11 states vote on gay marriage

[pax]

I fixed it for you, Irvine. At least I hope that's how you wanted it.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Why is it that people always defend gay marriage with all this talk about if two individuals love each other, they should be allowed to marry?

What if a man loves a pig, or what if a man loves a five year old boy? I just don't see it going in the right direction.

Why do people always bring up farm animals and children into discussions about the rights of consenting adults to marry? I just don't see it going in the right direction.

 

[joyfulgirl]

oops - I posted while pax was posting - sorry.

 

[Irvine511]

Why is it that people always defend gay marriage with all this talk about if two individuals love each other, they should be allowed to marry?

What if a man loves a pig, or what if a man loves a five year old boy? I just don't see it going in the right direction.

because 5 year old boys and pigs are unable to consent to an adult relationship. and these constant comparisons between homosexuality and bestiality and pedophilia (the latter two of which are crimes, precisely because they comprise an abusive relationship between adults and either animals or children) are offensive in the extreme.

it's so depressing. i've never committed a crime in my life, i've never hurt anyone in my life, all i've done is have two (count 'em, two) adult relationships with members of my gender, and i have to hear both in this forum and on the floor of Congress (thank you Sen. Santorum) these relationships compared to pigs and children.

part of me wants to say "go fuck yourself" but i realize that's destructive too and precislely the wrong message. i should say "let's have a beer and talk" and you'll realize that whatever heterosexual relationships you have are very nearly the same as the homosexual relationships i've had and neither of the two has the least bit in common with crimes like beastiality and pedophilia.

so, let's have a beer and talk.

 

[Irvine511]

I fixed it for you, Irvine. At least I hope that's how you wanted it.

exactly right. thanks.

 

[pax]

because 5 year old boys and pigs are unable to consent to an adult relationship. and these constant comparisons between homosexuality and bestiality and pedophilia (the latter two of which are crimes, precisely because they comprise an abusive relationship between adults and either animals or children) are offensive in the extreme.

it's so depressing. i've never committed a crime in my life, i've never hurt anyone in my life, all i've done is have two (count 'em, two) adult relationships with members of my gender, and i have to hear both in this forum and on the floor of Congress (thank you Sen. Santorum) these relationships compared to pigs and children.

part of me wants to say "go fuck yourself" but i realize that's destructive too and precislely the wrong message. i should say "let's have a beer and talk" and you'll realize that whatever heterosexual relationships you have are very nearly the same as the homosexual relationships i've had and neither of the two has the least bit in common with crimes like beastiality and pedophilia.

so, let's have a beer and talk.

Santorum is the one who ought to be ashamed of himself. This PA voter can't wait until he's up for reelection and we can replace him with someone who's NOT a self-satisfied, smarmy bigot.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

True what you said Irvine-having a beer and talking would be so much more positive, though I can't blame you for wanting to say the other thing.

I just can't understand why you should have to answer questions like this-I don't have to answer them about my attraction towards men, and neither do any heterosexuals that I know.

I hope you won't be discouraged from posting here-your posts are informative and thoughtful.

 

[pax]

I just can't understand why you should have to answer questions like this-I don't have to answer them about my attraction towards men, and neither do any heterosexuals that I know.

This has always bugged me, too. As a heterosexual female, in fact, sometimes I have no damn clue as to why I'm attracted to men. Sometimes I think it'd be a whole lot simpler if I weren't.

 

[anitram]

it's so depressing. i've never committed a crime in my life, i've never hurt anyone in my life, all i've done is have two (count 'em, two) adult relationships with members of my gender, and i have to hear both in this forum and on the floor of Congress (thank you Sen. Santorum) these relationships compared to pigs and children.

I sincerely believe that in a hundred years, children will be sitting in school, reading about the blatant bigotry and discrimination experienced by homosexuals and wonder who these bigots were and how it was possible they were allowed to do what they did. Much in the same way we wonder now how it is possible that people had to sit in the back of the bus and drink from separate water fountains.

I hope for people like yourself that we get there a lot sooner than a hundred years.

Nobody's equal until everybody's equal.

 

[Irvine511]

thanks for the kind words.

i've been coming to interference for years, since back before the Pop album. i've only recently started posting, and i can't get enough. both for the people i agree with, and especially for the people i don't. with a few exceptions -- that GOP_Catholic, for example -- those with different opinions express them well, and respectfully, and it's always a great exercise to have write out a coherent response. your own thinking gets both sharpened and expanded. what more could you ask for?

 

[joyfulgirl]

I sincerely believe that in a hundred years, children will be sitting in school, reading about the blatant bigotry and discrimination experienced by homosexuals and wonder who these bigots were and how it was possible they were allowed to do what they did. Much in the same way we wonder now how it is possible that people had to sit in the back of the bus and drink from separate water fountains.

I hope for people like yourself that we get there a lot sooner than a hundred years.

Nobody's equal until everybody's equal.

I live in a gay-friendly town and forget sometimes that the rest of the country doesn't have gays and lesbians walking down the street holding hands like we do. My best friend, a gay man, recently moved back to Georgia where he's from and is actually having to conceal his sexuality from his conservative, corporate, colleagues. I find that absolutely shocking and disgusting and realize how naive I still am.

 

[MadelynIris]

because 5 year old boys and pigs are unable to consent to an adult relationship. and these constant comparisons between homosexuality and bestiality and pedophilia (the latter two of which are crimes, precisely because they comprise an abusive relationship between adults and either animals or children) are offensive in the extreme.

I really think though, that the same benefits that are allocated to 'marriage', e.g. the tax, insurance, retirement benefits that are normally reserved for a spouse, should be opened to anyone, not pending any sexual relationship, like a sibling, son/daugter, uncle, and yes, a close friend.

This is where some people might like to see these benefits to a pet, NO KIDDING! You probably know some people out there that honestly would - I'm not insuating a sexual relationship here.

So, it's a real question, where do we draw the line?

We've honored the idea that the mom/dad family is best for children, so we give advantages to those who strive for that. Maybe we should stop that all together, but it does open the door for some interesting progressions away from traditional marriage.

Haven't heard much about how this would open up the whole polygamy thing. Islam and LDS both have sects that would want to press this. They would like to spread these same 'rights'/benefits to mutliple people who they consider their spouses. So, you do it for one, what's so bad about two? I would demand it if I were them.

So, I personally would like to keep it the way it is, and not open the door, out of fear that the whole family idea would disentgrate over the next 50-100 years. Maybe there is not a problem with that, and as a people all would be fine (no real established mother father relationships, just a looser definition). Maybe?

I dunno.

Mark

 

[beau2ifulday]

I sincerely believe that in a hundred years, children will be sitting in school, reading about the blatant bigotry and discrimination experienced by homosexuals and wonder who these bigots were and how it was possible they were allowed to do what they did. Much in the same way we wonder now how it is possible that people had to sit in the back of the bus and drink from separate water fountains.

I hope for people like yourself that we get there a lot sooner than a hundred years.

Nobody's equal until everybody's equal.

I've raised this a few times in my RS lessons - you just have to look at how black people were discriminated back in the Malcolm X/MLK time, and how most people look back at the treatment of them now in disgust. Of course, this isn't to the same extreme, but it's just blatant prejudice wrapped up in bow.

 

[Golightly Grrl]

I don't think homosexuals could fuck up marriage anymore than heterosexuals have.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't think homosexuals could fuck up marriage anymore than heterosexuals have.

if you think about it, who would be better at marriage than lesbians? they are the most monogamous "group" out there. i bet allowing lesbians to marry would lower the divorce rate.


there's an old joke:

what does a lesbian bring to a second date?
a U-Haul.

what does a gay man bring to a second date?
what second date?


humor, people, just some humor. and if you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?

 

[joyfulgirl]

 

[Macfistowannabe]

because 5 year old boys and pigs are unable to consent to an adult relationship. and these constant comparisons between homosexuality and bestiality and pedophilia (the latter two of which are crimes, precisely because they comprise an abusive relationship between adults and either animals or children) are offensive in the extreme.

so, let's have a beer and talk.

Defining marriage as an art or some other baloney is, in my opinion, political correctness gone mad. How are we supposed to raise kids the right way if we allow the far-left to redefine marriage? I'm sure that most of us would dislike the thought of any of our children becoming homosexuals, so why are we playing with fire?

 

[nbcrusader]

Please read through your posts before you hit the "submit reply" button and consider how it may offend others.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

I did say it was just an opinion, and if I offended you with it, I don't know how, besides... having a different view? Ehh... nevermind.

 

[joyfulgirl]

I'm sure that most of us would dislike the thought of any of our children becoming homosexuals, so why are we playing with fire?

Excuse me??? Please stop projecting your homophobic beliefs onto "most of us."

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Perhaps one can stop to think how it would offend any gay people here...just a thought.

I was raised by two straight people in an unhappy and dysfunctional marriage. I would have rather had two gay people raising me in a more appropriate and loving way. That wouldn't have "turned me gay" either.

The "right way" to raise kids is with LOVE , with a loving relationship between two people as the foundation.

 

[BAW]

Defining marriage as an art or some other baloney is, in my opinion, political correctness gone mad. How are we supposed to raise kids the right way if we allow the far-left to redefine marriage? I'm sure that most of us would dislike the thought of any of our children becoming homosexuals, so why are we playing with fire?

Please, speak for yourself. Your "right way" is just that...yours.

If one of my kids told me they were gay, my main concern would be protecting them from people who equate homosexuality with sleeping with animals and small children.

I don't care who my children choose to love as long as they are good people who love and respect them. Gay or straight, my love for my children will never change.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

Excuse me??? Please stop projecting your homophobic beliefs onto "most of us."

Having a traditional belief system doesn't make me a homophobe. I've heard liberal people say the exact same thing - they wouldn't prefer that their children would become gay. I'm not saying you should love them any less, but in order to protect my future children from a moral drought, I supported the ban on gay marriage.

 

[Irvine511]

Defining marriage as an art or some other baloney is, in my opinion, political correctness gone mad. How are we supposed to raise kids the right way if we allow the far-left to redefine marriage? I'm sure that most of us would dislike the thought of any of our children becoming homosexuals, so why are we playing with fire?

marriage is an art? maybe a couple staying committed to each other forever is an art (as i'm sure both hetero and homosexuals will attest to ... i'm too young to offer an insight). marriage is a contract. it is firstly legal, and then cultural and religious.

you've also invited criticism with the last sentence, but i think it's less pernicious than it might be read. i see no malice in your statement, just naivete. no one "becomes" homosexual. it's something you are, and the attraction you feel towards members of your same gender arrive at exactly the same time as do heterosexual attractions (the onset of puberty). yes, homosexuality is abnormal, but it is a 100% naturally occurring abnormality akin to being left-handed.

you're right, i don't think any parent would want their child to be gay, mostly because of how much more difficult life is, as well as the very natural tendency to want your children to follow in the same path you did.

finally, common sense would tell us that the best way to "raise kids the right way" would be to have two good, loving parents. but this isn't always the case. i'd rather have one good parent than 2 bad ones. i'd rather have 2 good gay parents than 2 bad straight ones. that aside, it's those kinds of statements that drive me (and many on the left) nuts. there's a right way? who's right way? who gets to determine what works best for all kids? who knows best? you simply can't assert that there's a best way, and then all other ways. life is slippery, life is messy, life doesn't have tidy corners and happy endings. different strokes for different folks. there is no best way, there's only the way that's best for you.

and stop to consider the legal obstacles alone a gay couple must jump through when adopting children (let alone the social norms they must navigate). if that child receives the same dedication from his/her gay parents, what a lucky kid that will be.

 

[Irvine511]

Having a traditional belief system doesn't make me a homophobe. I've heard liberal people say the exact same thing - they wouldn't prefer that their children would become gay. I'm not saying you should love them any less, but in order to protect my future children from a moral drought, I supported the ban on gay marriage.

moral drought? it seems to be that encouraging monogamy and stability -- particularly amongst people stereotyped to be highly promiscuous, drug-taking, clubbers -- is precisely the moral thing to do. let's give people the tools they need to create the kinds of relationships that benefit everyone.

 

[joyfulgirl]

If I were going to have children, the thought "I hope they won't be gay" would never enter my consciousness. Even though my gay friends certainly have difficulties, they live happy lives nonetheless.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

marriage is an art? maybe a couple staying committed to each other forever is an art (as i'm sure both hetero and homosexuals will attest to ... i'm too young to offer an insight). marriage is a contract. it is firstly legal, and then cultural and religious.

Wesley Clark defined marriage as an art. It didn't drive me nuts, but it might've caused me to think less of him.

you're right, i don't think any parent would want their child to be gay, mostly because of how much more difficult life is, as well as the very natural tendency to want your children to follow in the same path you did.

And for saying this, I got a lot of criticism, surprisingly.

finally, common sense would tell us that the best way to "raise kids the right way" would be to have two good, loving parents. but this isn't always the case. i'd rather have one good parent than 2 bad ones. i'd rather have 2 good gay parents than 2 bad straight ones. that aside, it's those kinds of statements that drive me (and many on the left) nuts.

I certainly understand your view that you would rather be raised by good gay parents rather than bad straight parents, and in many ways I agree with you. I must define what I believe the right way is: Loving, caring, attentive, god-fearing, and moral.

 

[Irvine511]

I must define what I believe the right way is: Loving, caring, attentive, god-fearing, and moral.

how are these things incompatable with either gay marriage or gay families?

also, and this may be opening up a can of worms here, but why do so many people use the word "believe" rather than "think." the president does this all the time. belief seems like you're repeating something that has been handed down to you, whereas thinking is a much more active process.

this is a general question, not meant specifically for Macfistowannabe. any takers?

or maybe i could start a new thread with this one ... thought vs. belief.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

God-fearing.

 

[Irvine511]

God-fearing.

so an atheist cannot raise children the "right" way? and gay people cannot be God-fearing?

i don't go to church, though i do believe in god. i also don't fear god. i find the thought of an infinite that i am connected to empowering and awe-inspiring, but i don't fear that. if anything, belief in God strikes me as the opposite of fear.