Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

[BobCox2]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

So Don't ask Don't tell?
That not going to work Homosexuals historically have had hidden weddings and life partnerships will exist, the rights have been granted to civil unions etc. I don't think thats going away.
It's a question of societal definition of the word marriage.

 

[Johnny]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

I'd like more input from jmerv and his idea that homosexual people are homosexual by choice. It just seemed to unusually ignorant that I'd like to know if he was just being sarcastic or actually meant it.

 

[jel]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

I'd like more input from jmerv and his idea that homosexual people are homosexual by choice. It just seemed to unusually ignorant that I'd like to know if he was just being sarcastic or actually meant it.

In what other way can you be homosexual?

Spoiler

If not by choice, then it must mean you're being forced to be something you don't want to (or you'd have choosen to do so), which kind of gives the impression of you not having control of what you're doing. It's kind of removing responsibility for your actions in some sense, though I can't see why it would be required, just accept your choice, you decide who you're, and you can at any time make a new decision that you're from this moment not a homosexual anymore simply by not having sex with the same gender. Sure you may still experience feelings towards your own gender, but it'll always be your choice on how to act on those feelings, and it's your actions that defines you relative to others, not your thoughts or the input emotions you get in the first place.

 

[stillman]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

It has to do with brain structure. Autopsy reports have found demasculinized parts of male brains in sexually dimorphic nuclei. The brains of homosexual males are more feminine (resemble female brains in specific areas, while other areas are normal, male-like regions).

It's kind of like being born left handed. The differences are present right there in the brain, so certain behavior is expected. [<crude example]

Imagine if you are a regular man who loves women. Now someone tells you "Why don't you go and make love to that other man over there." Is it really a choice to say "No way?". You are pretty much certain to say "No way." You're going to feel disgust and discomfort. Well it's the same situation for a homosexual man being asked to make out with a girl. His brain (being feminized is some areas) is going to say "No way". Think of it like a normal, straight woman being asked to make out with another woman. It's going to seem gross to her. Now take that woman's brain and put it into a man's body. That man is going to be pretty grossed out at the thought of making out with a woman. Crude example, but that's basically how it works.

As usual, the science on this stuff is VERY careful to never really conclude anything, so findings such as these are still up in the air. No one can really nail down what causes what. I wish they would hurry up and publish some sort of consensus. There is a dire need for it. The public needs to know the real answer.

Even though the final verdict is still unknown, imo the only way you can get homosexual males to enjoy physical love with women is to really beat the tar out of them and torture them into it. And no one wants that. Think of what you (heterosexuals) would have to do in order to have sex with another man. I'm sure you would only do this if it were to avoid serious harm, torture or death. Some men still wouldn't do it. Some men might for many thousands of dollars, or some other extreme medicine that will make the experience go away.

Note: human sexuality is on a spectrum, so I'm only talking about homosexuals in my examples. The brains of bisexuals are going to be different (perhaps having different amounts of demasculinization), which is a different story altogether.

 

[KremBanan]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Think of it like a normal, straight woman being asked to make out with another woman. It's going to seem gross to her.

No no no, they like it. Atleast the pretty ones like it.

 

[SaroDarksbane]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

In what other way can you be homosexual?

He means being sexually attracted to men.

A lot of people seem to think that it's just something people decide to do one day ("Hey, I saw a pamphlet explaining to me that being *** is okay, I think I'll decide to try it out!").

 

[jmervyn]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

I'd like more input from jmerv and his idea that homosexual people are homosexual by choice. It just seemed to unusually ignorant that I'd like to know if he was just being sarcastic or actually meant it.

You'll excuse me if I'm sick of the subject; I've argued until I'm blue in the face and some people just prefer to take a false view of what others say.

While some queers <choose> their 'lifestyle', I never said what you claim I did. I <do> say that being queer is undeniably a behavioral trait, not a genetic one, and there are any number of psychological reasons that someone might be a switch-hitter or queer. Maybe they got turned down at a dance, maybe they're wispy Nordic guys in a roomfull of Vikings, maybe they're abused children. Doesn't really matter to me that much.

 

[jel]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

He means being sexually attracted to men.

A lot of people seem to think that it's just something people decide to do one day ("Hey, I saw a pamphlet explaining to me that being *** is okay, I think I'll decide to try it out!").

Ah I guess I misunderstood that one, sure you can't decide what input emotions you get, and often in circumstances such as attraction the emotions are too strong for most people not to act on in some way, or at least be influenced by.

 

[stephan]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Although both sides seem to argue the point a lot, the cause of someone being homosexual is irrelevant to the discussion.

The pro-side use it as a way to excuse their behavior (we can't help ourselves), which is kind of sad. The against-side uses the argument of choice as a sort of punishment (you chose to be that, now face the consequences), while there isn't really any good reason why things are as they are.

 

[jel]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Although both sides seem to argue the point a lot, the cause of someone being homosexual is irrelevant to the discussion.

Certainly, but since when have the Off Topic forum been on topic in any debate?

 

[stephan]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Certainly, but since when have the Off Topic forum been on topic in any debate?

Being irrelevant doesn't mean it's off topic.

The discussion involves the origin of homosexual behavior and what that means for who can get married and not, so it's very much on topic. I'm just saying that argument doesn't lead anywhere.

 

[jel]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Being irrelevant doesn't mean it's off topic.

That makes no sense as relevance and being on topic is the same thing. By not being on topic you're mentioned things that're irrelevant for the subject. It goes both ways.

The discussion involves homosexual behavior and what that means for who can get married and not, so it's very much on topic. I'm just saying that argument doesn't lead anywhere.

I can't see how behaviour have anything to do with what rights you have, we all have the same rights no matter how we behave, we're all equal for the law no matter from what past we come from. The only way I can see it makes sense that homosexuals can't get married is because the term marry is owned by the church and they can decide who they want to marry and who they don't want to. However as of marriage compared to what the state has to offer, it's not something it can choose to say some may have, others may not, the state exists for the people of the state, that means everyone, otherwise it goes against its purpose.

It's not something that needs to be voted on or opinions have to be known about really, it's a very simple matter, the church has the right to deny whoever they wish, and the state may only follow its purpose to serve the people in being free and secure of their freedom, therefore it's a basic right that anyone should be able to be married in the legal sense by the state, no matter what others think, as it's not the purpose of the state to take others opinion into consideration. You only take other peoples opinion into consideration when you're selecting the person who'll lead the people, leading by deciding what direction the state should go, chaning laws, redifining the purpose, but not for actions of the state itself, that's up to the leader (or those who're choosen by the people), and have to go along the purpose of the state which already have been defined.

 

[stephan]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

That makes no sense as relevance and being on topic is the same thing. By not being on topic you're mentioned things that're irrelevant for the subject. It goes both ways.

Again, the discussion is on-topic, but the angle from which it approaches the topic doesn't lead anywhere. Off topic would be discussing sports or Russian politics.

If you don't see the difference so be it.

 

[Johnny]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Maybe they got turned down at a dance, maybe they're wispy Nordic guys in a roomfull of Vikings, maybe they're abused children. Doesn't really matter to me that much.

You are such a ****ing redneck you could put smeg to shame with your backwater ignorance. A persons sexuality can be both psychological and biological as explained already:

It has to do with brain structure. Autopsy reports have found demasculinized parts of male brains in sexually dimorphic nuclei. The brains of homosexual males are more feminine (resemble female brains in specific areas, while other areas are normal, male-like regions).

It's kind of like being born left handed. The differences are present right there in the brain, so certain behavior is expected. [<crude example]

Imagine if you are a regular man who loves women. Now someone tells you "Why don't you go and make love to that other man over there." Is it really a choice to say "No way?". You are pretty much certain to say "No way." You're going to feel disgust and discomfort. Well it's the same situation for a homosexual man being asked to make out with a girl. His brain (being feminized is some areas) is going to say "No way". Think of it like a normal, straight woman being asked to make out with another woman. It's going to seem gross to her. Now take that woman's brain and put it into a man's body. That man is going to be pretty grossed out at the thought of making out with a woman. Crude example, but that's basically how it works.

As usual, the science on this stuff is VERY careful to never really conclude anything, so findings such as these are still up in the air. No one can really nail down what causes what. I wish they would hurry up and publish some sort of consensus. There is a dire need for it. The public needs to know the real answer.

Even though the final verdict is still unknown, imo the only way you can get homosexual males to enjoy physical love with women is to really beat the tar out of them and torture them into it. And no one wants that. Think of what you (heterosexuals) would have to do in order to have sex with another man. I'm sure you would only do this if it were to avoid serious harm, torture or death. Some men still wouldn't do it. Some men might for many thousands of dollars, or some other extreme medicine that will make the experience go away.

Note: human sexuality is on a spectrum, so I'm only talking about homosexuals in my examples. The brains of bisexuals are going to be different (perhaps having different amounts of demasculinization), which is a different story altogether.

Another example is when a human is born with a double set of chromosomes (Happens to 1 in 2000 people) of which 1 out of 3 people who have it turn out to be homosexual.

Regardless of why people are *** they deserve the same amount of respect for their sexuality as straight people and not that redneck bull**** of "Well I recon he was probably molested as a kid and that's why that there critter is not like me"

 

[jmervyn]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

You are such a ****ing redneck you could put smeg to shame with your backwater ignorance.

If you ever knew how stupid that makes you sound, you'd be ashamed to ever post here again. But then again, you seem to revel in it.

Regardless of why people are *** they deserve the same amount of respect for their sexuality as straight people and not that redneck bull**** of "Well I recon he was probably molested as a kid and that's why that there critter is not like me"

Why? Why must I honor someone's sexual fetishes, particularly one which I consider to be of "evil"? Do I need to honor child molesters, or Satanists, or drunkards, or smokers, as well? Just because you're the one waving a pink banner, I'm supposed to get all "tolerant" while letting <you> scream hate at the mainstream?

You'll never be taken seriously in civil society with those kinds of delusions.

 

[Puck Nutty]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Does the government submit all prospective couples to psychological testing to see if they have bizarre sexual fetishes or preferences? Does the law say that a marriage license can be denied to you if you have "strange" sexual tendencies?

Pedophiles get married. BDSM fetishists get married. In churches and courthouses. Every day. It seems the view from the side of the anti-*** marriage party is "Well, men and women can marry, as long as we don't have to hear about what you're doing behind closed doors."

I guess as long as your particular "perversion" is concealable, it's okay.

I think the anti-*** marriage folks should put their money where there mouth is. Try passing laws denying marriage to atheists, people with "strange" sexual tendencies or even people with obscure religious beliefs. See how far that goes.

 

[Johnny]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Why? Why must I honor someone's sexual fetishes, particularly one which I consider to be of "evil"?

Oh you don't have to. I just want you to be as vocal as possible about your fundamentalist bigotry so people can read it and not accidentally mistake you for anything other than the ignorant redneck you are.

 

[Magi]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

...bizarre sexual fetishes...

guilty. :grouphug:

 

[jmervyn]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

Oh you don't have to. I just want you to be as vocal as possible about your fundamentalist bigotry so people can read it and not accidentally mistake you for anything other than the ignorant redneck you are.

I'm glad you learned a new word, Johnny boy, but you ought to learn to use it properly. The voters who overturned Proposition 8 in California wouldn't exactly appreciate being called rednecks any more than I do; a redneck is a field laborer, presumably from a Southern state. It is used as a racism-oriented pejorative, which is where you've stumbled.

As for my being an ignorant fundie bigot, first I'd watch out with the gratuitous insults - that Pal status of yours may not grant as much protection as Ill's 'Gold Pal' does. But if you have decreed that anyone who does not embrace fudge-packing (as far more than a defensible human right) is one, then there's not much I plan to do to help you off that high horse. I'm neither opposed to queer marriage nor homophobic in any sense other than being disgusted by the concept of man-on-man action; if you think it's great stuff then bully for you. I've been arguing the topic purely for argument's sake now for something close to three weeks, and any interest in it has been gone for quite some time. So I'll leave you to scream and pout to your heart's content.

 

[Johnny]

Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay

I'm glad you learned a new word, Johnny boy, but you ought to learn to use it properly. The voters who overturned Proposition 8 in California wouldn't exactly appreciate being called rednecks any more than I do; a redneck is a field laborer, presumably from a Southern state. It is used as a racism-oriented pejorative, which is where you've stumbled.

Actually

red?neck
??/?r?d?n?k/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [red-nek] Show IPA Informal: Often Disparaging.
–noun
1. an uneducated white farm laborer, esp. from the South.
2. a bigot or reactionary, esp. from the rural working class.
–adjective
3. Also, red-necked. narrow, prejudiced, or reactionary: a redneck attitude.
Also, red-neck.

You being word one to three of definition 1 and all of the words of definition 2 and 3. Possibly not word 9 of definition 2. Depending on the IT bubble.