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

Forums - General - Traditional marriage supporters must write J.U.D.E.N. on their window

Rath on 03 September 2009
HappySqurriel said:

Every individual should have the right to refuse service to anyone, and everyone has the right to use their freedom of speech to speak out against people when they believe they have been wronged. Over time the consequences from people's actions will result in society being reasonably fair to everyone involved. The act of trying to get people to self identify is simply trying to shame people into conformity and is not acceptable, any more than it would be acceptable to say that all gay people must identify their sexual preference at all times.

 

Now, there is a photographer I know who doesn't take photos of marriages between two men because he believes the photos are generally boring ... he is personally gay but thinks that the variety in color and form from a traditional marriage is far more visually interesting than a bunch of guys in suits. Should he have to justify his decision that isn't hurting business, or be forced to take jobs he doesn't want in place of jobs he does want, because someone has hurt feelings?

I think you're far far too optimistic in saying that society will be fair to all. If for example enough people despise atheists (using this example as they are currently the most hated minority in the USA) then discriminating against an atheist does not provoke the outrage required to force people to change. Same with gays, blacks and every other minority - if enough bigots hate them for who they are then discrimination will happen openly.


Legislation to prevent this discrimination is necessary if you want society to progress.



Around the Network
Sqrl on 03 September 2009
Rath said:
@Sqrl. So you essentially believe in removing half of the civil rights that were gained during the 1960's? What you're talking about is essentially re-legalising segregation...

We really do sit at very very different ends of the political spectrum at times.

No, just in removing violations of people's rights that were the byproduct of the movement.  Again, nobody has a right to buy cake, but people should have the right to run their businesses how they please provided they don't violate someone else's rights.  I don't really see how thats a political spectrum thing so much as common sense...but like I said I really didn't expect us to see eye to eye and thats fine.

 

Rath said:
HappySqurriel said:

Every individual should have the right to refuse service to anyone, and everyone has the right to use their freedom of speech to speak out against people when they believe they have been wronged. Over time the consequences from people's actions will result in society being reasonably fair to everyone involved. The act of trying to get people to self identify is simply trying to shame people into conformity and is not acceptable, any more than it would be acceptable to say that all gay people must identify their sexual preference at all times.

 

Now, there is a photographer I know who doesn't take photos of marriages between two men because he believes the photos are generally boring ... he is personally gay but thinks that the variety in color and form from a traditional marriage is far more visually interesting than a bunch of guys in suits. Should he have to justify his decision that isn't hurting business, or be forced to take jobs he doesn't want in place of jobs he does want, because someone has hurt feelings?

I think you're far far too optimistic in saying that society will be fair to all. If for example enough people despise atheists (using this example as they are currently the most hated minority in the USA) then discriminating against an atheist does not provoke the outrage required to force people to change. Same with gays, blacks and every other minority - if enough bigots hate them for who they are then discrimination will happen openly.


Legislation to prevent this discrimination is necessary if you want society to progress.

 He isn't saying society will be fair to all.  Just that it will be reasonably fair.  Life in general is not fair and trying to legislate fairness is easily just as naive, if not more so.  Really when it gets right down to it social engineering on this scale is an incredibly naive concept all around no matter how you go about it. 

Happy and I see your methods as a "Win at all costs" approach that violates people's rights and liberty to get the job done.  If you don't agree fine, but I hope you can at least see where we are coming from.
To Each Man, Responsibility
Rath on 03 September 2009

I can see where you guys are coming from, I just really strongly disagree with your position on this one.



I_Heart_Nintendo on 03 September 2009

gosh its always "have the right to do this" or "don't have the right to do that".

I'm just glad I don't live in America, where nobody cares about anything unless it was written between 100 and 3000 years ago.

Just a heads up; when people make fun about Americans in the rest of the world, its always about:

Guns, Crazy Religious people, Rednecks, obesity and average Americans squawking about their rights.



FaRmLaNd on 03 September 2009
ManusJustus said:
FaRmLaNd said:
Why would you want to support "traditional" marriage? Its not like us strait people are very good at lifelong monogamous relationships.

I say we give the gay community a go.

I think a lot of fundamentalist Christians think that by not allowing other types of marriages they are somehow making up for all the pre-marital sex, adultry, and divorces that is so common with modern marriage. 

I'm tempted to argue marriage isnt that important anymore.  Whats the difference between living with someone and having a baby with them AND marrying someone, having a baby, and having a full pre-nuptial agreement?

Well, beyond the ceremony and the ecenomic/legal coupling of two people there really isn't any huge difference. Hence why de-facto marriages exist. I agree it isn't hugely important anymore. It functions more as a part of our culture then anything else. People get married because people get married (barring any other religious reasons obviously). But since such emphasis has been placed on marriage I think that its relevance to the modern way of life isn't really the point. If one group of people are doing it, others that have different sexualities should be allowed to aswell. Its pretty simple really.

 

I think marriage can be religious, if you're a religious person. But being a person of no faith I can get married aswell. Why can I get married when I'm not religious and gay people can't? It just doesn't make any sense to me. Because I don't believe in God I should be barred from marriage aswell, at least then the laws of the land would be enforced evenly.

 



Around the Network
fmc83 on 03 September 2009
I_Heart_Nintendo said:
gosh its always "have the right to do this" or "don't have the right to do that".

I'm just glad I don't live in America, where nobody cares about anything unless it was written between 100 and 3000 years ago.

Just a heads up; when people make fun about Americans in the rest of the world, its always about:

Guns, Crazy Religious people, Rednecks, obesity and average Americans squawking about their rights.

 

Wow, that's it in about two lines. Perfect. Please drink a Boag's Premium for me to cheers to you!



http://nintendo-geheimtipps.blogspot.com

Sqrl on 05 September 2009
I_Heart_Nintendo said:
gosh its always "have the right to do this" or "don't have the right to do that".

I'm just glad I don't live in America, where nobody cares about anything unless it was written between 100 and 3000 years ago.

Just a heads up; when people make fun about Americans in the rest of the world, its always about:

Guns, Crazy Religious people, Rednecks, obesity and average Americans squawking about their rights.

Yes....because as a country we should conduct ourselves in a manner that protects us from being ...gasp....made fun of.  Lord knows that is the most important thing we can do. 

PS - Since you don't seem to be, I'll be embarrassed for you that such a shallow remark was the only thing you could add to the discussion. A tip for next time: A substantive post about your position on the topic goes a lot further than claiming to speak for "the rest of the world".
To Each Man, Responsibility
I_Heart_Nintendo on 05 September 2009

@ Sqrl

Seriously? You seem to be responding like I must be the first person ever to go off on a tangent on an internet forum. GOD BABY JEBUS WHO ART IN HEAVEN I'm so embarrassed.

I'll try to remain professional, attractive and good with the ladies like you Sqrl (if that is your real name.)

PS. Penis sizes are measured by how many posts that you have on VGchartz, so yours is obviously bigger than mine.

 



mixer82 on 05 September 2009
Sqrl said:
I_Heart_Nintendo said:
gosh its always "have the right to do this" or "don't have the right to do that".

I'm just glad I don't live in America, where nobody cares about anything unless it was written between 100 and 3000 years ago.

Just a heads up; when people make fun about Americans in the rest of the world, its always about:

Guns, Crazy Religious people, Rednecks, obesity and average Americans squawking about their rights.

Yes....because as a country we should conduct ourselves in a manner that protects us from being ...gasp....made fun of.  Lord knows that is the most important thing we can do. 

PS - Since you don't seem to be, I'll be embarrassed for you that such a shallow remark was the only thing you could add to the discussion. A tip for next time: A substantive post about your position on the topic goes a lot further than claiming to speak for "the rest of the world".


No, as a country you should try to behave well enough that when you travel abroad your not given the advice to fly another countrys flag on you person. I have heard many instances where you yanks have used the maple leaf as not to get treated like shit while in europe.

on topic, really, on a day to day basis would anybody really post this on their place of buiness in a rescesion? what's that conversation with yourself sound like?

shop owner: "i'm bearly making any money here, maybe i should try to see if i can live on even less money"

shop owner's reply " yeah that would be a great challange! maybe we should drive away some of our clientelle"

shop owner " how about gays, i really don't like them anyways"

shop owner's reply"yeah that's great ,cause if i get rid of them you know the liberals will stay away too"

shop owner " excellent! that way i'll get less money AND the warm fuzzy feeling of only dealing with people who think like i do!"

if anybody is willing to take their biggotry that far, i hope they like the taste of what they get.



Kasz216 on 05 September 2009
stof said:
And he's comparing gays to nazi's. Which isn't far off, the two did have quite the connection. The nazi's even picked out that cute little pink triangle for the gays.

Dude, no one will take you seriously if you compare "the right to be yourself" with "the right to hate others"

The right to be yourself and the right to hate others are the same thing.

Not that i agree with comparing that to jews in the holocaust....

but the right to be yourself and the right to hate others is infact the same right.