By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Did Miss California lose because of her opinion on gay marriage?

WessleWoggle on 21 April 2009
MrBubbles said:
WessleWoggle said:
MrBubbles said:
eve was the product of god and adams homosexual relationship.

 

 

Actually, according to the Yezidi people, Adam was a hemaphrodite.

The Yezidi people think they are decendants of Adam and not Eve.

 

wow...i just went and looked them up.(as i never heard of them before)

"Before the roles of the sexes were determined, Adam and Eve quarreled about which of them provided the creative element in the begetting of children. Each stored their seed in a jar which was then sealed. When Eve's was opened it was full of insects and other unpleasant creatures, but inside Adam's jar was a beautiful boychild."

i wonder if the Jar counts as a parent

I thought the Jar was a metaphor for the womb.

 



Around the Network
SciFiBoy on 21 April 2009
Kasz216 said:

Well the same logic you use here would seem to indicate that it's wrong to make it so that guys can't enter a ladies room to use the bathroom.

Or play in womens sports or any other sort of thing.

Or that a co-ed sports team could have all guys.

Some things are dependent on sex.  Whether that is right or not... who can say.

 

somethings like that are ok, others arent, for instance, in many jobs, men are paid more than women, that is not fair, its discrimination

sports are an intresting one, i dont see any reason a women cant play a mans game or vice versa, ok it may be a bit unfair at a proffesional level, thats because they have different strengths, so we put them in different sections and stuff, im not against that.

what does "co-ed" mean?



WessleWoggle on 21 April 2009
HappySqurriel said:
nojustno said:
WessleWoggle said:
HappySqurriel said:
nojustno said:

Of course i know its true but he's acting like all gay people suddenly bashed black people while in fact it was a small amount, therefore generalization.

I never generalized and made any claim that "All" or "most" supporters of gay marriage were intollerant, but I have seen more racist and intollerant rants from gay marriage supporters than I have ever seen from people who oppose it ...

I'm not religious at all and it doesn't impact me directly, but I have been in crowds of people where if you changed "Evangelical Christian" to "Jew" you'd feel like you were in Germany in the 1930's. For people who preach so heavily of tolerance and acceptance you'd think that gay marriage supporters would try to understand the arguments against it without resorting to stereotypes and scapegoating.

 

How is that possible? I see much more intolerance on the part of anti-gay people then pro-gay people.

 

really, don't bother with people like him.

 

I find your comments interesting because you haven't successfully argued anything ...

Personally, I'm neither for or against gay marriage, but I have noticed a pattern that people who oppose gay marriage can typically forumlate well thought out arguments and gay marriage supporters reply by calling them intollerant. I have never even seen an argument that explains why "Marriage" was a right, and I have yet to see anyone explain how having a different point of view was immediately intollerant.

 

Well thought out arguments? I'd like to hear one please. I've never heard an argument that wasn't based on cultural or religious bias.

It's intolerant because, well, let me just parody you.

"Personally, I'm neither for or against the abolition of slavery, but I have noticed a pattern that people who abolition of slavery can typically forumlate well thought out arguments and abolition supporters reply by calling them intollerant. I have never even seen an argument that explains why slavery is wrong, and I have yet to see anyone explain how having a different point of view was immediately intollerant."

 

 

 



SciFiBoy on 21 April 2009
HappySqurriel said:

Fact: Oranges exist
Fact: They are living Organisms
Fact: living organisms can do things
Fact: one of these things living organisms can do is to talk

Therefore: Oranges can talk?

 

Your argument is a non-sequitur ...

 

 

well done, you missed the point entirely, my point is that, if you give straight people a right to marry based soley on there orientation, you should give the same right to gay people should you not?

 



HappySqurriel on 21 April 2009
WessleWoggle said:

Well thought out arguments? I'd like to hear one please. I've never heard an argument that wasn't based on cultural or religious bias.

It's intolerant because, well, let me just parody you.

"Personally, I'm neither for or against the abolition of slavery, but I have noticed a pattern that people who abolition of slavery can typically forumlate well thought out arguments and abolition supporters reply by calling them intollerant. I have never even seen an argument that explains why slavery is wrong, and I have yet to see anyone explain how having a different point of view was immediately intollerant."

 

 

 

 

The fact that you associate full rights protected under the law with the exception of the word "Marriage" being undefined and unused by the government with Slavery is actually quite frightening ...



Around the Network
Aj_habfan on 21 April 2009

Marriage is overrated.



WessleWoggle on 21 April 2009
Kasz216 said:
SciFiBoy said:
HappySqurriel said:

I never generalized and made any claim that "All" or "most" supporters of gay marriage were intollerant, but I have seen more racist and intollerant rants from gay marriage supporters than I have ever seen from people who oppose it ...

I'm not religious at all and it doesn't impact me directly, but I have been in crowds of people where if you changed "Evangelical Christian" to "Jew" you'd feel like you were in Germany in the 1930's. For people who preach so heavily of tolerance and acceptance you'd think that gay marriage supporters would try to understand the arguments against it without resorting to stereotypes and scapegoating.

 

 

Fact: Gay People Exist
Fact: they are human
Fact: humans are allowed to do things
Fact: one of the things humans are allowed to do is to get married
Fact: 1+1+1+1= 4

if you have a counter to these facts, which is not ignorant, then i would love to hear it, as im not aware of any.

Well the same logic you use here would seem to indicate that it's wrong to make it so that guys can't enter a ladies room to use the bathroom.

Or play in womens sports or any other sort of thing.

Or that a co-ed sports team could have all guys.

Some things are dependent on sex.  Whether that is right or not... who can say.

I can.

Male/female bathrooms are wrong because we're culturally taught that private parts are not for public viewing, which in turn, makes people want to look at private parts. There would be a lot of invasion of privacy if, in our culture, people were allowed to use the same bathroom.

As for sports, men and women are sized differently, with males usually being bigger and stronger.

There's a logical explaination for why men and women use different bathrooms and why they play on different sports team. There is no logical explaination for why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed.

 



HappySqurriel on 21 April 2009
SciFiBoy said:
HappySqurriel said:

Fact: Oranges exist
Fact: They are living Organisms
Fact: living organisms can do things
Fact: one of these things living organisms can do is to talk

Therefore: Oranges can talk?

 

Your argument is a non-sequitur ...

 

 

well done, you missed the point entirely, my point is that, if you give straight people a right to marry based soley on there orientation, you should give the same right to gay people should you not?

 

 

Sure, we'll give them an equal right ... They can choose any word that isn't "Marriage" and we will make the two kinds of relationships 100% equal under the law



WessleWoggle on 21 April 2009
HappySqurriel said:
WessleWoggle said:

Well thought out arguments? I'd like to hear one please. I've never heard an argument that wasn't based on cultural or religious bias.

It's intolerant because, well, let me just parody you.

"Personally, I'm neither for or against the abolition of slavery, but I have noticed a pattern that people who abolition of slavery can typically forumlate well thought out arguments and abolition supporters reply by calling them intollerant. I have never even seen an argument that explains why slavery is wrong, and I have yet to see anyone explain how having a different point of view was immediately intollerant."

 

 

 

 

The fact that you associate full rights protected under the law with the exception of the word "Marriage" being undefined and unused by the government with Slavery is actually quite frightening ...

The fact that you responded to my parody, rather than the important part of my post, is lame.

"Well thought out arguments? I'd like to hear one please. I've never heard an argument that wasn't based on cultural or religious bias."

 



Kasz216 on 21 April 2009
WessleWoggle said:
Kasz216 said:
SciFiBoy said:
HappySqurriel said:

I never generalized and made any claim that "All" or "most" supporters of gay marriage were intollerant, but I have seen more racist and intollerant rants from gay marriage supporters than I have ever seen from people who oppose it ...

I'm not religious at all and it doesn't impact me directly, but I have been in crowds of people where if you changed "Evangelical Christian" to "Jew" you'd feel like you were in Germany in the 1930's. For people who preach so heavily of tolerance and acceptance you'd think that gay marriage supporters would try to understand the arguments against it without resorting to stereotypes and scapegoating.

 

 

Fact: Gay People Exist
Fact: they are human
Fact: humans are allowed to do things
Fact: one of the things humans are allowed to do is to get married
Fact: 1+1+1+1= 4

if you have a counter to these facts, which is not ignorant, then i would love to hear it, as im not aware of any.

Well the same logic you use here would seem to indicate that it's wrong to make it so that guys can't enter a ladies room to use the bathroom.

Or play in womens sports or any other sort of thing.

Or that a co-ed sports team could have all guys.

Some things are dependent on sex.  Whether that is right or not... who can say.

I can.

Male/female bathrooms are wrong because we're culturally taught that private parts are not for public viewing, which in turn, makes people want to look at private parts. There would be a lot of invasion of privacy if, in our culture, people were allowed to use the same bathroom.

As for sports, men and women are sized differently, with males usually being bigger and stronger.

There's a logical explaination for why men and women use different bathrooms and why they play on different sports team. There is no logical explaination for why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed.

 

Aren't we culturally taught gay marriage is wrong?  I mean that is the traditional view.

Men and women are sized different.... so are Men and Men.

No form of seregation should be legal.

Bathrooms should be changed if as they currently are men and women can't be in the same room.