TeenHelp
Support Forums Today's Posts

Get Advice Connect with TeenHelp Resources
HelpLINK Facebook     Twitter     Tumblr     Instagram    Hotlines    Safety Zone    Alternatives

You are not registered or have not logged in

Hello guest! (Not a guest? Log in above!)

As a guest on TeenHelp you are only able to use some of our site's features. By registering an account you will be able to enjoy unlimited access to our site, and will be able to:

  • Connect with thousands of teenagers worldwide by actively taking part in our Support Forums and Chat Room.
  • Find others with similar interests in our Social Groups.
  • Express yourself through our Blogs, Picture Albums and User Profiles.
  • And much much more!

Signing up is free, anonymous and will only take a few moments, so click here to register now!


Current Events and Debates For discussions and friendly debates about politics and current events, check out this forum.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  (#1 (permalink)) Old
thebigmole Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
thebigmole's Avatar
 
Name: Taylor
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: Orlando, Fl

Posts: 1,668
Join Date: January 31st 2009

I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 10th 2010, 08:51 PM

Okay so I have debated this topic a lot, mostly with my mother, I've written papers on it, I've done research on it. And after all of this I just don't understand how the laws against gay marriage as constitutional. Because they aren't they are completely unconstitutional. In 1967 an interracial couples that got married in DC (where such unions were legal) were arrested upon returning home to Virginia. They were released upon the condition of not returning to the state for 25 years. Their appeal went to the supreme court where they won their case. Loving v. Virginia ruled that marriage is a basic human right and that since the 14th amendment states that every American citizen has the right to every basic human right that interracial marriage could no longer be illegal. So are homosexuals not Americans?

Not only that but for all of the people that are going to go "marriage is religious" on me I've got two points for you. Point 1: Separation of Church and State. Point 2: marriage is not a religious institution anymore. You cannot tell me that two drunk people getting married by an Elvis look alike in Vegas is a religious experience. All anyone needs to do to get married is to go to their court house and sign a piece of paper, you know a marriage license that little thing you need to be legally married and get all of the legal rights of a married couple? Listen if you want the bloody word so much just take it. We will leave "marriage" for religious/church ceremonies and you can discriminate as much as you want because the government has no right to impose on your religion. But EVERY couple has to go to their court house and sign a paper to be recognized by the state as a legal couple. And it has to have the same name whether the couple is heterosexual or homosexual. Can anyone against gay marriage tell me how that solution would possibly effect them? Aside from the fact that you just want to discriminate against a people for something they cannot control because you don't agree with their lifestyle, can you give me a reason that this should not be done?


"For Ignorance killed the cat, Curiosity was framed." -Caitlin McGrath

"For this thing we call failure is not the falling down, but the staying down." -Mary Pickford

"But the music's so happy!" -Little Sally: Urinetown

"If our own policies aren't supporting equality then what are we fighting for?"- Kathy Griffin
   
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#2 (permalink)) Old
TigerTank77 Offline
Rage is the best anesthetic
I've been here a while
********
 
TigerTank77's Avatar
 
Name: Ben
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: NY

Posts: 1,534
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 11th 2010, 12:05 AM

To add to that. About marriage. Marriage did not start as a religious thing. It started as a financial thing, wayyyyyy way back. Religion adopted it later on, and carried it through history.

I don't they they should be allowed to hold the word and say it's theirs, because it's not. Especially since there are churches that wed gay couples.

I'm honestly surprised it isn't a federal law yet, but with half of the law making system's representatives throwing themselves on the floor and throwing temper trantrums whenever gay marriage or health care reform comes up, it's gonna be a while before anything happens.


Often I lie wide awake, thinking of things I could make.
But I donít seem to have the parts to build them.
I am so scared of what will kill me in the end, for I am not prepared.
I hope I will get the chance to be someone, to be human.





  Send a message via AIM to TigerTank77 Send a message via MSN to TigerTank77 Send a message via Skype™ to TigerTank77 
  (#3 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 11th 2010, 02:02 AM

And, adding on that, how is the Defense of Marriage Act legal? Doesn't it violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause?




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)
   
  (#4 (permalink)) Old
.:Bibliophile:. Offline
PM me anytime!

TeenHelp Veteran
*************
 
.:Bibliophile:.'s Avatar
 
Gender: Just me

Posts: 16,720
Blog Entries: 1770
Join Date: January 18th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 11th 2010, 05:48 AM

I totally agree with everything being said. And, to add something a friend of mine once said; Two people (man and a woman) could meet for the first time at a fast food restaurant and decide that marriage would be the best thing for them(financially etc) and go down to the courthouse and get a marriage license and be married. Whereas two homosexual men or woman who have been together for 25 years and not be allowed to marry. How is that fair?

I don't get it at all but I hate trying to debate because people are too stuck on what they believe.

I think not allowing gay marriage is unconstitutional and I will always say that and I hope that one day everyone will be allowed to marry.


|Lead Moderator|Newsletter Officer|
   
  (#5 (permalink)) Old
Grasshopper Offline
Member
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
Grasshopper's Avatar
 
Age: 24
Gender: Female
Location: USA

Posts: 47
Join Date: January 3rd 2010

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 11th 2010, 11:25 AM

I agree completely with your post. I have a friend who is alive and very well today because of her gay friends, yet they are not allowed to get married unless they travel across state lines to California.

What I have to say to those who oppose it: YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT, AND YOU CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE TO ATTEND THE WEDDING. So what's the problem?



"Courage is not the absence of fear, but simply moving on with dignity despite the fear."

"If I'm gonna go down, I'm gonna do it with style. You won't see me surrender, you won't hear me confess, cause you've left me with nothing, but I have worked with less." -Ani Difranco

"You have enemies? Good! That means you've stood for something in your life!"
   
  (#6 (permalink)) Old
Xujhan Offline
Resident Atheist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Xujhan's Avatar
 
Name: Fletcher
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 2,024
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 11th 2010, 12:20 PM

The problem is, as ever, people love power. And people love passing judgment. Currently, those against gay marriage have the power to pass judgment on it. As long as that's true, gay marriage won't become legal. Either the judgment needs to change - which means waiting until conservative Christianity is no longer the driving force in American culture - or there needs to be another Loving v. Virginia to remove the power. Here's hoping, eh?


The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
  Send a message via MSN to Xujhan  
  (#7 (permalink)) Old
Synaestheasiaen Offline
Member
Average Joe
***
 
Synaestheasiaen's Avatar
 

Posts: 192
Join Date: June 26th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 11th 2010, 04:33 PM

What I don't understand is how criminals and drunk strangers are allowed to get married whenever they want, but a pair of loving same sex couples can't? It's ridiculous. Justice will be brought eventually.
   
  (#8 (permalink)) Old
Penguin Queen Offline
Penguin queen!!
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Penguin Queen's Avatar
 
Name: Annie
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: UK

Posts: 509
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 12th 2010, 11:31 PM

What I don't get is how people say same sex couples shouldn't be allowed to get married because marriage is a religous ceromony. Yet these people have no problem with hetrosexual couples marrying in hotels. Surely they should be opposing this too?




fait
h is a bluebird that you see from afar
it is real and as sure as the first evening star
can't touch it, or buy it, or lock it up tight
but its there just the same
making things turn out right



LE PE
NGUIN QUEEN


   
  (#9 (permalink)) Old
Stardaze Offline
Hopeless Love
Jeez, get a life!
***********
 
Stardaze's Avatar
 
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: California

Posts: 5,799
Blog Entries: 275
Join Date: November 7th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 13th 2010, 08:11 PM

For people that do not support gay marriage...
It's not you getting married. It's not your life. They don't even have to attend the wedding.
It really upsets me because it should be about equality. Love is NOT about gender, or the people in the relationship. Love is love, how you feel inside your heart.
I could go on forever on this. >_<

I just hope one day its legal everywhere. A straight couple is no different then a gay couple. A straight couple doesn't have more love then a gay couple. :|
There should be NO boundaries on LOVE.




   
  (#10 (permalink)) Old
TheBabyEater Offline
With A Sprinkle Of Cinnamon
I've been here a while
********
 
TheBabyEater's Avatar
 
Name: Marissa
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: Iraw

Posts: 1,705
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 16th 2010, 05:06 PM

Hey, someone thinks that if gays get married the abortion rate will go up.

Thank you television exploiting the views and words to stupid idiots.



Take me seriously.
I dare you.



  Send a message via Skype™ to TheBabyEater 
  (#11 (permalink)) Old
Grizabella Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Grizabella's Avatar
 
Name: Jessica
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Vancouver

Posts: 1,305
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 17th 2010, 02:05 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBabyEater View Post
Hey, someone thinks that if gays get married the abortion rate will go up.

Thank you television exploiting the views and words to stupid idiots.
Wow, what on earth? That's really strange. What possibly reason did they give for thinking that?


Not around so much now that school's started

"Live a good life.
If there are gods and they are just,
then they will not care how devout you have been,
but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by.
If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them.
If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life
that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
Marcus Aurelius
   
  (#12 (permalink)) Old
Algernon Offline
CPT-1 Phlebotomist
Outside, huh?
**********
 
Algernon's Avatar
 
Name: Holly
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Roseville, California

Posts: 4,124
Join Date: January 21st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 17th 2010, 02:18 AM

They should be able to get married. And honestly? I'm not for homosexuality. For many reaons. I believe they should have the same rights. I do believe marriage is between a woman and a man. And two homosexuals don't make that definition... Like being married in a church, that's probably against homosexuality, just doesn't seem right. They should create a "union" or something.


Geek? Nerd? More like intellectual badass.

"You ran through Africa, and Asia, and Indonesia.. And now I've found you, and I love you. I want to know your name."
  Send a message via Yahoo to Algernon  
  (#13 (permalink)) Old
Algernon Offline
CPT-1 Phlebotomist
Outside, huh?
**********
 
Algernon's Avatar
 
Name: Holly
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Roseville, California

Posts: 4,124
Join Date: January 21st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 17th 2010, 02:21 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penguin Queen View Post
What I don't get is how people say same sex couples shouldn't be allowed to get married because marriage is a religous ceromony. Yet these people have no problem with hetrosexual couples marrying in hotels. Surely they should be opposing this too?
Why would you want to get married in a place that probably doesn't support what you're doing. That would be against the "laws" of the bible. I mean, yeah, there might be churchs that do that, but it is in the bible, It's in wording in several spots.

Marriage to me is a religious ceremony, but they, that's just me.


Geek? Nerd? More like intellectual badass.

"You ran through Africa, and Asia, and Indonesia.. And now I've found you, and I love you. I want to know your name."
  Send a message via Yahoo to Algernon  
  (#14 (permalink)) Old
Casey. Offline
Dance with me
I can't get enough
*********
 
Casey.'s Avatar
 
Name: Casey
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Somewhere in my mind

Posts: 2,343
Blog Entries: 337
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 17th 2010, 02:37 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBabyEater View Post
Hey, someone thinks that if gays get married the abortion rate will go up.
I don't even get that connection. Why would abortion rates go up? Most gay couples can't get pregnant naturally, and if they were having a child, they wouldn't abort it?


She whispered to her own reflection "I will be strong."

"I am not what has happened to me.I am what I have chosen to become."- Carl Jung

"If ye harm none, do as ye wish."

Sometimes things just happen.


Smile through the tears.


PM me

  Send a message via Yahoo to Casey.  
  (#15 (permalink)) Old
St.Vincent Offline
Edna
I've been here a while
********
 
St.Vincent's Avatar
 
Name: Edna
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: Somewhere Across Forever

Posts: 1,269
Blog Entries: 102
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 17th 2010, 03:15 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xHolyValorx View Post
Why would you want to get married in a place that probably doesn't support what you're doing.
I know many gay people who are very active in their churches. Just because the bible says it does not mean that their own church community will not support them if they want to get married in their church.


I am waylaid by Beauty. Who will walk
Between me and the crying of the frogs?

(My PM box is always open.. if I can't help you, I'll find someone who can)
   
  (#16 (permalink)) Old
TheBabyEater Offline
With A Sprinkle Of Cinnamon
I've been here a while
********
 
TheBabyEater's Avatar
 
Name: Marissa
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: Iraw

Posts: 1,705
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 17th 2010, 11:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cas* View Post
I don't even get that connection. Why would abortion rates go up? Most gay couples can't get pregnant naturally, and if they were having a child, they wouldn't abort it?
I didn't understand it at all either. But it was on The Daily Show.
Now, in all honesty, the people on the daily show and the colbert report and news shows like that, tend to take what people say and twist them into ways that aren't originally what they meant. But, no matter what the show did, the guy still said "If homosexuals get married, the abortion rate will go up!"
SOOO....

Yeah, I don't get it.



Take me seriously.
I dare you.



  Send a message via Skype™ to TheBabyEater 
  (#17 (permalink)) Old
anishift Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
anishift's Avatar
 
Name: Anissa
Gender: Female
Location: California

Posts: 51
Join Date: July 9th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 23rd 2010, 10:51 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xHolyValorx View Post
Why would you want to get married in a place that probably doesn't support what you're doing. That would be against the "laws" of the bible. I mean, yeah, there might be churchs that do that, but it is in the bible, It's in wording in several spots.

Marriage to me is a religious ceremony, but they, that's just me.
That's kind of a silly question. Sin is sin is sin right? If you really think that question it a valid one, NO ONE would get married in church. Every single person lies, and church does not support that, so why would you want to get married there? It's just that lying isn't something they can control, and at this point gay marriage is something that they have (in Cali., with Prop. 8) successfully rallied against. Can you imagine, if your church turned you out because you are a liar? Sin is sin is sin, right? Wrong, apparently. We all do things that are against the "laws" of the Bible, that doesn't mean we don't want to marry in the church of our beliefs, in the house of our Lord. With the people we have possibly grown up with and known for years. People are just a lot more accepting of things like lying because they do those things themselves or because they are numb to them, and I'm sure they would not be so quick to kick themselves out of church for an equal sin to homosexuality.. sin is sin is sin. People just aren't used to homosexuality yet.

I hate to sound rude if this does, but it really doesn't matter if marriage is a religious ceremony "to you." World of Warcraft is real to me, but the reality is that it's NOT real. Similarly, marriage is not a religious ceremony. It was celebrated non-religiously by plenty of cultures before they even heard of Christianity. People being bonded to each other for the rest of their lives for benefits predates religion in some places. So while for you, I'm sure it will be a very religious and spiritual ceremony, the practice in general is not truly Christian or religious. It's not one thing that was invented by one person in one religion, it happened in all parts of the world and is just as much secular as it is religious. It's seen as religious because most people identify (although it seems like fewer and fewer actually practice the religions they claim to identify with) with a religion so they get married in a church or religious matter, but plenty of agnostics and atheists get married and have gotten married for many many many years. For you, it may be. But in general, it is what it is... neutral.

Last edited by anishift; January 23rd 2010 at 11:01 PM.
  Send a message via AIM to anishift Send a message via MSN to anishift  
  (#18 (permalink)) Old
Marvin Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Name: Marvin
Gender: Male
Location: USA

Posts: 1,576
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 01:10 PM

Marriage is currently a flawed institution, its racist, and classist, and I do believe theres so much left to the queer battle we shouldnt get too sidetracked with government regulated marriage. Nonetheless, there is no logical reason marriage should be restricted based on the sex of the individuals desiring to get married (particularly in light of the fact that sex isnt even binary, aka intersexed conditions). Its not like the two people are a different species. Wow both people might have vaginas or both might have penises... I mean of course they shouldnt be married! We all know a human is essentially just the content of their pants!

Marriage can be religious, but its not inheritantly so, its why some people marry at a church,others at a register office, and some on the beach,etc. Orthadox Christianity is not the only religion in the world, and in the West,we have freedom of religion. And guess what, some religions are fine with gay marriage, like the liberal and maybe even moderate wings of Judasm. Quakers are fine with gays. And so on. Surely these religions should have the right to define their own view of marriage, and not have to conform to yours?
   
  (#19 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 05:04 PM

I DO NOT AGREE WITH GAY MARRIAGE

Just thought I should let that out there. And I know I'm always one to play the devil's advocate, but I truly do not believe in it. I have nothing against gays, and I don't care for organised religion at all, in fact I'm a deist and have GID and often pondered my own sexuality. But I believe there is a strong line between embracing and encouraging.

It is unarguable that homosexuality is not natural, no matter how much you may want it to be, it is not (Given that scientifically, there is no other reason for us to exist and desire another, but to reproduce, mates for life being the factor reducing genetic disorders, etc,). What type of disorder is homosexuality? I don't know, could be genetic, chromosomal, neurological, likely mental; Keep in mind I am not ragging on you, I feel the same way about my own condition (gender identity disorder). It is not natural. It CANNOT be natural, because Darwinian Success is the only scientific success, which is only possible through a mother, father and child-- all of which do not coincide with homosexuality.

It is also evident that in growing "acceptance" of homosexuality, suddenly scantily clad girls are declaring themselves lesbians one day, having a boyfriend the next, men who once were considered to be a bit metro are suddenly pronounced gay before they even have a say in it, and the list goes on. It's becoming mainstream to declare yourself bisexual. Is it 'okay' to be gay or is it just becoming pushed? Homosexuality is becoming ingrained in society with a more casual life. No more three piece suits and bowler caps, rather people run around in wind trousers, and go to dinner theatre with a hoodie on. As people lay back, gayness becomes more prominent.

Homosexuals shout that every single person has a right to their opinion and that's its acceptable to be gay-- they rally, they protest, etc, etc, etc. But what about the other's opinion? I guarantee right now, at this very moment, you are thinking "blasphemy!" at my very ramblings. Well do I not get my right to an opinion too? Should I not be granted the right to protest against the very thing in which you believe? Hypocrisy at it's finest, gay community.

My last bit. GAY IS OKAY. BEING AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE IS OKAY.
Setting a precedent for people through media prominence is not okay. Adam Lamburt (I believe that's who it was) shouldn't be snogging men all over camera, just as well as Britanny Spears shouldn't be snogging men all over cameras. Just because he's gay doesn't give him rights to decency above any other person. If people want gays to be accepted as part of a normal society, then don't set yourselves on a pedestal. Admit that that was nasty, as it would have been any other way.

Oh, right, marriage. Gays should have their own "gay marriage" entity, instead of trying to infiltrate traditional marriage. People should not change their traditions merely because another group, though they could very well set up their own traditions, decides that they want their traditions to end. Why is it not good enough to have "gay marriage?" Why does it have to overlap traditional marriage? And you ask, well why shouldn't it? Well, why shouldn't we knock down that 200 year old library and build a modern hi-tech one? Why shouldn't we replace the Mayan ruins with a mini-mall? Give sentiments a chance, my dear friends.

And attack me on this, I'm quite interested.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.

Last edited by Hdjdjdjduvieg; January 24th 2010 at 05:09 PM.
   
  (#20 (permalink)) Old
TigerTank77 Offline
Rage is the best anesthetic
I've been here a while
********
 
TigerTank77's Avatar
 
Name: Ben
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: NY

Posts: 1,534
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 06:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
I DO NOT AGREE WITH GAY MARRIAGE

Just thought I should let that out there. And I know I'm always one to play the devil's advocate, but I truly do not believe in it. I have nothing against gays, and I don't care for organised religion at all, in fact I'm a deist and have GID and often pondered my own sexuality. But I believe there is a strong line between embracing and encouraging.

It is unarguable that homosexuality is not natural, no matter how much you may want it to be, it is not (Given that scientifically, there is no other reason for us to exist and desire another, but to reproduce, mates for life being the factor reducing genetic disorders, etc,). What type of disorder is homosexuality? I don't know, could be genetic, chromosomal, neurological, likely mental; Keep in mind I am not ragging on you, I feel the same way about my own condition (gender identity disorder). It is not natural. It CANNOT be natural, because Darwinian Success is the only scientific success, which is only possible through a mother, father and child-- all of which do not coincide with homosexuality.

It is also evident that in growing "acceptance" of homosexuality, suddenly scantily clad girls are declaring themselves lesbians one day, having a boyfriend the next, men who once were considered to be a bit metro are suddenly pronounced gay before they even have a say in it, and the list goes on. It's becoming mainstream to declare yourself bisexual. Is it 'okay' to be gay or is it just becoming pushed? Homosexuality is becoming ingrained in society with a more casual life. No more three piece suits and bowler caps, rather people run around in wind trousers, and go to dinner theatre with a hoodie on. As people lay back, gayness becomes more prominent.

Homosexuals shout that every single person has a right to their opinion and that's its acceptable to be gay-- they rally, they protest, etc, etc, etc. But what about the other's opinion? I guarantee right now, at this very moment, you are thinking "blasphemy!" at my very ramblings. Well do I not get my right to an opinion too? Should I not be granted the right to protest against the very thing in which you believe? Hypocrisy at it's finest, gay community.

My last bit. GAY IS OKAY. BEING AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE IS OKAY.
Setting a precedent for people through media prominence is not okay. Adam Lamburt (I believe that's who it was) shouldn't be snogging men all over camera, just as well as Britanny Spears shouldn't be snogging men all over cameras. Just because he's gay doesn't give him rights to decency above any other person. If people want gays to be accepted as part of a normal society, then don't set yourselves on a pedestal. Admit that that was nasty, as it would have been any other way.

Oh, right, marriage. Gays should have their own "gay marriage" entity, instead of trying to infiltrate traditional marriage. People should not change their traditions merely because another group, though they could very well set up their own traditions, decides that they want their traditions to end. Why is it not good enough to have "gay marriage?" Why does it have to overlap traditional marriage? And you ask, well why shouldn't it? Well, why shouldn't we knock down that 200 year old library and build a modern hi-tech one? Why shouldn't we replace the Mayan ruins with a mini-mall? Give sentiments a chance, my dear friends.

And attack me on this, I'm quite interested.
So what you're saying, it's okay to discriminate as long as its your opinion, and that because of that, gay's can't have equal right's because some people have the opinion that they're essentially subhuman?


Often I lie wide awake, thinking of things I could make.
But I donít seem to have the parts to build them.
I am so scared of what will kill me in the end, for I am not prepared.
I hope I will get the chance to be someone, to be human.





  Send a message via AIM to TigerTank77 Send a message via MSN to TigerTank77 Send a message via Skype™ to TigerTank77 
  (#21 (permalink)) Old
Xujhan Offline
Resident Atheist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Xujhan's Avatar
 
Name: Fletcher
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 2,024
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 08:09 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
I DO NOT AGREE WITH GAY MARRIAGE

Just thought I should let that out there. And I know I'm always one to play the devil's advocate, but I truly do not believe in it. I have nothing against gays, and I don't care for organised religion at all, in fact I'm a deist and have GID and often pondered my own sexuality. But I believe there is a strong line between embracing and encouraging.

It is unarguable that homosexuality is not natural, no matter how much you may want it to be, it is not (Given that scientifically, there is no other reason for us to exist and desire another, but to reproduce, mates for life being the factor reducing genetic disorders, etc,). What type of disorder is homosexuality? I don't know, could be genetic, chromosomal, neurological, likely mental; Keep in mind I am not ragging on you, I feel the same way about my own condition (gender identity disorder). It is not natural. It CANNOT be natural, because Darwinian Success is the only scientific success, which is only possible through a mother, father and child-- all of which do not coincide with homosexuality.
You're going to have to offer up some definition of "natural" if you want to take this stance. Homosexuality IS natural in that it occurs in nature, and not too rarely either. Homosexuality seems about as 'natural' as albinism. It isn't the genetically preferable option, yet it occurs anyway. Be careful when you call something a disorder; many people will take that to mean you think something is harmful in some way. Homosexuality is different, that's all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
It is also evident that in growing "acceptance" of homosexuality, suddenly scantily clad girls are declaring themselves lesbians one day, having a boyfriend the next, men who once were considered to be a bit metro are suddenly pronounced gay before they even have a say in it, and the list goes on. It's becoming mainstream to declare yourself bisexual. Is it 'okay' to be gay or is it just becoming pushed? Homosexuality is becoming ingrained in society with a more casual life. No more three piece suits and bowler caps, rather people run around in wind trousers, and go to dinner theatre with a hoodie on. As people lay back, gayness becomes more prominent.
So gayness is causing a sudden decrease in fashion sense? Really? Even if you're right about that, how is it bad? Trends change, and they're all equally silly. Homosexuality is far from being 'pushed' on the average youth; it's still probably one of the quickest ways to get ostracized in many places.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
Homosexuals shout that every single person has a right to their opinion and that's its acceptable to be gay-- they rally, they protest, etc, etc, etc. But what about the other's opinion? I guarantee right now, at this very moment, you are thinking "blasphemy!" at my very ramblings. Well do I not get my right to an opinion too? Should I not be granted the right to protest against the very thing in which you believe? Hypocrisy at it's finest, gay community.
No, I'm sorry, this argument is not blasphemy, it's wrong. They don't rally because they want the right to their own opinion; they rally because they want to be able to live equally and with as much freedom as we enjoy. You have the right to your own opinion, but don't have the right to act on act when it tramples the rights of others. That's the whole purpose of rights in the first place; to ensure that no group gets their freedom and quality of life taken away by another.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
My last bit. GAY IS OKAY. BEING AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE IS OKAY.
Setting a precedent for people through media prominence is not okay. Adam Lamburt (I believe that's who it was) shouldn't be snogging men all over camera, just as well as Britanny Spears shouldn't be snogging men all over cameras. Just because he's gay doesn't give him rights to decency above any other person. If people want gays to be accepted as part of a normal society, then don't set yourselves on a pedestal. Admit that that was nasty, as it would have been any other way.
No idea what you're going on about here, but what's so awful about kissing on camera? Seems to me that if it were Britney no one would have batted an eyelash. You can't use "indecent behavior" as an argument against homosexuality unless you're willing to use it on heterosexuality too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
Oh, right, marriage. Gays should have their own "gay marriage" entity, instead of trying to infiltrate traditional marriage. People should not change their traditions merely because another group, though they could very well set up their own traditions, decides that they want their traditions to end. Why is it not good enough to have "gay marriage?" Why does it have to overlap traditional marriage? And you ask, well why shouldn't it? Well, why shouldn't we knock down that 200 year old library and build a modern hi-tech one? Why shouldn't we replace the Mayan ruins with a mini-mall? Give sentiments a chance, my dear friends.

And attack me on this, I'm quite interested.
Remember how black people used to have their own drinking fountains? "Separate but equal" is never equal. Many gay people share in the very same traditions as we do, and grew up wanting them. Being gay doesn't suddenly make them outsiders. They aren't "infiltrating" anything. As for your metaphors; why not keep the old building and build a new one? There's plenty of room for both. And if you couldn't parse the meaning there; why does including homosexuality suddenly diminish the value of "traditional marriage"? It doesn't. There room for everyone, and it's that simple.


The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
  Send a message via MSN to Xujhan  
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#22 (permalink)) Old
thebigmole Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
thebigmole's Avatar
 
Name: Taylor
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: Orlando, Fl

Posts: 1,668
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 08:31 PM

Xujhan pretty much said it all. I just want to add that being against gay marriage is NOT okay. It's being discriminatory, which is NOT okay. I don't give a damn what your opinion is but the second you try to use that opinion to decrease the rights of others, that's when it's NOT okay. I will not lie I think less of any person who tells me they are against gay marriage. I think of them less as a person in every way, I can't imagine being the type of person that thinks discrimination against people for being who they are and wanting what everyone else wants is okay.


"For Ignorance killed the cat, Curiosity was framed." -Caitlin McGrath

"For this thing we call failure is not the falling down, but the staying down." -Mary Pickford

"But the music's so happy!" -Little Sally: Urinetown

"If our own policies aren't supporting equality then what are we fighting for?"- Kathy Griffin
   
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#23 (permalink)) Old
Penguin Queen Offline
Penguin queen!!
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Penguin Queen's Avatar
 
Name: Annie
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: UK

Posts: 509
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 09:38 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xHolyValorx View Post

Marriage to me is a religious ceremony, but they, that's just me.
This is what I meant about the church. If someones objection to gay marriage is that marriage is a religous ceremony, then why don't they object to hetrosexual marriages in hotels? surely thats against the principle that its a religous ceremony as well.




fait
h is a bluebird that you see from afar
it is real and as sure as the first evening star
can't touch it, or buy it, or lock it up tight
but its there just the same
making things turn out right



LE PE
NGUIN QUEEN


   
  (#24 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 09:46 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigmole View Post
Xujhan pretty much said it all. I just want to add that being against gay marriage is NOT okay. It's being discriminatory, which is NOT okay. I don't give a damn what your opinion is but the second you try to use that opinion to decrease the rights of others, that's when it's NOT okay. I will not lie I think less of any person who tells me they are against gay marriage. I think of them less as a person in every way, I can't imagine being the type of person that thinks discrimination against people for being who they are and wanting what everyone else wants is okay.
As they say..."don't hate the player, hate the game"

If you had/have a little sister and she started doing pot and you were by chance completely against marijuana, then would you hate your sister? Or would you hate her choices? You can hate the decisions that people make but not hate the person. My cousin is hitting rock bottom because she's doing nothing but smoking pot along with other drugs, going to jail, having sex with a dude that doesn't even care about her, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna hate her. Yeah, if I was her mom I'd send her ass to boot camp, but I'm not going to wish she died or anything like that. I'm not going to degrade her just because of her bad choices, I'm just going to be disappointed in her choices.

Martin Luther King Jr. made a difference to the world through non-violence. Sure, black people were enraged at white people, but you gotta let that hate be your motivation to make a difference instead of criticizing someone just because they don't agree with your beliefs.

We all grew up in different environments and have different DNA. We're all uniquely different, and it just so happens that we won't all agree with the same thing. That's life. My grandmother is racist because she was taught to hate black people because she never was around them. Phin just doesn't agree with gay marriage. That doesn't make him a serial killer, child rapist, or anything like that. It just makes him a human being that just doesn't agree with gay marriage.

Quote:
This is what I meant about the church. If someones objection to gay marriage is that marriage is a religous ceremony, then why don't they object to hetrosexual marriages in hotels? surely thats against the principle that its a religous ceremony as well.
I think marriage should be much more strict because marriages like that are despicable. Those marriages shouldn't even be allowed to happen. I'm against gay marriage, but if they're gonna keep preventing gay marriage from being legalized, they should also get rid of those stupid marriages too.
   
  (#25 (permalink)) Old
thebigmole Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
thebigmole's Avatar
 
Name: Taylor
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: Orlando, Fl

Posts: 1,668
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 10:52 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
As they say..."don't hate the player, hate the game"

If you had/have a little sister and she started doing pot and you were by chance completely against marijuana, then would you hate your sister? Or would you hate her choices? You can hate the decisions that people make but not hate the person. My cousin is hitting rock bottom because she's doing nothing but smoking pot along with other drugs, going to jail, having sex with a dude that doesn't even care about her, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna hate her. Yeah, if I was her mom I'd send her ass to boot camp, but I'm not going to wish she died or anything like that. I'm not going to degrade her just because of her bad choices, I'm just going to be disappointed in her choices.

Martin Luther King Jr. made a difference to the world through non-violence. Sure, black people were enraged at white people, but you gotta let that hate be your motivation to make a difference instead of criticizing someone just because they don't agree with your beliefs.

We all grew up in different environments and have different DNA. We're all uniquely different, and it just so happens that we won't all agree with the same thing. That's life. My grandmother is racist because she was taught to hate black people because she never was around them. Phin just doesn't agree with gay marriage. That doesn't make him a serial killer, child rapist, or anything like that. It just makes him a human being that just doesn't agree with gay marriage.



I think marriage should be much more strict because marriages like that are despicable. Those marriages shouldn't even be allowed to happen. I'm against gay marriage, but if they're gonna keep preventing gay marriage from being legalized, they should also get rid of those stupid marriages too.
I never said hate. I said "think less of". I cannot hate a person I do not know, and I can not hate a person for having an opinion different than mine. But I can certainly think less of them if that opinion involves the discrimination of others.


"For Ignorance killed the cat, Curiosity was framed." -Caitlin McGrath

"For this thing we call failure is not the falling down, but the staying down." -Mary Pickford

"But the music's so happy!" -Little Sally: Urinetown

"If our own policies aren't supporting equality then what are we fighting for?"- Kathy Griffin
   
  (#26 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 11:27 PM

Quote:
I never said hate. I said "think less of". I cannot hate a person I do not know, and I can not hate a person for having an opinion different than mine. But I can certainly think less of them if that opinion involves the discrimination of others.
"Think less of", mah bad. Still, you're going to "think less of" someone who is against your beliefs. You don't hate them, but just because they don't share the same opinion you do, you're not only going to disagree with them, but you're also going to think less of them as a person?

So basically you're discriminating against people who are discriminated against others?
   
  (#27 (permalink)) Old
TheBabyEater Offline
With A Sprinkle Of Cinnamon
I've been here a while
********
 
TheBabyEater's Avatar
 
Name: Marissa
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: Iraw

Posts: 1,705
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 24th 2010, 11:57 PM

I'd think less of a person who discriminates yes, but I'd still give them rights. That's the difference.



Take me seriously.
I dare you.



  Send a message via Skype™ to TheBabyEater 
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#28 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 12:22 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerTank77 View Post
So what you're saying, it's okay to discriminate as long as its your opinion, and that because of that, gay's can't have equal right's because some people have the opinion that they're essentially subhuman?
I do not believe the argument has anything to do with equal rights. Why are homosexuals in such a rush to breach traditional marriage anyhow? Why cannot they settle for equal? Marriage is between a man and a woman, that is the definition of marriage. Should it be changed? I suppose that's the argument, but it has nothing to do with equal rights.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan View Post
You're going to have to offer up some definition of "natural" if you want to take this stance. Homosexuality IS natural in that it occurs in nature, and not too rarely either. Homosexuality seems about as 'natural' as albinism. It isn't the genetically preferable option, yet it occurs anyway. Be careful when you call something a disorder; many people will take that to mean you think something is harmful in some way. Homosexuality is different, that's all.
Albinism is a disorder, too. Natural, I suppose, in the sense of what is supposed to happen to ensure strong Darwinian success (essentially, reproduction and passing of stronger traits). In your sense, one could argue dwarfism is natural, too. Which of course it happens through nature, but the question lies is it supposed to happen? Depends on the definition of supposed to, I suppose, but in the sense of survival of strong genes in continuation of line, the answer is no. Obviously in today's society it's not that impairing (well it is, but not to the point where if you're a dwarf, you'll not survive), but say the same occurred in an animal, the odds may be different. I'm not sure if I'm making sense, but bottom line it is not the way things should be.
Again, I have nothing against homosexuality, I am just stating it as a fact.


Quote:
So gayness is causing a sudden decrease in fashion sense? Really? Even if you're right about that, how is it bad? Trends change, and they're all equally silly. Homosexuality is far from being 'pushed' on the average youth; it's still probably one of the quickest ways to get ostracized in many places.
Well, I am relating the prominence to the way culture in the Western world is going. It is good to say it's okay, but becoming mainstream and having everyone go declare it upon themselves is unneeded.

Quote:
No, I'm sorry, this argument is not blasphemy, it's wrong. They don't rally because they want the right to their own opinion; they rally because they want to be able to live equally and with as much freedom as we enjoy. You have the right to your own opinion, but don't have the right to act on act when it tramples the rights of others. That's the whole purpose of rights in the first place; to ensure that no group gets their freedom and quality of life taken away by another.
Besides from hate crimes that every singe 'different' group suffers from at point whether it be Jews, Blacks, short people, fat people, etc, etc, where is it that gays do not have equal rights? Is there a federal law I do not know about banning homosexuals from entering certain buildings?
Even in military, the 'don't ask don't tell' is being lifted (which I find absolutely ridiculous considering it is not necessary to spout your sexuality within the military because that is NOT what you are there for, and if it is get out). And in sense of marriage, obviously there is the problem, but would it not be easier to come to a compromise where YOU do not have to trample the rights of people who have a right to hold the traditions of marriage sacred? Sure, it may be a primitive ideal, but those people are in their right to preserve it. Why can you not settle for an equivilent? Why is it all-or-nothing? Is that really a way to go about something like this?


Quote:
No idea what you're going on about here, but what's so awful about kissing on camera? Seems to me that if it were Britney no one would have batted an eyelash. You can't use "indecent behavior" as an argument against homosexuality unless you're willing to use it on heterosexuality too.
I believe my point was that it should be as unacceptable to act indecently in public for homos as it is for heteros. Homosexuals do not deserve higher treatment, just as a black does not over a white.



Quote:
Remember how black people used to have their own drinking fountains? "Separate but equal" is never equal. Many gay people share in the very same traditions as we do, and grew up wanting them. Being gay doesn't suddenly make them outsiders. They aren't "infiltrating" anything. As for your metaphors; why not keep the old building and build a new one? There's plenty of room for both. And if you couldn't parse the meaning there; why does including homosexuality suddenly diminish the value of "traditional marriage"? It doesn't. There room for everyone, and it's that simple.
I would not liken segregation to what homosexuals face considering I go to school with many. That is the point I am trying to put across, keep the old one and build a new one. Keep the old marriage, and build a new (gay) one.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#29 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 12:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigmole View Post
Xujhan pretty much said it all. I just want to add that being against gay marriage is NOT okay. It's being discriminatory, which is NOT okay. I don't give a damn what your opinion is but the second you try to use that opinion to decrease the rights of others, that's when it's NOT okay. I will not lie I think less of any person who tells me they are against gay marriage. I think of them less as a person in every way, I can't imagine being the type of person that thinks discrimination against people for being who they are and wanting what everyone else wants is okay.
Considering you do not know me, nor my circumstances and experiences, I find it juvenile that you would 'think less of me' because I express my opinion under the same rights you have and use to express yours. I do not consider it discriminating against them, considering I would happily agree with them to have a separate entity exactly as marriage, just not traditional marriage. Have you ever been to a Jewish wedding? It's different from a Christian wedding, is it not? Am I discriminatory for agreeing with a Jew to have the right to a Jewish wedding, rather than changing the meaning of Christian weddings?


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#30 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 12:29 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
Considering you do not know me, nor my circumstances and experiences, I find it juvenile that you would 'think less of me' because I express my opinion under the same rights you have and use to express yours. I do not consider it discriminating against them, considering I would happily agree with them to have a separate entity exactly as marriage, just not traditional marriage. Have you ever been to a Jewish wedding? It's different from a Christian wedding, is it not? Am I discriminatory for agreeing with a Jew to have the right to a Jewish wedding, rather than changing the meaning of Christian weddings?
It's not changing a Christian marriage. It's changing the LEGAL definition of marriage. It's not changing any religious definitions. If a Christian church doesn't want to marry a gay couple, they don't have to.




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)
   
  (#31 (permalink)) Old
Algernon Offline
CPT-1 Phlebotomist
Outside, huh?
**********
 
Algernon's Avatar
 
Name: Holly
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Roseville, California

Posts: 4,124
Join Date: January 21st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 12:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by anishift View Post
That's kind of a silly question. Sin is sin is sin right? If you really think that question it a valid one, NO ONE would get married in church. Every single person lies, and church does not support that, so why would you want to get married there? It's just that lying isn't something they can control, and at this point gay marriage is something that they have (in Cali., with Prop. 8) successfully rallied against. Can you imagine, if your church turned you out because you are a liar? Sin is sin is sin, right? Wrong, apparently. We all do things that are against the "laws" of the Bible, that doesn't mean we don't want to marry in the church of our beliefs, in the house of our Lord. With the people we have possibly grown up with and known for years. People are just a lot more accepting of things like lying because they do those things themselves or because they are numb to them, and I'm sure they would not be so quick to kick themselves out of church for an equal sin to homosexuality.. sin is sin is sin. People just aren't used to homosexuality yet.

I'm not talking about sin. Sinning is a bit different than calling yourself a homosexual. I don't know homosexuals in my church, and my church isn't conservative. There's a reason why most homosexuals and churches conflict... They aren't very accepting. I live in California, one of the most secular and homosexually influenced states, and I haven't really seen many homosexual ceremonies done in the church.

I hate to sound rude if this does, but it really doesn't matter if marriage is a religious ceremony "to you." World of Warcraft is real to me, but the reality is that it's NOT real. Similarly, marriage is not a religious ceremony. It was celebrated non-religiously by plenty of cultures before they even heard of Christianity. People being bonded to each other for the rest of their lives for benefits predates religion in some places. So while for you, I'm sure it will be a very religious and spiritual ceremony, the practice in general is not truly Christian or religious. It's not one thing that was invented by one person in one religion, it happened in all parts of the world and is just as much secular as it is religious. It's seen as religious because most people identify (although it seems like fewer and fewer actually practice the religions they claim to identify with) with a religion so they get married in a church or religious matter, but plenty of agnostics and atheists get married and have gotten married for many many many years. For you, it may be. But in general, it is what it is... neutral.

I'm not talking about sin. Sinning is a bit different than calling yourself a homosexual. I don't know homosexuals in my church, and my church isn't conservative. There's a reason why most homosexuals and churches conflict... They aren't very accepting. I live in California, one of the most secular and homosexually influenced states, and I haven't really seen many homosexual ceremonies done in the church.

I didn't really want to bring up my belief on this topic, but I believe marriage is a man and a woman, not a man/man, woman/woman. So... Not to sound rude either, that's my belief. I support to let them get united, but in all honest, "marriage" isn't the correct term.


Geek? Nerd? More like intellectual badass.

"You ran through Africa, and Asia, and Indonesia.. And now I've found you, and I love you. I want to know your name."
  Send a message via Yahoo to Algernon  
  (#32 (permalink)) Old
Algernon Offline
CPT-1 Phlebotomist
Outside, huh?
**********
 
Algernon's Avatar
 
Name: Holly
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Roseville, California

Posts: 4,124
Join Date: January 21st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 12:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penguin Queen View Post
This is what I meant about the church. If someones objection to gay marriage is that marriage is a religous ceremony, then why don't they object to hetrosexual marriages in hotels? surely thats against the principle that its a religous ceremony as well.
God is everywhere, and a holy man, a pastor, priest, is a representation of God. So if someone such as the following decides to marry them, they would probably do it religiously.

Just like funerals, they are religious as well.


Geek? Nerd? More like intellectual badass.

"You ran through Africa, and Asia, and Indonesia.. And now I've found you, and I love you. I want to know your name."
  Send a message via Yahoo to Algernon  
  (#33 (permalink)) Old
Marvin Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Name: Marvin
Gender: Male
Location: USA

Posts: 1,576
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 01:00 AM

There are theories suggesting an evoluntionary reason for homosexuality.. I remember reading somewhere mothers with homosexual sons tend to be more fertile with straight girls. Also, in some animal groups, the gay animals help raise children, same in some human cultures. But saying its disordered to be gay for the reason you stated is also effectively saying any heterosexual who does not desire offspring are also disordered. Also, post menopausal women are an abomination to nature.. a lot less species has post menapausal females, according the the TV show IQ (though might be worth looking it up), only humans and killer whales experience this. On top of that, humans are clearly not simply creatures of basic instincts. The cognitive functions we have cause us to do many things that are completely irrelevant to passing on our genes... like, hmm... make condoms and the pill? Oh, and abortion. We also sometimes abandon our children, in orphanages if they are lucky, or sometimes on the street to die. But my point is, you can't reduce humanity in that way. I mean, if thesituation came about where gay people had to have straightsex to make babies, mostof them could. In fact a lot have had straight sex, but if they don't like straight sex, and there is no need for them to reproduce, so what? Not to mention, there's always turkey basters

Another thing, is you are giving orthadox Western religion a monoloplyover marriage. There are some religious sects that aren't against gay marriage. And if people personally believe marriage is for a man and a woman, well, I know its been said before, but really, don't get married to the same sex? Keep in sacred in your own lives? What does it matter how other people are using marriage? To be fair, the Christian view of marriage was screwed up in the West a long time ago with the ever increasing divorce rates. But what other people are doing isnt the point, its your job to enforce your own beliefs upon yourself, not others. If marriage is special to you, it shouldnt matter if its not to Britney, or whoever. Likewise it shouldnt matter if two men get married, because it does not involve you.

I believe people have a right to disagree with gay marriage, but not to demand by law that others can't have a different view.

And you know what? considering homosexuality (and heterosexuality for that matter) are terms only coined in recent history, its not suprising this is a new issue. Also, its not suprising that in say Greece, men just married women. It was a contract, and often property and wealth based. Women were not objects of romantic love. The Greek philosphers felt that men could only really love men, because in effect, women had no soul. Marriage wasn't about love, and man-man love was considered the ultimate type of love. Things change. Things always change.

People who think that gays should have something identical to marriage but called something else are far too stuck up on semantics, and it's generally a defence mechanism. Surely it's better to spend time trying to fix the decaying family, then stopping a small percentage of the population getting married? I seems like a pointless fight.
   
2 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#34 (permalink)) Old
thebigmole Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
thebigmole's Avatar
 
Name: Taylor
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: Orlando, Fl

Posts: 1,668
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 02:26 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
"Think less of", mah bad. Still, you're going to "think less of" someone who is against your beliefs. You don't hate them, but just because they don't share the same opinion you do, you're not only going to disagree with them, but you're also going to think less of them as a person?

So basically you're discriminating against people who are discriminated against others?
If those beliefs discriminate against others then yes I think less of them. However that is not discrimination. I don't treat them any differently, I don't deny them rights.

@Phin Jewish Weddings? Christian Weddings? What do you call a wedding between athiests? The whole argument is confusing. Legally a "Jewish wedding" is the same as a "Christian wedding", so as long as legally a "Gay wedding" is the same as any other wedding that's fine. But are you saying that a "Jewish wedding" is not a traditional wedding because it isn't Christian. I just find that confusing.


"For Ignorance killed the cat, Curiosity was framed." -Caitlin McGrath

"For this thing we call failure is not the falling down, but the staying down." -Mary Pickford

"But the music's so happy!" -Little Sally: Urinetown

"If our own policies aren't supporting equality then what are we fighting for?"- Kathy Griffin
   
  (#35 (permalink)) Old
Xujhan Offline
Resident Atheist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Xujhan's Avatar
 
Name: Fletcher
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 2,024
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 03:31 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
I do not believe the argument has anything to do with equal rights. Why are homosexuals in such a rush to breach traditional marriage anyhow? Why cannot they settle for equal? Marriage is between a man and a woman, that is the definition of marriage. Should it be changed? I suppose that's the argument, but it has nothing to do with equal rights.
Because they want to get married. Not gay-married, not civil-union'd, not common-law-married. Gay people, in most places, don't have the right to get married, yet marriage is really important to a lot of people. I'd be furious if because of some religious tradition I weren't allowed to be married. "Alternate marriage" is even less acceptable to gay Christians, who want to be able to have a "traditional" religious marriage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
Besides from hate crimes that every singe 'different' group suffers from at point whether it be Jews, Blacks, short people, fat people, etc, etc, where is it that gays do not have equal rights? Is there a federal law I do not know about banning homosexuals from entering certain buildings? Even in military, the 'don't ask don't tell' is being lifted (which I find absolutely ridiculous considering it is not necessary to spout your sexuality within the military because that is NOT what you are there for, and if it is get out). And in sense of marriage, obviously there is the problem, but would it not be easier to come to a compromise where YOU do not have to trample the rights of people who have a right to hold the traditions of marriage sacred? Sure, it may be a primitive ideal, but those people are in their right to preserve it. Why can you not settle for an equivilent? Why is it all-or-nothing? Is that really a way to go about something like this?
Again, gay people do not have the right to get married. That's inequality. You may think it's a minor thing, but that's only you. Other people may think it's a very major thing. The only way you can say that gay people are "trampling" the rights of others is if you think that being discriminatory is a right. It's not! There is no grey area here, just as Taylor says. You have the right to think whatever you want, but you don't have the right to act however you want. If you don't want gay people to get married because of your feelings, then acting on that is infringing on the rights of others.


The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
  Send a message via MSN to Xujhan  
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#36 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 05:24 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan View Post
Because they want to get married. Not gay-married, not civil-union'd, not common-law-married. Gay people, in most places, don't have the right to get married, yet marriage is really important to a lot of people. I'd be furious if because of some religious tradition I weren't allowed to be married. "Alternate marriage" is even less acceptable to gay Christians, who want to be able to have a "traditional" religious marriage.
Well that is you setting a view that being 'gay-married' is not the same as being married. When there comes a point where there is no legal difference, other than terminology, then what is the possible point in fighting to become regular marriage other than creating conflict?


Quote:
Again, gay people do not have the right to get married. That's inequality. You may think it's a minor thing, but that's only you. Other people may think it's a very major thing. The only way you can say that gay people are "trampling" the rights of others is if you think that being discriminatory is a right. It's not! There is no grey area here, just as Taylor says. You have the right to think whatever you want, but you don't have the right to act however you want. If you don't want gay people to get married because of your feelings, then acting on that is infringing on the rights of others.
Well I believe it is a fact, it's a minor thing. There are a million and one thing I can think of that people should be worrying more about. I believe there should be a type of 'marriage' where homosexuals can enjoy whatever legal benefits married couples achieve, but I do not believe that they need to change the name of marriage in order to gain it. It is not necessary. It is a right to withhold certain traditions, such as marriage. There is absolutely no reason to change the definition of marriage other than a needless cause set up by a minority to practice their rights to free speech. You do it because you can, rather then looking to what is logical, and best for all parties-- set up a 'marriage' for homosexuals with the same benefits, under a different alias. What is wrong with that, other than the narrow minded public's inability to accept it? Because of my feelings? Are you not wanting homosexuals to be married because of their feelings entirely?

Quote:
It's not changing a Christian marriage. It's changing the LEGAL definition of marriage. It's not changing any religious definitions. If a Christian church doesn't want to marry a gay couple, they don't have to
And this Christian church would end up all over the news being denounced for following what they believed in and likely end up forced to marry the couple.
Right, or wrong, it's hypocrisy.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#37 (permalink)) Old
Xujhan Offline
Resident Atheist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Xujhan's Avatar
 
Name: Fletcher
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 2,024
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 07:47 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phin View Post
Well that is you setting a view that being 'gay-married' is not the same as being married. When there comes a point where there is no legal difference, other than terminology, then what is the possible point in fighting to become regular marriage other than creating conflict?

Well I believe it is a fact, it's a minor thing. There are a million and one thing I can think of that people should be worrying more about. I believe there should be a type of 'marriage' where homosexuals can enjoy whatever legal benefits married couples achieve, but I do not believe that they need to change the name of marriage in order to gain it. It is not necessary. It is a right to withhold certain traditions, such as marriage. There is absolutely no reason to change the definition of marriage other than a needless cause set up by a minority to practice their rights to free speech. You do it because you can, rather then looking to what is logical, and best for all parties-- set up a 'marriage' for homosexuals with the same benefits, under a different alias. What is wrong with that, other than the narrow minded public's inability to accept it? Because of my feelings? Are you not wanting homosexuals to be married because of their feelings entirely?
Wonderful, you may believe what you like. Everyone can. But we don't have the right withhold a basic happiness like marriage from other people just because we believe they don't deserve it, or that it's not "proper". There is no reason to withhold marriage from gay people, other than to placate those who for some reason cannot stand to see some other people happy. Allowing gay people to get married doesn't invalidate or weaken in any way the meaning marriage holds for anyone else. Gay people don't want marriage because it's some status symbol of equality, or to raise hell, or to ruin religion, or whatever else you argue. They just want to get married!


The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
  Send a message via MSN to Xujhan  
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#38 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 04:05 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan View Post
Wonderful, you may believe what you like. Everyone can. But we don't have the right withhold a basic happiness like marriage from other people just because we believe they don't deserve it, or that it's not "proper". There is no reason to withhold marriage from gay people, other than to placate those who for some reason cannot stand to see some other people happy. Allowing gay people to get married doesn't invalidate or weaken in any way the meaning marriage holds for anyone else. Gay people don't want marriage because it's some status symbol of equality, or to raise hell, or to ruin religion, or whatever else you argue. They just want to get married!
What do you mean by "basic"? Happiness is happiness. There's really no "basic" or "extreme". If you're not happy before you get married, what kind of relationship is that? And sure, marriage can make someone more happy...but even Bob, a necrophiliac, can be happy by having sex with dead bodies. Why can't Bob have the right to dig up dead bodies and have sex with them? And who says that you can't be happy without getting married? You don't need to get married to be happy, you don't need to be married to move in with someone, you don't need to be married to raise children, etc. The only difference between marriage and long-term relationships is legal documentation and more involvement with finances. Whether homosexuals "deserve" marriage has nothing to do with my opinion that gay marriage shouldn't be legalized.

I view it like this: Let's pretend that I'm a transvestite. Sure, I dress up like a woman...I act like a woman...I feel that I am a woman, but regardless...I was born a male. If you want gay marriage legalized, then let it be legalized...although call it something different than marriage. Marriage is between a man and woman, that's how it's been for the longest time and shouldn't be altered.

And, of course, don't forget about the men and women who meet up one day and get married. I don't even think that should be considered marriage. I don't think animals should get married, and I definitely don't think people should be able to marry objects. Marriage should be even MORE strict, but still be between a man and woman. Anything else, it's still chocolate, just different type of chocolate. You can't call a Reeses bar a Hershey bar because they aren't the same thing.

And who says that men and women don't marry "just to get married"? Who says some homosexuals don't marry for financial reasons?



Last edited by Brandon; January 25th 2010 at 04:25 PM.
   
  (#39 (permalink)) Old
Marvin Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Name: Marvin
Gender: Male
Location: USA

Posts: 1,576
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 05:10 PM

I think my last post really did address a lot of relevant points.... someone please comment on it, either to disagree or add to it, so I dont feel it was pointless

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
What do you mean by "basic"? Happiness is happiness. There's really no "basic" or "extreme".


Point one, just as a psychologist, I feel the need to point out, there are different levels of happiness. There is a basic and an extreme... though interestingly, being too happy can in some cases be considered neurotic. This was completely off topic, I just thought I wanted to point out the world isn't black and white, it generally works on a scale.

Quote:
If you're not happy before you get married, what kind of relationship is that?


I agree that marriage won't suddenly make an unhappy relationship happy. But I think the point that was being made wasn't about how gay people need to get married to have a healthy relationship, but about happiness in expressing their relationship in this idealised way that is constantly promoted to us from childhood - the whole grow up, meet a nice person, get married, have kids and 'live happily ever after'. Ok, that's bullshit in reality, but it's a value held throughout society, and then gays are being barred from what society has made them desire. It's a bit mean, don't you think? For me, I only want to get married because I'm religious, and sure, you may not be able to reconcile homosexuality and Christianity, and you are free to hold that belief, but hey, what can I do, penises repulse me, and I fall in love with women. That's between me and God. Not me, God and you. Outside of religion, marriage is such a heteronormative, even kinda instrinsically sexist insitution, that theoretically, I feel I should oppose. Not to mention, the benefits from marriage don't help poorer people. I read an interesting article called 'Gay Marriage is Racist', which, from my interperatation of it, wasn't talking so much about gay marriage, but the existing flaws of marriage, and how they would hit gay poor and ethnic minorities twice as hard with gay marriage. It's quite interesting to see the points raised.

Nonetheless, particularly over the time I've been on teenhelp, quite a common area of distress of people discovering they are gay, is the crushing of this idealised future they grew up with. I don't understand people's almost need of marriage to be complete personally, but it really is an issue for some people, and it causes them a lot of distress.

Quote:
And sure, marriage can make someone more happy...but even Bob, a necrophiliac, can be happy by having sex with dead bodies. Why deny Bob his right to dig up dead bodies and have sex with them?

Last time I checked, dead bodies can't really give consent, verbally, written, anything. Because, well, they are dead. Not to mention, it's still not a victimless crime, because in our society, that would be considered as a form of disrespect and probably damage, which would upset the grieving family. This is applied outside of just sex, such as your need to be an organ donor for the doctors to take your organs... which is absurd. Also, digging up dead bodies seems like a bad idea for the practice of necrophillia, because most of those bodies would be rotting, or literally just bones. So its both highly unhygienic, and incredibly impractical. Ok, my humour is not funny.


Quote:
And who says that you can't be happy without getting married? You don't need to get married to be happy, you don't need to be married to move in with someone, you don't need to be married to raise children, etc.

You don't. Many couples gay and straight, who are able to get married, opt not to, because they don't see it as needed. Which is fair enough. The argument isn't 'should gays have to get married', its 'should they be allowed'.


Quote:
The only difference between marriage and long-term relationships is legal documentation and more involvement with finances. Whether homosexuals "deserve" marriage has nothing to do with my opinion that gay marriage shouldn't be legalized.

So even if they 'deserved' it (I again with the inverted commas, because I think its the wrong word, likewise, I think its the wrong word for straights getting married), you would be comfortable denying them it? Really?


Quote:
I view it like this: Let's pretend that I'm a transvestite. Sure, I dress up like a woman...I act like a woman...I feel that I am a woman, but regardless...I was born a male.
Just for some awareness raising. Transvestites identify with the sex they were born. Transvestism is basically 'dress up', sometimes for sexual pleasure, sometimes for other reasons. But it's generally part time, and nothing to do with the gender identity of the individual. I assume you were looking for the word transsexual? You probably don't care, but I figure if you are going to be against something, you may as well know something about it I won't go into too much depth, but I also want to highlight that sex and gender are for some, incredibly complex issues. Without going into trans, because that's a whole new thread, I shall mention intersex conditions. Some people (more then you would think), are born physically with an ambigious sex, not simply just 'boy' or 'girl'. Some people actually have a external sex of the opposite to their chromosomes. There's one condition that effect XY individuals where hormone receptors don't work right, and these XY individuals physically develop external female sex. Infact, they often are more womanly then XX women, as even XX women are effected by male sex hormones in their blood. Anyway, this is off topic, my point was, things are often not black and white.

Quote:
If you want gay marriage legalized, then let it be legalized...although call it something different than marriage. Marriage is between a man and woman, that's how it's been for the longest time and shouldn't be altered.

And for the longest time, humans were ground bound, aka, couldnt fly. Women were not equal humans, in many places, women had no souls. You could only talk to people face to face, or through letters delivered by messengers. In war, you killed people with a blunt or sharp weapon, not with a bullet half way across a field. Slavery was deemed ok. Husbands couldn't rape their wife (in the UK, marital rape only became recognised in 1990). In the middle ages, a wife who spoke out of turn, or in a way her husband didnt like could have this metal frame put on her head that would pry her mouth open, and her head would be dunked into a horribly dirty pond, and it'd all go in her mouth. Then a few hundred years later, a law was made telling husbands they could only beat their wifes with a stick no thicker then their thumb. Decomcracy wasn't common. The Earth was flat, and and left handed people were evil and burnt at the stake.

I'm glad we never change anything, ever, because tradition and long standingness is the way forward?


Quote:
And, of course, don't forget about the men and women who meet up one day and get married. I don't even think that should be considered marriage.
Why not, if it works for them? Like marriage is a contract. Biblically speaking, because I assume that is your faith?, there's no requirement against this. The most common verse people use to outline what marriage is (and generally the man + woman thing) goes along the lines of how a man should leave his mother and father and cling to his wife. Ok, the marriage is probably going to end badly, and I'll agree its a stupid thing to do, but its their life.

Quote:
I don't think animals should get married, and I definitely don't think people should be able to marry objects.

Animals can't understand what a contract is, nor do animals desire marriage, because its a human construct. Marriage is not a natural practice, and as animals can neither understand, desire or consent, of course they shouldn't get married. As for objects... well, if thats what I said about animals, can you guess my opinion on objects?


Quote:
Marriage should be even MORE strict, but still be between a man and woman. Anything else, it's still chocolate, just different type of chocolate. You can't call a Reeses bar a Hershey bar because they aren't the same thing.

But if a Reeses bar became a Hershey's bar, because the companies decided to do that, well then they are the same thing? I'm not sure what those chocolate bars actually are, but I guess thats not the point. Rather, I think your example is a bit self defeating. As you said, they are both chocolate, but they are different from each other. Well appling it to this discussion, both are marriage, but expressed/practiced differently. Even forgetting gay people, this is true of marriage, and I think it should be in a free land. For example, a (truely) Christian marriage will probably be lived differently then an Atheist marriage. The marriage of a traveling salesman will be different from a marriage held by a small community doctor. Some people get married to much older/ounger people. Some people get married to people of different cultures. Etc. Marriage is diverse as it is. But marriage *is* a secular institution in both my country, and yours, and whilst some (probably more in your country) get married out of religion, that is a personal decision, the legal marriage is secular. Marriage is a legal contract, given to relationships for various reasons. There is no reason a secular meaning of a word can't change, particularly in a country where you can freely practice whatever faith you desire. I would go as far as to say that specific churches against gay marriage shouldn't have to perform such ceremonies, though I wouldnt extend this to individuals working in a court.


Quote:
And who says that men and women don't marry "just to get married"? Who says some homosexuals don't marry for financial reasons?
I'm not sure what you are getting at? Oh no, the big bad gays want to get financial breaks which were designed to help cohabitating partners in the days it wasnt really ok to cohabitate without a marriage? Oh noes!?

One more thing. If gay marriage can destroy marriage and its value for the straight people who think marriage should be between a man and a woman, there's a lot more wrong then same sex couples getting married. If you are looking to fix the decay of the traditional family, you are a) looking in the wrong place, as its been happening a lot longer then serious discussion about gay marriage, and b) marriage is going to have to change in some way anyway if you want to keep marriage strong. I think stronger marriages are of more value then simply 'traditional'. But in the way the world is changing, not only feminism, but the very nature of life, goals, education, ease of moving away, meeting people, etc, etc. Again, forgetting gays, marriage needs to change, and 'traditional marriage', which is always thrown around, really is not just about one man + one woman, so yeah, I think the campaigns for Protection of Marriage are totally missing the actual main problems.

Last edited by Marvin; January 25th 2010 at 05:16 PM.
   
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#40 (permalink)) Old
Xujhan Offline
Resident Atheist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Xujhan's Avatar
 
Name: Fletcher
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 2,024
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: I don't understand it: a gay marriage debate - January 25th 2010, 06:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
What do you mean by "basic"? Happiness is happiness. There's really no "basic" or "extreme". If you're not happy before you get married, what kind of relationship is that? And sure, marriage can make someone more happy...but even Bob, a necrophiliac, can be happy by having sex with dead bodies. Why can't Bob have the right to dig up dead bodies and have sex with them? And who says that you can't be happy without getting married? You don't need to get married to be happy, you don't need to be married to move in with someone, you don't need to be married to raise children, etc. The only difference between marriage and long-term relationships is legal documentation and more involvement with finances. Whether homosexuals "deserve" marriage has nothing to do with my opinion that gay marriage shouldn't be legalized.
It's tempting just to say "what Teagan said" and leave it at that, but just to be clear:

By basic happiness, I meant to remind that your own government once ruled that marriage was a basic right that should be open to all people regardless of their station. Something I happen to agree with.

And the only difference to you is the legal documentation, but this is the same point I've been beating over Phin's head. Just because it's true of you doesn't mean it's true of everyone. Look, I'm as atheist and progressive as they come. I'm perfectly aware that I shouldn't think there's any real difference between a "true" marriage and something legally equivalent. But like Teagan said; so many of us grew up idealizing the perfect white wedding that there's a huge emotional difference between the two. I'm too old now to truly change that feeling, even if I had the desire to. This is going to be true of many gay couples, and that's not even mentioning gay Christian couples to whom marriage has religious implications as well. And she's right; idealizing marriage as a society and then denying it to an entire group of people simply because it's "improper" is cruel.


The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
  Send a message via MSN to Xujhan  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
debate, gay, marriage, understand

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All material copyright ©1998-2019, TeenHelp.
Terms | Legal | Privacy | Conduct | Complaints

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000-2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search engine optimization by vBSEO.
Theme developed in association with vBStyles.