naked in thorn bushes

Joined: 13 February 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3876
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dazed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 10:59am
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

Question for the supporters of <**edited**> Marriage. What is the next established social norm that will be deemed discrimination and judicially sanctioned.

How about pedophia, there are those discriminated by established law who by choice prefere young children as sexual pardners, why do we discriminate against them. The same arguements that are used for <**edited**> marriage could be used in this case also.

As for the seperation of church and state, still have not found that passage in the US Constitution, unfortuanately for many our government is based on judeo-christian fundimentals of law and behavior.

There is a book out there which I will find the title that documents the fall of all of histories great "empires" and the destruction of established social norms is found to be the start of the downward spiral of that society.


Considering that the last major established social norms to be declared discrimination were Womens Rights and and Black Rights, I'm not sure I would side myself on the side of tradition in this case, OS. As someone who lived through the sixties, tell me, which side were you on then? Do you still think you were right?

Pedophilia falls under the "legal age of consent." Completely different than the "two consenting adults wanting to file their taxes jointly and have a pretty ceremony" most of us are talking about.

While most of the founding fathers were Christians, their were athiests among them. Benjamin Franklin, most prominiently. And while our basic tenants do seem to follow Judeo-Christian laws, they also tend it follow the motto "First, do no harm." I, personally, believe that our laws were established to grant each individual every personal liberty possibly that wouldn't detract from anyone elses. I, respectfully, submit to you, OS that homosexual marriage does not curb your personal freedoms in any way that seeing a black man marry a white woman doesn't.

My point isn't whether it is right or wrong, its whether this is something our government, or our personal morals should dictate.

Edited by Dazed - 07 June 2006 at 11:03am
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 11:09am
People bring up "People were for slavery at one time" arguement.. but think about it like this.

Slavery was wrong because it forced people to hard labor for nothing but a minimum amount of food and harsh physical punishment for petty things.

Not allowing **edited** marriage, what does it do? Nothing. No one gets physical pain. No one loses money. No one is kept down (though your definition will vary from mine on that).

Only "bad" thing is you cant wear a ring and say your married.   Oh noez!

Live together! Many hetereo couples decide never to get married, yet they love eachother and stay with eachother for life and have children. Why can't **edited**s do that?

Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 11:19am
OS, Mbro already adressed that point. Children can not be held responsible to make such a descision, and animals are simply not able to make that descision and sign the contract.

Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

People bring up "People were for slavery at one time" arguement.. but think about it like this.

Slavery was wrong because it forced people to hard labor for nothing but a minimum amount of food and harsh physical punishment for petty things.

Not allowing **edited** marriage, what does it do? Nothing. No one gets physical pain. No one loses money. No one is kept down (though your definition will vary from mine on that).

Only "bad" thing is you cant wear a ring and say your married.   Oh noez!

Live together! Many hetereo couples decide never to get married, yet they love eachother and stay with eachother for life and have children. Why can't **edited**s do that?


Dazed mentioned nothing of slavery, he mentioned black's rights. Big difference.

And it is still discrimination, regardless of what you think they should do. I'm hoping you can agree on that.
Back to Top
White o Light View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Guested. blatant pornographic post

Joined: 12 June 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2772
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote White o Light Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 11:36am
Originally posted by Gatyr Gatyr wrote:

I'm hoping you can agree on that.


One can only hope he will agree.
Back to Top
Savage93fvss View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 677
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Savage93fvss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 12:50pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

People bring up "People were for slavery at one time" arguement.. but think about it like this.

Slavery was wrong because it forced people to hard labor for nothing but a minimum amount of food and harsh physical punishment for petty things.

Allowing **edited** marriage, what does it do? Nothing. No one gets physical pain. No one loses money. No one is kept down (though your definition will vary from mine on that).

Only "bad" thing is.....nothing
Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 12:56pm
Originally posted by Savage93fvss Savage93fvss wrote:

Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

People bring up "People were for slavery at one time" arguement.. but think about it like this.

Slavery was wrong because it forced people to hard labor for nothing but a minimum amount of food and harsh physical punishment for petty things.

Allowing **edited** marriage, what does it do? Nothing. No one gets physical pain. No one loses money. No one is kept down (though your definition will vary from mine on that).

Only "bad" thing is.....nothing


So why do you care so much that they not be allowed to do it?
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 June 2006 at 1:08pm
So, by the example of **edited** marriage activism, all the pedophile activists have to do is get an activist Judge to lower the age of consent to 6, and then thier right to thier wants will be legal. Slippery slope as mentioned, incest can to be seen as discrimination, so do we change those laws also to fit the few who demand thier rights. Children today have decesion rights way prior to age of consent. Ask planned parenthood, a 12 year old can be given birth control or even an abortion without parental consent and or even knowledge in some cases.

What is the norm, what is the abnorm, that is where societies determine the norm based on the consent of the many. Slavery is another age old issue, and still exsists in the world, right or wrong, depends on where you live and the culture you live in. As of many polls the norm here in America is still man woman marriage, the norm as established by the many, and again by law and per religion, marriage is a priviledge, even in the biblical sense, not a right.

BTW we still have an indentured servant system here in america, ask any trucker firm. They put you in the school, train you and have exclusive rights to your services for upwards of three years till debt is paid off, and usually driver paid way below the standard, or they quit and have to pay back upwards of $7,000.00.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 10>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.186 seconds.