Gay marriage in Utah put on hold

[One Brow]

Not equal meaning homosexual relations cannot produce life. Therefore a homosexual population could never survive.

This has been rebutted more times than I can count, and the discussion is getting repetitive. Unless you can summon a direct response to a point, I'm flouncing on this conversation with you.

 

[Beantown]

This has been rebutted more times than I can count, and the discussion is getting repetitive. Unless you can summon a direct response to a point, I'm flouncing on this conversation with you.

Lol how has this been rebutted? There is nothing to rebutt? A homosexual relationship cannot produce life and a homosexual population cannot survive without heterosexual relations.

There is nothing you can say or do to change that fact.

 

[TroutBum]

Would you sell him home insurance? Should you be able to refuse to do so?

However, the rights of felons under the law has long been recognized as being restricted. Can you come up with an example that doesn't involve the prospective customer having committed a crime?

Honestly, probably not. I'd refer him to someone else in my office. I don't dig child rapists, yo. Yes, I should be able to. I'm not sure I agree with that, but for now, yes I should.

As for your second point, I probably can't, to be honest. Unless it's a knee-jerk reaction. EG: A bunch of kids on skateboards outside of my shop have been asked to please not do it by an elderly person trying to walk around the shops. They are disrespectful and rude and point out that it's not illegal. If those little pukes came into my store I'd tell them to GTFO.

As Jazzfanz first official gay man I will say you are all welcome to your opinions but it won't matter. It's going to happen eventually either way.

Newsflash, you aren't the first official gay man. There are plenty here. Not to mention the unofficial gay men, which number in the hundreds and pretty much frequent the UGLI forum.

Lol how has this been rebutted? There is nothing to rebutt? A homosexual relationship cannot produce life and a homosexual population cannot survive without heterosexual relations.

There is nothing you can say or do to change that fact.

At least part of your post was true. It wouldn't matter if Truth and Fact were standing on your face, dumping into your mouth, you'd still dismiss them and pretend they weren't there.

 

[colton]

To summarize:

Gay marriage foes: homosexual and heterosexual relationships/marriages are fundamentally different, and so should be called different things. They should not be legally equivalent, which is why civil unions have been/should be developed for homosexual unions.

Gay marriage advocates: homosexual and heterosexual relationships/marriages are fundamentally the same, and so should be called the same thing. They should be legally equivalent, and homosexuals have a right to the same marital unions/laws that heterosexual couples have.

Both sides to the opposing side: Your view doesn't make any sense. It is incompatible with both science and religion/ethics. You are therefore both stupid and evil, and just a notch above Hitler. Maybe.

/thread

 

[Stoked]

It does not affect me in any way. I support gay marriage and gay adoption. I'm just simply saying that homosexual and heterosexual relations are not equal or the same in a biological sense.

Biologically they are not. But not calling them a family simply because they are not hetero is ignorant. Also not all hetero and not all homo families are created equal.

 

[TroutBum]

I'm loving all of the Hitler talk in this thread.

 

[Stoked]

I'm loving all of the Hitler talk in this thread.

Colton and his damn minions imo.

 

[Bigby Wolf]

I want names and pictures of these gay men.

 

[Deleted member 848]

To summarize:

Gay marriage foes: homosexual and heterosexual relationships/marriages are fundamentally different, and so should be called different things. They should not be legally equivalent, which is why civil unions have been/should be developed for homosexual unions.

Gay marriage advocates: Although I may or may not perceive homosexual unions as my interpretation of marriage, I understand that the term 'marriage' is one not exclusive to any one faith, and deserves to be used, align with its entire share of legal rights, to any union of any two people of any faith as long as they consent to that union, in a nation that proclaims itself as secular, and one that extends its arms in attempts to be as inclusive of multiple cultures (while maintaining a national identity) as possible. There is a mounting collection of evidence proving the safety/effectiveness of homosexual parenting as being tantamount to that of heterosexual parenting-- something that cannot be said for polygamous marriages.

Fixed.

Both sides to the opposing side: Your view doesn't make any sense. It is incompatible with both science and religion/ethics. You are therefore both stupid and evil, and just a notch above Hitler. Maybe.

The viewpoints of opponents to Gay Marriage makes total sense, in fact. That is precisely what makes it quite simple for myself to refute.

 

[moevillini]

... I'm flouncing on this conversation ...

the use of this particular term in this particular context within this specific thread befuzzles me...

or is it more One Brow humor perhaps?

Lol how has this been rebutted? There is nothing to rebutt? A homosexual relationship cannot produce life and a homosexual population cannot survive without heterosexual relations.

There is nothing you can say or do to change that fact.

So Bean, let me ask you a question: If a person who professes to be a homosexual has, at some point in their lifetime, engaged in some degree of intimate relations with a person of the opposite gender (ie, "heterosexual" relations) in your mind, are they not really a homosexual? Or are they still a homosexual? Or do you have a different word to describe them?

 

[LogGrad98]

To summarize:

Gay marriage foes: homosexual and heterosexual relationships/marriages are fundamentally different, and so should be called different things. They should not be legally equivalent, which is why civil unions have been/should be developed for homosexual unions.

Gay marriage advocates: homosexual and heterosexual relationships/marriages are fundamentally the same, and so should be called the same thing. They should be legally equivalent, and homosexuals have a right to the same marital unions/laws that heterosexual couples have.

Both sides to the opposing side: Your view doesn't make any sense. It is incompatible with both science and religion/ethics. You are therefore both stupid and evil, and just a notch above Hitler. Maybe.

/thread

Summed it up nicely. Now we just need a poll and it will be decided by our interwebs prowess. JF will speak and the interwebs will bow down and obey!!

 

[Deleted member 365]

I have a difficulty in finding a girl who is pretty, likes sports, is a good companion, and other desirable qualities. If some dudes have another dude who can treat them right, fulfill their needs, and maybe even adopt/raise a kid or two, then more power to'em. It's not like heterosexuals are tearin it up with great marriages (half of them divorce anyway) or child raising (so many parents should never be allowed within 100 feet of kids). So why not give homosexuals a shot?

Serious question, are heteros/religious people afraid that the adopted kids of homosexual parents will end up being straight and therefore put enormous strain on the belief that being gay is a choice and a sin?