Should Homo******s Be Allowed To Get Married?

[Seraphim]

Please dont turn this into a flame war, if it does and theres a good chance...please lock the thread. Being this is a very conservative majority in this forum I think I know the answer already.

Heres my opinion...
I think they should be allowed to get married. I think it is a human rights issue, do we not proud ourselves because of our human rights?

[Operation Ivy]

No

2000th post woot

[Ratamacue]

Why not? It's not like it'll affect you if you're not homo******.

[Falco]

Hasn't this topic been covered before?

[Operation Ivy]

I really dont have a reason, yea i know its dumb, i could really careless if a gay couple got married, but i just dont like the idea

[Cactuar]

I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. But if a state doesn't want to legalize it within their own borders that's also fine. Gay civil unions should be legalized throughout the whole U.S.

That's my opinion.

[UkrainianAmerican]

Nope.

[Seraphim]

Can you people please explain your reasonings instead of a simple no.

Thanks

[UkrainianAmerican]

Can you people please explain your reasonings instead of a simple no.

Thanks
Nope.

[memphiz]

Why the hell not
Marriage is over rated anyways,

[Fintin]

i would say no to marrage...but some other form of legal bond...why the hell not...

[mattnwnc03]

Why the hell not
Marriage is over rated anyways, yeah i agree with that.marriage stinks.plain and simple. but if a homo****** wants to thats fine with me, they can be miserble for awhile till they get a devorce like the rest of us.

[molly747]

I think my favorite quote is from Greg Giraldo who said, "I'm tired of gay men living a carefree, ******ly promiscuous life. Let them start dealing with mortgages and PTA and ****ty diapers from now on."

[Tane Angle]

First off, homo****** is not a preference, homo******s choose to be gay no more than hetero******s choose to be straight. I didn't make a pros/cons list before deciding to be hetero******. My guess is that most you didn't either. Homo******s don't make such lists in regards to their ****** orientation either. The scientific evidence on the matter points to that conclusion.

Also, I'm not talking about religious ceremonies in places of worship. The federal and state governments have no right or business telling religions to marry two people. However, religious marriages are ceremonies, not rights-providing legal contracts. I'm talking about the legal document of a marriage license, and the rights and privileges accorded by said documents.

It is that it is worth remembering that state governments, not the US government, issue marriage licensees. However, the US Constitution has supremacy over all state laws:


US Constitution, Article VI

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

I do not know if all states have "No Bill of Attainder" clauses, but the US Constitution does, and that's all that matters on this issue:


US Constitution, Article I, Section 9

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.

A bill of attainder is a law that denies someone a right passed solely on one's being a type of person. For example, denying homo******s the right to marry.

In response to that argument, some might also bring up felons and voting rights. I am sorry to say, but convicted felons would seem to have voided their voting birthright in committing their felony crime. What's more, convicted felons chose to commit their crime (those who didn't choose are not guilty by reason of insanity, no?). In case you missed the first paragraph of this post, homo******s do not choose to be homo******. Again, while an issue with some parallels, it is still very different.

Also, the US Constitution states quite clearly that legal documents and contracts issued in one state are valid and still applies in other states. That is why if you own a car in your home state but cross the state line, you still own your car. Thus, a couple married legally and validly in Massachusetts is still a married couple if they go to another state:


US Constitution, Article I, Section 1

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Personally, I think they should be allowed to marry. But it doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the US Constitution prohibits, and it prohibits the denial of the right to marriage so long as it is accorded to others. In other words, either everyone has the right, or no one does.

Now some might bring up polygamy as a reason why homo****** marriage should be illegal. They are separate, though similar issues. I don't know what I think of polygamy, but that is a different issue. A similar issue, but still different.

I've worked for the defense of US citizens' lives and rights for the better part of my life. It astounds me that there can be any debate on the issue. It would seem to me that if we deny a class of people a right such as marriage, if we make homo******s second-class citizens, then we make all the death and destruction, all of the suffering and all of the sacrifice, for nothing. Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[molly747]

I find that most people who don't like gay people don't actually know any gay people. Isn't that funny....hmmm...

[SpazzMunky]

Homo******s should have the same rights as hetero******s.

none of you have any good reasons why homo******s shouldn't get married. God pisses me off, they can walk together and be couples but they can't have a peice of paper saying that they are legally married.... It's the christian extremists that are saying no and that marriage is between a man and a women bull****....

[Fintin]

none of you have any good reasons why homo******s shouldn't get married. God pisses me off, they can walk together and be couples but they can't have a peice of paper saying that they are legally married.... It's the christian extremists that are saying no and that marriage is between a man and a women bull****....

um...its not just christian extreamists....it is pritty much any religion...christianity.....muslim....jewish....and not just the extreamists...good night smarty pants

none of you have any good reasons why homo******s shouldn't get married. God pisses me off, they can walk together and be couples but they can't have a peice of paper saying that they are legally married.... It's the christian extremists that are saying no and that marriage is between a man and a women bull****....

um...its not just christian extreamists....it is pritty much any religion...christianity.....muslim....jewish....and not just the extreamists...good night smarty pants

So the laws are dictated by religion now?

[Fintin]

none of you have any good reasons why homo******s shouldn't get married. God pisses me off, they can walk together and be couples but they can't have a peice of paper saying that they are legally married.... It's the christian extremists that are saying no and that marriage is between a man and a women bull****....

um...its not just christian extreamists....it is pritty much any religion...christianity.....muslim....jewish....and not just the extreamists...good night smarty pants

So the laws are dictated by religion now?

look at the back of your doller bills..."in god we trust"....yep

[n4292936]

****e I hope not, if we start legislating morality based on biblical principles I'll be knee deep in felany charges in no time.

[101st__and_1/2]

i really think its simple, you say gay marriage should be aloud because you like lesbians. thats understandable, who doesn't like a good bit of girl on girl action.
look i'll make a diagram to explain it to you.
:oops: = woman
woot =man
:oops: + :oops: = woot

mathmatics truly is the universal language.....when applied to girl on girl action...

[Fintin]

i really think its simple, you say gay marriage should be aloud because you like lesbians. thats understandable, who doesn't like a good bit of girl on girl action.
look i'll make a diagram to explain it to you.
:oops: = woman
woot =man
:oops: + :oops: = woot

mathmatics truly is the universal language.....when applied to girl on girl action...

useing the same model...
woot + woot = :oops: = :slap:

[101st__and_1/2]

excelent fintin, and now for the multiplication rule, when any lesbian action is multiplied by a number greater than zero, happiness occures,
example:
:oops: x :oops: x :oops: x :oops: x :oops: x :oops: = :D :D :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: x 10 ^10,00000

:oops: + woot= ?

[Fintin]

:oops: + woot= ? :hug:

:oops: + woot= ? :hug:

nice......

[Fintin]

:oops: + woot= ? :hug:

nice......

im smooth

[101st__and_1/2]

:oops: + woot= ? :hug:

nice......

but in reality its always
:oops: - :D (you) + :P (best friend) = :-*$

:oops: + woot= ? :hug:

nice......

but in reality its always
:oops: - :D (you) + :P (best friend) = :-*$

that equation is too advanced for me

[Fintin]

:oops: + woot= ? :hug:

nice......

but in reality its always
:oops: - :D (you) + :P (best friend) = :-*$

that equation is too advanced for me

alot is...dont worry...one day you will be a marine...the third guy in from the left on the evolution of man chart

[101st__and_1/2]

were digressing from our point fintin, lesbians rock

[Fintin]

were digressing from our point fintin, lesbians rock

sorry...http://www.romadisconight.com/foto/2003/0614Estate/images/girls_kissing.jpg

[101st__and_1/2]

this is the only thing that can describe my reaction to that fintin a girl x 3
http://hstsci.gsfc.nasa.gov/host/art/launch/KSC-98EC-1448l.jpg

[J-10]

I say "No" or I don't know. American is too modern. ;)

[n4292936]

double post

[n4292936]

string []BedMate = { woot , :oops: , :hug: }
while(! woot + :oops: = bad && woot + :oops: = :hug: )
{
Console.WriteLine("enter the number of partners")
input = Console.ReadLine()
PartnerNum = int.parse(input)
Console.WriteLine("enter the prefered ***: m or f")
input2 = Console.REadLine();
*** = char.parse(input2)
if(***=="f" || ***=="F"){
Console.Write("id like a harem of {0}{1}", PartNum, ***)
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("you are either a female or are gay")
}
return
}
Just thought I'd prepare for my exam with some fun :D

[usa320]

THe obvious compromise is to allow the blonde lesbians that meet certain dimensions and are under the age of 30 to marry. I think that would please both sides no?

In seriousness, i think Civil unions should be allowed, giving them the economical benefits as marriage, but not carrying the name marriage, as we have to draw the moral line somewhere.

Although in a country flooded with drugs, lack of self-responsibilty, crooked lawsuits, a **** industry that is doing better than the airline industry and murders galore, i guess people just arent moral anymore.

[molly747]

were digressing from our point fintin, lesbians rock

sorry...http://www.romadisconight.com/foto/2003/0614Estate/images/girls_kissing.jpg

There's nothing 'lesbian' about that picture. I kiss my girl friends on the cheek all the time. It's just a cultural thing.

[Fintin]

were digressing from our point fintin, lesbians rock

sorry...http://www.romadisconight.com/foto/2003/0614Estate/images/girls_kissing.jpg

There's nothing 'lesbian' about that picture. I kiss my girl friends on the cheek all the time. It's just a cultural thing.

you search the word lesbian on google and see what images you come up with then....that could be posted...i had to work with what i could fined...nexttime ill try harder

[n4292936]

were digressing from our point fintin, lesbians rock

sorry...http://www.romadisconight.com/foto/2003/0614Estate/images/girls_kissing.jpg

There's nothing 'lesbian' about that picture. I kiss my girl friends on the cheek all the time. It's just a cultural thing.
just let us dream wont you Molly? :D :hug:

[Pandy]

Truely, they can do whatever they want, just keep them out of my ass...

[Jack Mehoff]

woot + :oops: + http://geniv2.altervista.org/graficaforum/spermino.gif = http://www.geocities.com/mastersandsubmissives/smilies/babytumbleI.gif

[mocking_loudly_died]

I just watched the Rock Bitch documentary – now I am disturbed.

[Fargin]

Don't know the current stats, but in Denmark where it's allowed, 50% of straight marriages used to break up anyways.

[StarvingStudent47]

I still haven't heard a single explanation of how YOUR life is negatively affected IN ANY WAY if the two lesbians down the street or the two gay guys two blocks over are allowed to be legally married. How are you worse off. Give me tangible specifics.

I think it's shocking that people would oppose something that doesn't hurt anybody. Whatever happened to the land of the free? So you think homo******ity is immoral. Good for you. Don't practice it yourself. What does that have to do with whether a lesbian couple is labeled "life partners" or "married"? Doesn't change a damned thing from where you stand.

As for the whole "homo******ity is immoral, so gays shouldn't be allowed to marry." Shoot, I think a man lying to his wife about where he was on a friday night is immoral, but it ain't ILLEGAL. Laws do not exist to enforce morality; they exist to prevent people from getting hurt (physically, financially, etc). Nobody gets hurt when gays marry. Immoral or no, there's no victim.

[molly747]

I still haven't heard a single explanation of how YOUR life is negatively affected IN ANY WAY if the two lesbians down the street or the two gay guys two blocks over are allowed to be legally married. How are you worse off. Give me tangible specifics.

I think it's shocking that people would oppose something that doesn't hurt anybody. Whatever happened to the land of the free? So you think homo******ity is immoral. Good for you. Don't practice it yourself. What does that have to do with whether a lesbian couple is labeled "life partners" or "married"? Doesn't change a damned thing from where you stand.

As for the whole "homo******ity is immoral, so gays shouldn't be allowed to marry." Shoot, I think a man lying to his wife about where he was on a friday night is immoral, but it ain't ILLEGAL. Laws do not exist to enforce morality; they exist to prevent people from getting hurt (physically, financially, etc). Nobody gets hurt when gays marry. Immoral or no, there's no victim.

Good point. I'm a 1st Amendment purist, myself.

[Herrmannek]

I say NO or if you don't understand mariage institution just liqudate it to all. Marriage purpose isn't making people happy, wear rings etc. Purpose of the marriage is making good enviroment for rising children. Its not privilage or right its cold calculation with must encourage people to make children rise them and secure their future. Allowing homo******s to marry is unjust they give **** to country why the hell they want privilages... Allowing gays to mary is blowing steam in the whistle. Just all.

@Tane Angel there is no proof that gays are determined whatsoever.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Let em marry for gods sake.

[Herrmannek]

Let em marry for gods sake.

Gods sake? you knock wrong doors :)

[StarvingStudent47]

I say NO or if you don't understand mariage institution just liqudate it to all. Marriage purpose isn't making people happy, wear rings etc. Purpose of the marriage is making good enviroment for rising children. Its not privilage or right its cold calculation with must encourage people to make children rise them and secure their future. Allowing homo******s to marry is unjust they give **** to country why the hell they want privilages... Allowing gays to mary is blowing steam in the whistle. Just all.

With all due respect, Herrmannek, I never want to live in a country where you're in charge. You make life sound like a chore instead of a gift.

To paraphrase Equilibrium: "That's circular. You exist to continue your existence. What's the point?"

[Herrmannek]

With all due respect, Herrmannek, I never want to live in a country where you're in charge. You make life sound like a chore instead of a gift.

To paraphrase Equilibrium: "That's circular. You exist to continue your existence. What's the point?"
:) You can fukk your friend without being married :)..As for reproduction it is part of life's definition and if you want it or not, believe god or not, its most important part of human's life and life in general. PLesure is mean not a goal...

[n4292936]

correction: I do not exist for the purpose of procreation. I decide my own purpose, my own fulfillment, and my own goals - not my biological imperative. If I wasn't a sentient being capable of those things fine, perpetuation of my genes would be my overiding concern, and therefore would also be the determinant of my lifes success. However, as I am a sentient being, and am not constrained by my genetic inclination to breed for its sake, I have to disagree with your comment.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Let em marry for gods sake.

Gods sake? you knock wrong doors :)
Huh?

[Gringo]

My stance of gay marriage.............

I don't care is marriage is just bollecks anyway!

[Herrmannek]

correction: I do not exist for the purpose of procreation. I decide my own purpose, my own fulfillment, and my own goals - not my biological imperative. If I wasn't a sentient being capable of those things fine, perpetuation of my genes would be my overiding concern, and therefore would also be the determinant of my lifes success. However, as I am a sentient being, and am not constrained by my genetic inclination to breed for its sake, I have to disagree with your comment.

And this is reason why human beings are going to extuingish... :) Why tha hell we are so suicidal...

[StarvingStudent47]

If the purpose of life is procreation, maybe we should set up some death camps for post-menopausal women. Just sayin'.

[Herrmannek]

Let em marry for gods sake.

Gods sake? you knock wrong doors :)
Huh?

From what I know there is no god who will suport your claims :)

[StarvingStudent47]

correction: I do not exist for the purpose of procreation. I decide my own purpose, my own fulfillment, and my own goals - not my biological imperative. If I wasn't a sentient being capable of those things fine, perpetuation of my genes would be my overiding concern, and therefore would also be the determinant of my lifes success. However, as I am a sentient being, and am not constrained by my genetic inclination to breed for its sake, I have to disagree with your comment.

And this is reason why human beings are going to extuingish... :) Why tha hell we are so suicidal...

What planet do you live on? Cause here on Earth, human population is skyrocketing out of control. ;)

[Herrmannek]

If the purpose of life is procreation, maybe we should set up some death camps for post-menopausal women. Just sayin'.

Post menopausal women are wery helpfull in post procreation process... Did you ever heard about grandmas?

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Let em marry for gods sake.

Gods sake? you knock wrong doors :)
Huh?

From what I know there is no god who will suport your claims :)
What! Have you got a direct line to one, you know this claim of yours cannot be supported in any way. :roll:

[StarvingStudent47]

Let em marry for gods sake.

Gods sake? you knock wrong doors :)
Huh?

From what I know there is no god who will suport your claims :)

I guess Unitarian Universalists and Reform Jews don't have a God then.

[Herrmannek]

And this is reason why human beings are going to extuingish... :) Why tha hell we are so suicidal...

What planet do you live on? Cause here on Earth, human population is skyrocketing out of control. ;)

Planet Earth, Country Poland with negaitve birth-rate within 20-30 years because of lack of young people in working age we will not have money to sponsor pensions of eldery. [I don't know if I'm kidding]Why do you think most european states want euthanasia? Because their high moral grounds doesn't allow to encorage people to make new people instead of that they got idea to kill old and sick?[/I don't know if I'm kidding]

[n4292936]

correction: I do not exist for the purpose of procreation. I decide my own purpose, my own fulfillment, and my own goals - not my biological imperative. If I wasn't a sentient being capable of those things fine, perpetuation of my genes would be my overiding concern, and therefore would also be the determinant of my lifes success. However, as I am a sentient being, and am not constrained by my genetic inclination to breed for its sake, I have to disagree with your comment.

And this is reason why human beings are going to extuingish... :) Why tha hell we are so suicidal...

What planet do you live on? Cause here on Earth, human population is skyrocketing out of control. ;)
The educated bread less then is otherwise the case. There is also a high correlation between intelligence and not breeding. In some places they have actually instituted a reward scheme for those with college degrees who decide to have children.
and Starving Student, populations are buergening out of control only at some locations. Australia, and much of northern Europe are not growing substantially, if at all (in some scando countries the reproduction rate isnt enough to sustain the present population level - its in decline). The problem lies in Africa and Asia mostly where it is a problem because the environment is not able to sustain the population, and it becomes untenable. In places like the US the population is sustainable because of advanced agricultural practices and sound (relative to Zaire) environmental practices.

[StarvingStudent47]

Planet Earth, Country Poland with negaitve birth-rate within 20-30 years because of lack of young people in working age we will not have money to sponsor pensions of eldery. [I don't know if I'm kidding]Why do you think most european states want euthanasia? Because their high moral grounds doesn't allow to encorage people to make new people instead of that they got idea to kill old and sick?[/I don't know if I'm kidding]

I was under the impression that negative growth rates in some European countries were due to people emigrating to other countries, not to a lack of ***.

And I thought that the point of euthanasia was to allow people in great amounts of pain to end their lives in a dignified manner...not to kill off the elderly to lower the tax burden!

[Herrmannek]

Planet Earth, Country Poland with negaitve birth-rate within 20-30 years because of lack of young people in working age we will not have money to sponsor pensions of eldery. [I don't know if I'm kidding]Why do you think most european states want euthanasia? Because their high moral grounds doesn't allow to encorage people to make new people instead of that they got idea to kill old and sick?[/I don't know if I'm kidding]

I was under the impression that negative growth rates in some European countries were due to people emigrating to other countries, not to a lack of ***.

And I thought that the point of euthanasia was to allow people in great amounts of pain to end their lives in a dignified manner...not to kill off the elderly to lower the tax burden!

Its not lack of *** its plenty of that gumy thingys and yelow transparent pills...

As for euthanasia, we are at level that we can give diginfied live without killing. THere is also serious threat that euthanasia will be used not in idea it was created. Tell me how easy is to confince suffering or old man to sign papres allowing euthanasia. THere is no talking about concious choice thats why I'm against any kind of "life" control other than natural. If you had teth pain and no instant chance to go doctor and have not pills you now what I'm talking about...

[Tane Angle]

SS47, if I remember correctly, it's that more and more native Europeans are putting off having children until 30, 35, 40, or never. They want to get their careers in order first (and understandably so) and as a result the generational gaps increase. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Europe today serves as a sink for other areas' populations. However, native Europeans are clearly on the path to lose power (and their continent) to immigrants. I'm not saying that xenophobically. Indeed, if immigrants become citizens than they deserve full power and privileges as granted to native Europeans. This population shift is not automatically good or bad, but it is noteworthy.

Seems like now we're getting into the meaning of life here. Whoa there, I don't think anyone knows that one. But the fact that species instinctively reproduce would indicate that at least a substantial portion of the point of it all might be to safeguard the continuation of the species. After all, the vows of marriage are meant to ensure that pregnant mothers and children are cared for when they are unable to care for themselves.

By the way, why should homo****** couples not be allowed to raise children? That denial of the right to raise children more than anything is second-class citizenship.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[Herrmannek]

By the way, why should homo****** couples not be allowed to raise children? That denial of the right to raise children more than anything is second-class citizenship.


Why they don't have right? They have same rights as everyone else can marry with human of oposite ***, make children and be happy with it.

BTW. Allowing gay marriages to gays implicates other threat...that people who aren't in any relaetionship(brothers normal friends anybody) will marry to get country care, tax cuts, health care etc making that way marriage dead institution with can be write down as not working and sensless, making that way great harm to people realy trying to rise they children....

[Tane Angle]

I know of a few "married couples" consisting of a man and a woman who have no romantic love for one another, but did it just for the economic benefits. We're already beyond that point. The question is, why shouldn't people have the right to give any one person of their choosing the health insurance and tax breaks that can come with marriage?

[Herrmannek]

I know of a few "married couples" consisting of a man and a woman who have no romantic love for one another, but did it just for the economic benefits. We're already beyond that point. The question is, why shouldn't people have the right to give any one person of their choosing the health insurance and tax breaks that can come with marriage?
I didn't said it idoesn't happen already, but why to escalate that phatology, also marriage is institution designed before wave of divorces, so there should be mechanism making such practices not-payable...

[Parzival]

Vote: No.
It something between Man and Women.

[StarvingStudent47]

Vote: No.
It something between Man and Women.

Please say HOW your life is made worse IN ANY WAY if gays can marry.

[Seraphim]

Seems like the people who say "no" is all that they can say regarding to this issue. As Tane, said second class citizenship. Twenty years from now people would be thinking how stupid "we" are that "we" wouldnt let homo******s get married. Do you not think it was stupid that we did not let women work and vote?

[molly747]

If marriage (in the US) is "only between and man and a woman and meant for procreation), then should we null marriages that do not produce children? Do we ban couples who are past childbearing age from marrying? If a person is not able to have children, do we keep them from being married? When couples get married, do we make them sign a contract that says they must produce children? It all just seems unconstitutional to me. We may not agree with it, but the basis of our country's laws is the constitution.

[Cactuar]

Question for people who would allow homo******s to marry (which includes myself). What limit would you put on your beliefs on what liberties people have when they want to marry? What if a polygamist wanted to marry multiple women or men? How would you set the moral bar?

Personally, I wouldn't care. I think marriage shouldn't be limited until it becomes a marriage without consent, such as animal marriage, which could be seen as a strange thing, because a dog can't give its own consent.

Or should I start a new topic on the limits.

[Fintin]

simmer down folks....

[Herrmannek]

If marriage (in the US) is "only between and man and a woman and meant for procreation), then should we null marriages that do not produce children? Do we ban couples who are past childbearing age from marrying? If a person is not able to have children, do we keep them from being married? When couples get married, do we make them sign a contract that says they must produce children? It all just seems unconstitutional to me. We may not agree with it, but the basis of our country's laws is the constitution.

How dou you know they can't have children or they will not be able to have them in future? In case of homo******s its obvious :)

[molly747]

If marriage (in the US) is "only between and man and a woman and meant for procreation), then should we null marriages that do not produce children? Do we ban couples who are past childbearing age from marrying? If a person is not able to have children, do we keep them from being married? When couples get married, do we make them sign a contract that says they must produce children? It all just seems unconstitutional to me. We may not agree with it, but the basis of our country's laws is the constitution.

How dou you know they can't have children or they will not be able to have them in future? In case of homo******s its obvious :)

A doctor's test. Or if they do not have functioning reproductive organs (say, a man who had testicular cancer and had his ********s removed, or a woman who had a hysterectomy). Duh. Hermannek, how old are you?

[Seraphim]

If marriage (in the US) is "only between and man and a woman and meant for procreation), then should we null marriages that do not produce children? Do we ban couples who are past childbearing age from marrying? If a person is not able to have children, do we keep them from being married? When couples get married, do we make them sign a contract that says they must produce children? It all just seems unconstitutional to me. We may not agree with it, but the basis of our country's laws is the constitution.

How dou you know they can't have children or they will not be able to have them in future? In case of homo******s its obvious :)

Actually no...they released this report about 2weeks ago about fertilizing an egg without a male or sperm.

[Herrmannek]

If marriage (in the US) is "only between and man and a woman and meant for procreation), then should we null marriages that do not produce children? Do we ban couples who are past childbearing age from marrying? If a person is not able to have children, do we keep them from being married? When couples get married, do we make them sign a contract that says they must produce children? It all just seems unconstitutional to me. We may not agree with it, but the basis of our country's laws is the constitution.

How dou you know they can't have children or they will not be able to have them in future? In case of homo******s its obvious :)

Actually no...they released this report about 2weeks ago about fertilizing an egg without a male or sperm.

Parthenoghenesis never will be alowed method of curing inferlity :) between female homo****** pairs...

[StarvingStudent47]

Question for people who would allow homo******s to marry (which includes myself). What limit would you put on your beliefs on what liberties people have when they want to marry? What if a polygamist wanted to marry multiple women or men? How would you set the moral bar?

The issue with polygamy is not a "moral" issue. I have no moral issue against adult polygamy. EDIT--let me rephrase. I personally have a moral problem with it. But I have no problem with it being legalized. Adult polygamy is a victimless "crime."

The problem is that all the legal benefits of marriage are meant to confer benefits from one person to another. You work for a certain employer, your husband/wife also gets health and dental benefits. It DOES NOT MATTER whether that person is male or female, the employer still only has to give benefits to two people for every one employee. If you die without a will, all your property reverts to your spouse. It DOES NOT MATTER whether that person is male or female, the property is still reverting to a single trusted individual.

But what happens with polygamy? All of a sudden, this rule doesn't work anymore. Employers have to provide medical/dental benefits to 4, 6, 30 people for every single employee. Property can't transfer to your "spouse" if there's 30 of them.

The American legal institutions of marriage make sense in a gender-neutral manner. They do not make sense in a polygamist manner.

I don't think that people should be SENT TO JAIL for polygamy. But I think they should only be able to designate one of their spouses as the "spouse for legal reasons" (inheritance, medical/dental benefits, etc). If they want to have private contracts where the husband guarantees to provide equal medical/dental benefits to all spouses, or they write a will to address how property will be divided, that's fine and good. They should be allowed to do that. But all laws mentioning married couples would have to be completely rewritten if the law recognized polygamy. This is not the case with gay marriage.

[Tane Angle]

Fintin, I believe it's ****ounced "Simma Dahn Na!" p-)

Regarding reproduction, take a look at invitro fertilization, sperm banks, egg banks, surrogate mothers, adoption, etc. Homo****** couples already have children the same way that infertile couples do. It's no problem to have a child in that regard. The difference today is that only one person in a homo****** couple can be granted legal guardianship, and thus if, say, a woman who gave birth to a child through invitro fertilization dies, the other woman in the relationship will have no legal guardianship and the child will automatically go to the next of kin.

Good point Molly. I'm 54, and my wife isn't far behind me. I'd say the chances of having any more children is pretty low. Will our marriage now be annulled?

Cactuar, while I don't really know what I think regarding polygamy, I would say that perhaps each US citizen is granted one other person (besides family members) to give the financial and legal benefits of marriage to. Thus, it remains equal rights. If one person gives their health insurance to five adults, and another gives it to only one, then the second person has fewer rights, no? However, it's a different, while related, issue. Edit: SS47 said it much better, so just ignore this paragraph I guess.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[Upfrontreporting]

Have not taken the trouble of reading the whole thread, so I might have missed out on some important points.

Cut to the bone I couldn't care less if a gay couple wants top get married, anyone who contributes to society should should share the same benefits as anyone else. (a bit naive wish, nevertheles this is how I feel).

Not knowing if there are any gay (male or female) people in my social circles, I would still wish them good luck if they chose to get married, I don't feel threathned by that.
I don't have to understand how everyone choose to live their lives, I don't need to as long as their way of living doesn't impair my life.


regards.

[molly747]

The whole thing just seems like an underinclusive law (if my memory of Communication Law class serves). Like, you cannot ban a religious group from conducting (noncruel) animal sacrifices because companies can butcher animals for food. It seems like a stretch, but, in the eyes of the law, the end result is the same: a dead animal. Now, how that relates to gay marriage....

[hank]

Wow, tons of misinfo here.

First, animal sacrifice is illegal for religious purposes in many places. There is no "right" under the first amendment to kill animals. There are cases where certain religions have won cases involving animal sacrifice, but not on the broad ground that they had a first amendment right to do so. molly's point about "inclusiveness" is not a constitutional one. There may be issues if you let one religion do it and not another, but otherwise what is good for presbyterians is good for any other religion. If killing animals is illegal for everybody then the constitution is satisfied.

Now, to marriage. Purpose and all that crap is really not the relevant question. The point is understanding the IMPLICATIONS of marriage and the different definitions that people constantly fail to recognize.

The first definition of marriage is the religious kind. Adam and Eve and procreation and all that. Clearly gay marriage is not acceptable under that definition. Your particular church getrs to make the decisions on that and the first amendment protects that decision. OK.

The second definition is the one that Tane keeps bringing up. The legal definition. The implications and the rules are different. If we let church, any church dictate what is and is not LEGAL marriage, then the first amendment is in play.

ON what basis do we deny all the implications, and benefits, to someone based on a choice (or not depending on your view) that is admittedly legal? That is the question you must ask.

I vote yes.

hank

[molly747]

Tee hee, I think I was hungover in class that day. But I do remember the animal sacrifice metaphor... rofl

[ZeroPositive]

I voted no.... I don't see anything wrong with having gay couples adopt, or for them to be together and I know quite a few gay people, but I object to marriage... unless they do it for a legal requirement...

Anyway I see the human race in its natural state, we need to reproduce for our species to survive... logically if our brains were smaller and we didn't think so much I look to animals and compare the basic instincts...
I probably have written this down totally wrong but as someone said earlier Marriage is overated... my parents are divorced but I grew up not being a total basket case :)

Please don't bash me too badly as I said no :S

[Midtown]

I think my favorite quote is from Greg Giraldo who said, "I'm tired of gay men living a carefree, ******ly promiscuous life. Let them start dealing with mortgages and PTA and ****ty diapers from now on."

That guy is funny as hell, easily one of my favorite comedians on Quinns show.

[molly747]

Anyway I see the human race in its natural state, we need to reproduce for our species to survive... logically if our brains were smaller and we didn't think so much I look to animals and compare the basic instincts...


rofl I don't think gays are going to take over the world and ban childbirth.

[Herrmannek]

Anyway I see the human race in its natural state, we need to reproduce for our species to survive... logically if our brains were smaller and we didn't think so much I look to animals and compare the basic instincts...


rofl I don't think gays are going to take over the world and ban childbirth.

We can can argue about meaning of tha marriage and it social role etc... but gays are going to take over and will ban chidlbirth in Poland they already did in some way... Those homo-femino-idiot-liberals-pinko-commies-******-revisionists want to make free anticonception and in the same move they don't want to support making new children, even polish problem aren't AIDS, overbirth and other problems related to extensive ****** activity to not say they are oposite... :cantbeli:

[molly747]

Anyway I see the human race in its natural state, we need to reproduce for our species to survive... logically if our brains were smaller and we didn't think so much I look to animals and compare the basic instincts...


rofl I don't think gays are going to take over the world and ban childbirth.

We can can argue about meaning of tha marriage and it social role etc... but gays are going to take over and will ban chidlbirth in Poland they already did in some way... Those homo-femino-idiot-liberals-pinko-commies-******-revisionists want to make free anticonception and in the same move they don't want to support making new children, even polish problem aren't AIDS, overbirth and other problems related to extensive ****** activity to not say they are oposite... :cantbeli:

I think I just pulled an eye muscle from rolling them so hard...

[Seraphim]

Anyway I see the human race in its natural state, we need to reproduce for our species to survive... logically if our brains were smaller and we didn't think so much I look to animals and compare the basic instincts...


rofl I don't think gays are going to take over the world and ban childbirth.

We can can argue about meaning of tha marriage and it social role etc... but gays are going to take over and will ban chidlbirth in Poland they already did in some way... Those homo-femino-idiot-liberals-pinko-commies-******-revisionists want to make free anticonception and in the same move they don't want to support making new children, even polish problem aren't AIDS, overbirth and other problems related to extensive ****** activity to not say they are oposite... :cantbeli:

What kind of shape is the educational system in Poland?

[Herrmannek]

What kind of shape is the educational system in Poland?

What do you mean saying shape? I don't think that kind of system have shape at all ? :)

If you want to know if education is good... it depends mainly from student and his ambitions and tallent like everywhere...

If you want know if it is secular...Yes it is

If you want to know if its free.. Yes it is...

If you want know something else just ask...

[Resevoir Hogs]

My question is what is the big deal? I don't give two ****s what homos do just as long as they don't bother me.

I figure let em "marry" each other so they'll stfu and get off my TV. But don't expect me to change my own definition of marriage or support their choices. You need a bride and groom for marriage plain and simple.

Basically it's their life and I don't care what they do but my own beliefs assure me of what marriage means to me and my family.

[Seraphim]

I figure let em "marry" each other so they'll stfu and get off my TV.

That quote should go down in history. rofl

[Resevoir Hogs]

It's sooo annoying everytime I turn on the tube it's queer eye this and bum rush that and I just wanna sit down without becoming nautious.

[StarvingStudent47]

We can can argue about meaning of tha marriage and it social role etc... but gays are going to take over and will ban chidlbirth in Poland they already did in some way... Those homo-femino-idiot-liberals-pinko-commies-******-revisionists want to make free anticonception and in the same move they don't want to support making new children, even polish problem aren't AIDS, overbirth and other problems related to extensive ****** activity to not say they are oposite... :cantbeli:

This was a joke. Right? Tell me this was a joke.

[Herrmannek]

We can can argue about meaning of tha marriage and it social role etc... but gays are going to take over and will ban chidlbirth in Poland they already did in some way... Those homo-femino-idiot-liberals-pinko-commies-******-revisionists want to make free anticonception and in the same move they don't want to support making new children, even polish problem aren't AIDS, overbirth and other problems related to extensive ****** activity to not say they are oposite... :cantbeli:

This was a joke. Right? Tell me this was a joke.

What part?
Yes commies here want make free love tolly free :)
Yes they also want cut help in other branches like suporting multichildren families, **** up sumthing in "rasing vacations" for new mothres/fathers etc
We don't have real problem with AIDS and HIV, those numbers are statisticaly much lower than in other western countries..
Also birthrate AFAIK is second to lowest in Europe :)

[Seraphim]

Is anyone else here going to voice their opinions why homo******s shouldnt get married besides Herrmannek?

[Herrmannek]

Anybody?

[Brzeczyszczykiewicz]

Anybody?

:P

There's only silence... ;)

[mack pl]

Anybody?

:P

There's only silence... ;)

"zapadła cisza wręcz grobowa i nie powiedział nikt ni słowa"-Kaliber44

btw Im against homo****** married, because.............Im against ;) :lol:

[StarvingStudent47]

btw Im against homo****** married, because.............Im against ;) :lol:

I'm noticing a trend here.

[mack pl]

btw Im against homo****** married, because.............Im against ;) :lol:

I'm noticing a trend here.
Im guessing its trendy to support this homo****** marrieds ;) Well, I have my fukin right to say -NO, and you have right to say-Hey Yeah ;) :lol:

[Fargin]

p-) it's a pirat smily

[McLane]

I voted for YES!

[Moledet]

Hmm...Why not? I don't see a problem with the fact that gays will get married. I find homo******ity to be disgusting but that doesn't mean that I have to enter their underwears. I'm sure that they are normal people (in tel aviv they sometimes look a bit mad when they are walking with very short pants and a baby carriage).

[StarvingStudent47]

Im guessing its trendy to support this homo****** marrieds ;) Well, I have my fukin right to say -NO, and you have right to say-Hey Yeah ;) :lol:

But I can, and HAVE, explained my position. Most of the "no" people just say "no" and leave it at that.

[mack pl]

Im guessing its trendy to support this homo****** marrieds ;) Well, I have my fukin right to say -NO, and you have right to say-Hey Yeah ;) :lol:

But I can, and HAVE, explained my position. Most of the "no" people just say "no" and leave it at that.
so what? Im against, thats all. I dont want to explain that. But If you want- well, Im intolerate person, I hate homo******s blah blah -Happy now ;) :lol:

seriously, I think they should't have this right in Poland, maybe we are more conservative here, but i dont care. Im not religious person or something, but in my opinion only man and women should have this right to get married. If they want to live togheter(homo******s) they could live now, nobody says NO. But married is something more........huh........Well, Im against ;) :lol:

regards :)

[Tranceaddict]

I cant think of ONE reason why they shouldn't be able to get married.

[mack pl]

I cant think of ONE reason why they shouldn't be able to get married.
it looks weird p-) :lol:



ohh, well, maybe only for me ;) :)

[Tranceaddict]

:lol:

APART FROM THAT!!

but seriously, i dont think that the people who are against gay marriage have any real reasons except for that they are "just against it...and stuff"

[mack pl]

:lol:

APART FROM THAT!!
dont get it :( :roll:

:|

[Midtown]

http://www.thouck.com/uf/gallery/BK.jpg

[Jack Mehoff]

You don't have to be gay to get buttsex.

[Seraphim]

You don't have to be gay to get buttsex.

Kinky

[Jack Mehoff]

That's my middle name

[Tranceaddict]

dont get it :( :roll:

:|

I was just kidding. :)


As for the "buttsex", that has absolutely nothing to do with their rights for marriage. There arent any reasons as to why they shouldnt be allowed except for narrow-mindedness.

[Herrmannek]

dont get it :( :roll:

:|

I was just kidding. :)


As for the "buttsex", that has absolutely nothing to do with their rights for marriage. There arent any reasons as to why they shouldnt be allowed except for narrow-mindedness.

Why...I'm sure in next few years science will prove that homo******ity is deviation like pedofile, zoofile, necrofile and any other shiat...

And you can't mary sheep :), but there is no reason other than narrow-mindedness against it :)

[mack pl]

dont get it :( :roll:

:|

I was just kidding. :)


As for the "buttsex", that has absolutely nothing to do with their rights for marriage. There arent any reasons as to why they shouldnt be allowed except for narrow-mindedness.

Why...I'm sure in next few years science will prove that homo******ity is deviation like pedofile, zoofile, necrofile and any other shiat...

And you can't mary sheep :), but there is no reason other than narrow-mindedness against it :)

well, few years ago they talking that homo******ity is deviation ;) So, you have hope that some revisionist scientists exists ;) :lol:

[Midtown]

Oh Im WELL AWARE. My girlfriend and I were just discussing that today.
I was telling her how I aways get what I want, sometimes it just takes a while, she goes no you havent, you havnt gotten buttsex from me, I go "It's only a matter of time."

[Seraphim]

Oh Im WELL AWARE. My girlfriend and I were just discussing that today.
I was telling her how I aways get what I want, sometimes it just takes a while, she goes no you havent, you havnt gotten buttsex from me, I go "It's only a matter of time."

LoL classic.

[Midtown]

silly girl will bend to my might. then get it in the butt. woot.

[Seraphim]

silly girl will bend to my might. then get it in the butt. woot.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12196&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=16

[RomanS]

If tomorrow we all turn GAY, and only have *** with our kind. HUMANS will not be able to continue in this existance.

NO TO GAYS !

[Herrmannek]

If tomorrow we all turn GAY, and only have *** with our kind. HUMANS will not be able to continue in this existance.

NO TO GAYS !

Once* talked like a men :)


*at least as for today :)

[RomanS]

If tomorrow we all turn GAY, and only have *** with our kind. HUMANS will not be able to continue in this existance.

NO TO GAYS !

Once* talked like a men :)


*at least as for today :)

Hermanek , dont you agree? Gays are not GOOD

[perdurabo]

If tomorrow we all turn GAY, and only have *** with our kind. HUMANS will not be able to continue in this existance.

NO TO GAYS !
whooo i agree with you! prabably first time this day will be remembered! :lol:

[Seraphim]

Females dont need males to get pregnant.

[Herrmannek]

Hermanek , dont you agree? Gays are not GOOD

Agree... I was alone for first 10 pages of siscussion :)

[Herrmannek]

Females dont need males to get pregnant.

Repeating that over and over you make things ever worse :)

[Seraphim]

Females dont need males to get pregnant.

Repeating that over and over you make things ever worse :)

Im just telling you how it is.

[Herrmannek]

Females dont need males to get pregnant.

Repeating that over and over you make things ever worse :)

Im just telling you how it is.
I know, but why all girls in neighberhood must know that too?

[RomanS]

Females dont need males to get pregnant.

HUH?
yeah they do. They need sperm. And only males have it.

[Herrmannek]

Females dont need males to get pregnant.

HUH?
yeah they do. They need sperm. And only males have it.
Ever heard about parthenogenesis?


parthenogenesis [pär"thunOjen'usis] ****unciation Key

parthenogenesis [Gr.,=virgin birth], in biology, a form of reproduction in which the ovum develops into a new individual without fertilization. Natural parthenogenesis has been observed in many lower animals (it is characteristic of the rotifers), especially insects, e.g., the aphid. In many social insects, such as the honeybee and the ant, the unfertilized eggs give rise to the male drones and the fertilized eggs to the female workers and queens. The phenomenon of parthenogenesis was discovered in the 18th cent. by Charles Bonnet. In 1900, Jacques Loeb accomplished the first clear case of artificial parthenogenesis when he pricked unfertilized frog eggs with a needle and found that in some cases normal embryonic development ensued. Artificial parthenogenesis has since been achieved in almost all major groups of animals, although it usually results in incomplete and abnormal development. Numerous mechanical and chemical agents have been used to stimulate unfertilized eggs. In 1936, Gregory Pincus induced parthenogenesis in mammalian (rabbit) eggs by temperature change and chemical agents. No successful experiments with human parthenogenesis have been reported. The phenomenon is rarer among plants (where it is called parthenocarpy) than among animals. Unusual patterns of heredity can occur in parthenogenetic organisms. For example, offspring produced by some types are identical in all inherited respects to the mother.
Few weeks ago or month they did it with mice...

[perdurabo]

Hmm...Why not? I don't see a problem with the fact that gays will get married. I find homo******ity to be disgusting but that doesn't mean that I have to enter their underwears. I'm sure that they are normal people (in tel aviv they sometimes look a bit mad when they are walking with very short pants and a baby carriage).
any one made research on how children from this type of "familis" behave? how their psychic is constructed? can they make "normal" bonds with oposite sexes?
This is my main concern about gay maridge, maridge is mainly for breeding children. We all know that children from broken familis have problems so how it is about gay-breed children?

[dhfactory]

I don't care if it's right or wrong.

I don't like it. I've added this to my list of things to stop before i die.

nuf said.

-Sean

[Fioraon]

Should a man be able to marry his horse and have *** with it given the horse gives concent through actions? I mean why not? Its good for both the man and the horse and it has no effect on my life or the way I function....

Should a man be able to marry his horse and have *** with it given the horse gives concent through actions? I mean why not? Its good for both the man and the horse and it has no effect on my life or the way I function....

I'm just wondering how the horse gives his concent?

[Midtown]

Should a man be able to marry his horse and have *** with it given the horse gives concent through actions? I mean why not? Its good for both the man and the horse and it has no effect on my life or the way I function....

Dude, you bang horses huh.

[Tane Angle]

Well, perhaps marriage should be limited to two beings that are genetically homo sapien sapien, no? Of course, centuries down the road, we might have to adjust those laws to allow for bi-species marriages. ;)

Regarding parthenogenesis, there are also things like adoption, surrogate mothers, and invitro fertilization.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[hank]

Should a man be able to marry his horse and have *** with it given the horse gives concent through actions? I mean why not? Its good for both the man and the horse and it has no effect on my life or the way I function....

Do I really need to answer this? Well, I guess so.

It works like this. The right to marry is fundamental under the constitution, the right to have *** with a horse is not. Therefore, the government needs a compelling interest to stop or limit marriage and not so for the horse, only a rational basis. Most states offer the reason against bestiality that it is unsafe (meaning it spreads diseases) plus its an "unnatural" act. Traditionally this has been enough because the standard to justify such a law is low.

For marriage, in the other hand, the standard is compelling. That means that the right to marry is fundamental and may not be abridged without a compelling reason. Additionally, that reason may not be a religious one, lest we have an entanglement problem.

As yet, our Supreme Court has not decided the issue of whether any of the proffered reasons against non man-woman marriages are compelling, nor whehter the right to smae-*** marriage is also fundamental. Interestingly, just last year, Justice Kennedy announced for a 6-3 court that the right to have gay *** in your home was fundamental. This leads many scholars smarter than ol' hank to think the next logical step is that ******ity is a suspect classification and also that same-*** marriage is a fundamental right. Either reault would liekly entitle gays who want to marry to the protections involved in forcing the government to come up with a compelling reason for limiting said marriages.

Also, how the hell does a horse consent? Consent requires knowing and voluntary agreement. Animals traditionally have been incapable of such consent from a legal standpoint. Also, "good for the horse" is not relelvant. The relevant groups are society and the individual. Just so you know.

That is probably more info than you wanted. Your obvious ignorance (not stupidity, just ignorance) on this topic prompted this reply. If you have any questions, I'll do my best. The kind of BS you posted gets spread much easier than the truth.

hank

[UkrainianAmerican]

Gay people have a bad sense of style.

Gay people have a bad sense of style.

I wouldn't be talking.... ;)

[Moledet]

Hmm...Why not? I don't see a problem with the fact that gays will get married. I find homo******ity to be disgusting but that doesn't mean that I have to enter their underwears. I'm sure that they are normal people (in tel aviv they sometimes look a bit mad when they are walking with very short pants and a baby carriage).
any one made research on how children from this type of "familis" behave? how their psychic is constructed? can they make "normal" bonds with oposite sexes?
This is my main concern about gay maridge, maridge is mainly for breeding children. We all know that children from broken familis have problems so how it is about gay-breed children?
Actualy, there's a celebrity here that he and his friend (male) adopted a child 18 years ago and now their child is straight.

[gilgoul]

Why not, married or an other form of recognition, doesn`t bother me more than that

[Fox2]

Most states offer the reason against bestiality that it is unsafe (meaning it spreads diseases) plus its an "unnatural" act. Traditionally this has been enough because the standard to justify such a law is low.

I am currently undecided as far as the poll goes, but I thought I'd ask this question of hank;

Isn't the above reasoning also applicable to homo******ity? (spreading diseases like AIDS, and "unnatural" in that our reproductive organs are not designed to be used male-male or female-female)

[hank]

Most states offer the reason against bestiality that it is unsafe (meaning it spreads diseases) plus its an "unnatural" act. Traditionally this has been enough because the standard to justify such a law is low.

I am currently undecided as far as the poll goes, but I thought I'd ask this question of hank;

Isn't the above reasoning also applicable to homo******ity? (spreading diseases like AIDS, and "unnatural" in that our reproductive organs are not designed to be used male-male or female-female)

Well that was the other part I did not go into. There is also a least restrictive means to advance the compelling interest. There are plenty of ways to stop the spread of aids that do not involve banning gay marriage (condoms, abstinence). As far as I know, no state has advanced that argument, but I'm not an expert on that by any means. My thought is that the SC would not buy it for any number of reasons, the most likely of which is that banning marriage between gays is overly restrictive to advance any interest (assumign it is compelling whic has not been decided). Good question

hank

[StarvingStudent47]

I am currently undecided as far as the poll goes, but I thought I'd ask this question of hank;

Isn't the above reasoning also applicable to homo******ity? (spreading diseases like AIDS, and "unnatural" in that our reproductive organs are not designed to be used male-male or female-female)

Check your figures. Most HIV transmissions are between straight people. Ordinary ******l intercourse is a very easy way to transmit HIV. There is not a single STD on the planet which can be transmitted through gay *** that cannot also be transmitted through straight ***.

And if you want to talk about percentage chance of transmissions, HIV is actually far LESS likely to be transmitted through cunnilingus than through any type of *** involving ***** (including oral). So maybe ONLY lesbians should be allowed to marry? ;)

[captainfly]

This thread asks for personal views, and so for this reason I will answer, If you are not prepare to respect someone asked for opinion, then don't bother reading any further.

I don't think homo******s should be allowed to breath let alone get married, their whole existence shows utter contempt for humanity and its core values. Surely it has to be a choice, as if it were genetic how has this gene been passed down? surely it is an evolutionary dead end?
So in brief making the choice to be homo****** is choosing to loose your humanity, so no human rights issue there then.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I am currently undecided as far as the poll goes, but I thought I'd ask this question of hank;

Isn't the above reasoning also applicable to homo******ity? (spreading diseases like AIDS, and "unnatural" in that our reproductive organs are not designed to be used male-male or female-female)

Check your figures. Most HIV transmissions are between straight people. Ordinary ******l intercourse is a very easy way to transmit HIV. There is not a single STD on the planet which can be transmitted through gay *** that cannot also be transmitted through straight ***.

And if you want to talk about percentage chance of transmissions, HIV is actually far LESS likely to be transmitted through cunnilingus than through any type of *** involving ***** (including oral). So maybe ONLY lesbians should be allowed to marry? ;)

Er...I think the numbers tell a different story (if I'm reading it right). This is from http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hasr1402/table1.htm

Estimated numbers of diagnoses of HIV/AIDS, by year of diagnosis and selected characteristics of persons, 1999–2002—30 areas with confidential name-based HIV infection reporting :

Exposure category= Male adult or adolescent
Male-to-male ****** contact 134,357
Injection drug use 43,426
Male-to-male ****** contact and injection drug use 17,758
Hetero****** contact 30,337
Other 2,694

Female adult or adolescent
Injection drug use 22,166
Hetero****** contact 56,492
Other 1,678

And I don't even wanna know what they consider "Other" (didn't this come from monkeys?)

Heh heh, based on the numbers, it looks like women have good reason to be pissed off at IV drug using & bi****** men! :)

Another thing I noticed when I was digging for these numbers is that all the studies seemed to be ass-deep (no pun intended) in ultra PC language. Studies with names like "Be Proud! And Responsible"...one can only imagine the unbiased and scientifically sound conclusions of such a study.

[Seraphim]

Gay people have a bad sense of style.

I wouldn't be talking.... ;)

Zing...but to each his own.

[WolverineBlue]

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/551_1088740111_faccina523.gif

rofl rofl rofl

[Colt45]

Homo******ity is a psychological problem. Those of you that argue that god existed, he would have let men have babies if there were supposed to be gay couples running around. Thats why it takes opposites to attract.

[Seraphim]

Homo******ity is a psychological problem. Those of you that argue that god existed, he would have let men have babies if there were supposed to be gay couples running around. Thats why it takes opposites to attract.

Huh What??

Was too busy looking at your avatar.
Who is that by the way? Anyone in particular or just some internet skank.

[Truthsayer]

Hmm...Why not? I don't see a problem with the fact that gays will get married. I find homo******ity to be disgusting but that doesn't mean that I have to enter their underwears. I'm sure that they are normal people (in tel aviv they sometimes look a bit mad when they are walking with very short pants and a baby carriage).
any one made research on how children from this type of "familis" behave? how their psychic is constructed? can they make "normal" bonds with oposite sexes?
This is my main concern about gay maridge, maridge is mainly for breeding children. We all know that children from broken familis have problems so how it is about gay-breed children?

A small study has shown that kids with gay parents have higher grades then other kids and so on. This would most likely be due to that only very dedicated gays get kids - but any moron can screw a woman and then be trapped for life with a kid he didn't want to have...

[Herrmannek]

Hmm...Why not? I don't see a problem with the fact that gays will get married. I find homo******ity to be disgusting but that doesn't mean that I have to enter their underwears. I'm sure that they are normal people (in tel aviv they sometimes look a bit mad when they are walking with very short pants and a baby carriage).
any one made research on how children from this type of "familis" behave? how their psychic is constructed? can they make "normal" bonds with oposite sexes?
This is my main concern about gay maridge, maridge is mainly for breeding children. We all know that children from broken familis have problems so how it is about gay-breed children?

A small study has shown that kids with gay parents have higher grades then other kids and so on. This would most likely be due to that only very dedicated gays get kids - but any moron can screw a woman and then be trapped for life with a kid he didn't want to have...

First that those gays must be "realy" dedicated if they have children now so that study is worth **** :). If you will compare those children with children of people who had realy big problem geting children you will see no difference...

[Colt45]

Homo******ity is a psychological problem. Those of you that argue that god existed, he would have let men have babies if there were supposed to be gay couples running around. Thats why it takes opposites to attract.

Huh What??

Was too busy looking at your avatar.
Who is that by the way? Anyone in particular or just some internet skank.


SKANK!?!?!?!? HOW DARE YOU!!! LoL its Vida Guerra, baddest ass italian hotty this side of the atlantic =P.

[Truthsayer]

First that those gays must be "realy" dedicated if they have children now so that study is worth **** :). If you will compare those children with children of people who had realy big problem geting children you will see no difference...

I fail to see your objection...some gays adopt, some go togwther with another gay couple (of opposite ***) and arrange to have kids and so on.

That being said, yes, they are dedicated and more stable then some families.

Not all, ofcourse. And not all gays are nice people.

Um...aaanyway, being allowed to be married: yes.

Time for gays to see their sexlife go down the toilet too. ;)

[Herrmannek]

First that those gays must be "realy" dedicated if they have children now so that study is worth **** :). If you will compare those children with children of people who had realy big problem geting children you will see no difference...

I fail to see your objection...some gays adopt, some go togwther with another gay couple (of opposite ***) and arrange to have kids and so on.

That being said, yes, they are dedicated and more stable then some families.

Not all, ofcourse. And not all gays are nice people.

Um...aaanyway, being allowed to be married: yes.

Time for gays to see their sexlife go down the toilet too. ;)

Ther are dedicated not because they are gay, but beacause to have baby gay must be dedicated... Shortly when gay adoption will be allowed statistics can change diametraly as not so dedicated gays also will be able to have children...

[Durandal]

Thats why it takes opposites to attract.

Well, every gay and bi****** person on this planet proves this point of yours wrong.

rofl

[Resevoir Hogs]

Perversion isn't proof of anything

[Durandal]

Perversion isn't proof of anything

Huh?

[Fintin]

the jibbly bits dont match up...

[Durandal]

the jibbly bits dont match up...

Oh yeah, that is sooooo perverted.

rofl

[Moledet]

First that those gays must be "realy" dedicated if they have children now so that study is worth **** :). If you will compare those children with children of people who had realy big problem geting children you will see no difference...

I fail to see your objection...some gays adopt, some go togwther with another gay couple (of opposite ***) and arrange to have kids and so on.

That being said, yes, they are dedicated and more stable then some families.

Not all, ofcourse. And not all gays are nice people.

Um...aaanyway, being allowed to be married: yes.

Time for gays to see their sexlife go down the toilet too. ;)

Ther are dedicated not because they are gay, but beacause to have baby gay must be dedicated... Shortly when gay adoption will be allowed statistics can change diametraly as not so dedicated gays also will be able to have children...
Dunno how it is in your country, but here gay people can adopt kids, still I don't see many gay teenagers in Israel.

[EvanL]

First that those gays must be "realy" dedicated if they have children now so that study is worth **** :). If you will compare those children with children of people who had realy big problem geting children you will see no difference...

I fail to see your objection...some gays adopt, some go togwther with another gay couple (of opposite ***) and arrange to have kids and so on.

That being said, yes, they are dedicated and more stable then some families.

Not all, ofcourse. And not all gays are nice people.

Um...aaanyway, being allowed to be married: yes.

Time for gays to see their sexlife go down the toilet too. ;)

Ther are dedicated not because they are gay, but beacause to have baby gay must be dedicated... Shortly when gay adoption will be allowed statistics can change diametraly as not so dedicated gays also will be able to have children...
Dunno how it is in your country, but here gay people can adopt kids, still I don't see many gay teenagers in Israel.
Except for Bornt to Kill, but he lives in LA. :D
On a serious note. I know quite a few gay Israeli teens. Seeing as Israel has only 6million ppl, they wouldnt have such high numbers of gay teens.

[Moledet]

First that those gays must be "realy" dedicated if they have children now so that study is worth **** :). If you will compare those children with children of people who had realy big problem geting children you will see no difference...

I fail to see your objection...some gays adopt, some go togwther with another gay couple (of opposite ***) and arrange to have kids and so on.

That being said, yes, they are dedicated and more stable then some families.

Not all, ofcourse. And not all gays are nice people.

Um...aaanyway, being allowed to be married: yes.

Time for gays to see their sexlife go down the toilet too. ;)

Ther are dedicated not because they are gay, but beacause to have baby gay must be dedicated... Shortly when gay adoption will be allowed statistics can change diametraly as not so dedicated gays also will be able to have children...
Dunno how it is in your country, but here gay people can adopt kids, still I don't see many gay teenagers in Israel.
Except for Bornt to Kill, but he lives in LA. :D
On a serious note. I know quite a few gay Israeli teens. Seeing as Israel has only 6million ppl, they wouldnt have such high numbers of gay teens.
I don't know, I haven't met many gay teens, but there are many gay people in Tel Aviv (IMO, most of Tel Aviv's population need to be hospitalized for mental problems and not for being gay).