Spain Unveils Controversial Gay Marriage Law - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-02-2004, 12:38 PM   #61
War Child
 
Vorsprung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 976
Local Time: 12:06 AM
Come on Aussie!! Let gay people do what they wanna do!!
They don't hurt anybody with it do they? So gay sex may not be your favourite hobby, they're not asking you to join them!! Why should we ask them to join us???
Because it's not natural???? I don't want to go into that discussion, but all I can say is that flying an F15, a MiG, a Boeing 747 or driving your 4wd also aren't your typical natural things to do. Neither is riding a rollercoaster, but we also like to do that.
Why force your views and morals on other people who do no harm to you in any way!!!
I don't agree with the views of muslims, christians, conservatives, hippies, hindus or jews, but I do think they still have a right to live their lives.
And 90% of the world population being gay actually could be a really good thing. Because I think overpopulation is one of the worse problems we have on this planet. I also truly believe that educated people who see reproduction as one of their main goals, either really have unethical morals or are just really ignorant. (I mean people pursuing "bigger" families)
__________________

__________________
Vorsprung is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 12:44 PM   #62
Offishul Kitteh Doctor
Forum Moderator
 
bonosloveslave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Taking care of kitties
Posts: 9,655
Local Time: 06:06 PM
I know people get really worked up about this topic, but let's try to slow the downward spiral this thread is taking...
__________________

__________________
bonosloveslave [at] interference.com
bonosloveslave is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 01:00 PM   #63
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 06:06 PM
Aussie, you are full of it. And please, stop stating generalizations about people you don't know at all. There is nothing wrong with homosexualality. It's just that people naturally fear what they don't know or aren't familiar with, and some people just don't understand homosexualality. These homophobes that spew so much contempt for homosexuals, what it comes down to is that they fear it. And there is simply nothing to fear.
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 01:15 PM   #64
Offishul Kitteh Doctor
Forum Moderator
 
bonosloveslave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Taking care of kitties
Posts: 9,655
Local Time: 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by namkcuR
Aussie, you are full of it.
namkcuR, please refer to our FAQs, no personal attacks please.
__________________
bonosloveslave [at] interference.com
bonosloveslave is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 01:21 PM   #65
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 07:06 PM
That "no personal attacks" thing is a good thing for EVERYONE here to keep in mind.

Not that I'm thinking of anyone in particular.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 06:10 PM   #66
Refugee
 
Anthony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,538
Local Time: 11:06 PM
I truly find it hard, indeed - very hard, for anyone to think that people would 'turn gay' because of the supposed 'cool factor'. I've kept quiet in this debate because, well, if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all (and it would be cool if those with fiery tempers would observe such a maxim), but I'll phrase my astonishment in the form of a question;

How on Earth can anyone think that homosexuals, in an age where blatant descrimination still exists (and lets face it, if it isn't, then the news about Spain legalising gay marriage wouldn't even BE news) and is as rampant as the spread of AIDS (not saying that only homosexuals get it, because that is incorrect, but it is nevertheless a fear and problem many homosexuals do have to contend with) are profiting from a 'cool factor' based on their sexuality?

I can assure you, its not a picnic for any homosexual out there, and I marvel at how anyone can even think that.

Ant.
__________________
Razors pain you; Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you; And drugs cause cramp.
Guns aren't lawful; Nooses give;
Gas smells awful; You might as well live.

Dorothy Parker, 'Resumé'
Anthony is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 08:50 PM   #67
War Child
 
shrmn8rpoptart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Seward, NE
Posts: 516
Local Time: 05:06 PM
somebody call me if i'm wrong on this, but i think that it is wrong to label someone finding the act of homosexual sex morally wrong to be discrimination. to me, discrimination is the unfair judgement of someone based on a fact of their nature that they have no control over (i.e. race or sex). when i disagree with homosexual sex, i am saying i don't condone a particular action that i believe is morally wrong.

as to the issue of being gay, i accept the fact that some people have an innate sexual attraction towards a person of the same sex. this is something about the person that they have no control over. this, in and of itself is not a problem for me. however, the act of having sex of any kind (heterosexual, homosexual, inside of marraige, or outside of marraige) is by its very nature (except in the case of a rape victim) an act that a person chooses to engage in.

indulge me, if you will, but i am willing to make the assumption that there are also people in the world that have an innate sexual attraction to children, animals, and various other things. i would also assume that most sensible people would agree that once these people act on their sexual desires, they have crossed over a line and committed an act that is "wrong" in it's very nature.

it would seem logical then, that a perfectly reasonable person would be able to come to the conclusion that just because a person desires to engage in sexual activities with someone/thing it doesn't necessarily hold true that said person should be allowed to make good on that desire. that is my position on homosexual sex, i believe that the act of homosexual sex is wrong, and therefore someone who commits this action has commited a wrong.
__________________
shrmn8rpoptart is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 08:53 PM   #68
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:06 AM
But any sexual act against a child is abuse, same goes for animal because it is non consenting. But if it is between two consenting adults then there should be no problem.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:07 PM   #69
War Child
 
shrmn8rpoptart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Seward, NE
Posts: 516
Local Time: 05:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
But any sexual act against a child is abuse, same goes for animal because it is non consenting. But if it is between two consenting adults then there should be no problem.
there are those that would argue this point with you. the ancient greeks obviously believed otherwise (check out plato's "symposium" if anyone disagrees with this claim) and there are groups whose purpose is to legalize consentual sex between men and boys (nambla). i would also point to the case of mary kay latourno (sp?), the teacher who entered into a relationship with a 13 year-old student that was described by both parties as loving and fully consentual. was this relationship wrong? why or why not? it appears, as your response "ANY sexual act against a child" seems to imply, that this act would be abuse, even though it was entered into consentually, simply on the basis that it was a sexual act against a child. therefore, it seems that you would argue that there are times when a consentual relationship is wrong. correct me if i have misjudged your argument.
__________________
shrmn8rpoptart is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:19 PM   #70
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:06 AM
Sex against a minor is wrong because it is injuring a child, plain and simple.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:20 PM   #71
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
But any sexual act against a child is abuse, same goes for animal because it is non consenting. But if it is between two consenting adults then there should be no problem.
Exactly! I fail to see what other people's sex life has to do with anyone else(given the usual consenting adults clause). If a person feels that homosexuality is immoral, that is that person's right. However, I wonder why people ever got the idea that just because they don't like something it should be prohibited for others. Where did that come from?

As for Aussie....homosexuality is not something you catch. Have you ever considered that your cousin says he was converted to avoid your obvious scorn? Perhaps to him it is better to be thought "converted" to homosexuality than to admit, especially in light of your attitude, that he actually is gay.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:23 PM   #72
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shrmn8rpoptart


it appears, as your response "ANY sexual act against a child" seems to imply, that this act would be abuse, even though it was entered into consentually, simply on the basis that it was a sexual act against a child. therefore, it seems that you would argue that there are times when a consentual relationship is wrong. correct me if i have misjudged your argument.
You missed the word adults in A_Wanderer's reply.

"two consenting ADULTS"

That is the difference.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:29 PM   #73
War Child
 
shrmn8rpoptart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Seward, NE
Posts: 516
Local Time: 05:06 PM
so, am i to take it, that you are able to say, that sex against a minor (even in a case where the minor fully entered into the relationship, and even took steps to pursue the relationship itself, and by both accounts, the law prevented them from having a loving relationship to the person to whom they were attracted to, and the young man flat out states that no injury was done to him) is wrong plain and simple, while people arguing against homosexual sex are not allowed to use the same justification.

it seems that if someone were to say, "homosexual sex is wrong, because it goes against the natural state of humanity" (a simple anatomy lesson shows that men and women were created/evolved in a way in which it was natural that a man should have sex with a woman), "plain and simple." then they should be able to do so without being labeled a homophobe, in the same manner that you should be allowed to say that sex against a minor is wrong, without being labeled a pedaphiliaphobe.
__________________
shrmn8rpoptart is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:38 PM   #74
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:06 AM
As I have said sex against a minor is wrong. One cannot expect a child to make such a decision and they can be manipulated. Now if you are talking about a 15 year old then there is a little bit of leeway but in general sexual relationships between adults and children = exploitation and abuse. Homosexuality (between two consenting individuals above the age of consent) is perfectly fine in my book because it does not hurt anybody. Now we can run around in circles all day, I think that this is an issue of individual liberty and sexual freedom and you think that this is an issue of morality. I think that we will have to respectfully disagree.

I am a pedaphilaphobe, I abhor child abusers and think that they deserve everything they get when they go to prison. Liberty does not encompass the right to hurt others.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-02-2004, 09:44 PM   #75
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shrmn8rpoptart
so, am i to take it, that you are able to say, that sex against a minor (even in a case where the minor fully entered into the relationship, and even took steps to pursue the relationship itself, and by both accounts, the law prevented them from having a loving relationship to the person to whom they were attracted to, and the young man flat out states that no injury was done to him) is wrong plain and simple, while people arguing against homosexual sex are not allowed to use the same justification.

it seems that if someone were to say, "homosexual sex is wrong, because it goes against the natural state of humanity" (a simple anatomy lesson shows that men and women were created/evolved in a way in which it was natural that a man should have sex with a woman), "plain and simple." then they should be able to do so without being labeled a homophobe, in the same manner that you should be allowed to say that sex against a minor is wrong, without being labeled a pedaphiliaphobe.
I don't mind being labeled a pedaphiliaphobe.

A child is unable to make an informed decision. An adult is able to make an informed decision. There is a big difference. It's not really a difficult concept to understand.
__________________

__________________
indra is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com