so I had chick-fil-a this morning

[ItODDospeed]

Well that's a Gay Pride Parade, and if I saw that I'd be grossed out. We do have public decency laws, and they apply to Gay Pride Events as well. For that matter lesbians could show breasts, but funny how that wasn't put into light by you. Next time you're at a Gay Pride Parade accessing the penises being shown, you should call the police. You focus a lot on penises and homosexuality...

Geoff, it's funny how you said I compared when it was a quote, and that was denoted by the quotation marks surrounding the quote. Grammar 101.

[geoff]

Sinfix: I've seen the movie "Bruno" and I have a gay friend who told me all about his first parade. I have never been to one nor will I ever.

Blank: Simon brought it up man. It's just funny the comparison he made.

[ItODDospeed]

So you have PERSONALLY been to a gay pride parade and seen with your own eyes guys pull their meat sausage out and wave it around?

If you have, you should probably hate the majority of straight people as well, specifically slutty females that show their breasts in public or those who make out in a public area.


Why do you keep bringing up things that are totally irrelevant to the conversation? Indecent exposure and child molestation (what you can be charged with if you whip your junk out in front of a child) has nothing to do with religions forcing their dogma on everyone.

Hahaaa, I couldn't even type it fast enough before y'all got to the point. *chuckle-snort*

[geoff]

Like I said. I found it ironic. As far as lesbians go, lots of them enjoy the company of a man every now and then.

[ItODDospeed]

oops...I double posted...

[bu villain]

You answered a question with a question and i can answer it with the same question i asked you to begin with. Why change a tradition that a large portion of christians hold sacred? Why arent gay people happy with civil unions? they can be together, they can live together, they get benefits? why arent that happy with that?

Because they want the title "married". The same way christians want that title to remain between a man and woman. Who's right? neither? both?.... so there needs to be a compromise.

Because marriage is both a Christian tradition and a legal status. While they share the same name and roots, they are not the same thing. Gays aren't trying to change the Christian tradition, they are trying to change the legal status definition. That's why you don't see gays protesting church's for not marrying them. In the states where civil unions have been granted, they have not had ALL the benefits of heterosexual marriage. If they did, I personally think many gays would be more willing to compromise on the terminology.

[C230K]

I just add this...

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/s720x720/480076_605512726235_128477134_n.jpg

I already beat you to it:p


oops...I double posted...

nobody is paying attention to you

[bu villain]

Currently, it is legally defined in each state. Just get enough people to tell their state congressman to change the law. It's that simple, but the gay community doesn't seem to be interested in doing it the proper legal way.

What exactly are they doing that is illegal? Much of our country's application of law is not based on popular vote. Shit, I wish I got to vote on the Citizens United decision.

[ItODDospeed]

nobody is paying attention to you

And yet you replied.

GFYS.

[quickdodge®]

It is everyone's problem when they do not wish to follow the process to properly change the law. Everyone else has to petition their state congressmen when they want a marriage law changed, why should a specific special interest minority group be allowed to overthrow the normal process?

In 1996, GA enacted section 19-3-3.1 in the Georgia Code, stopping gay marriage in other states from being recognized in GA. The gay community has not even bothered to make much of a challenge to the law.

In 2004, GA's state congress passed SR 595, which ameded the GA state Constitution to define marriage as one man - one woman. Again, the gay community has not mounted any real challenge to the law.

Why can't the gay community work to change the GA law through the legal process? Do they think that they cannot get enough support?

I don't know, dude. I guess I just don't care enough to make it a concern for me. I guess I'd like to be at a point in my life where I could let other people's issues be my issues. Later, QD.

[Sinfix_15]

I also would like to state that Dan Cathy has the right to say what he wants. I believe in freedom of speech, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. I don't agree with what Cathy said, but I'll still eat me some CF-A. We all have the right to believe what we choose, that's a foundation of the U.S.

IMO, some of the actions, protests and completely ignorant comments that have been stated bother me; especially, as a U.S. citizen, but we all have the right to feel the way we want.

If you don't know, here it is, religion is a BELIEF - there is no science to support "God", ghosts, spirits, an after-life or "Jesus." The differences in time between the Old and New Testament is 500 years - are you or anyone gonna say that's not a Human Doctrine?

Christians need to stop pushing their beliefs on others.

"Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of it, but please don't whip it out in public and start waving it around... and PLEASE don't try to shove it down my child's throat."

classic.

[Sinfix_15]

Because marriage is both a Christian tradition and a legal status. While they share the same name and roots, they are not the same thing. Gays aren't trying to change the Christian tradition, they are trying to change the legal status definition. That's why you don't see gays protesting church's for not marrying them. In the states where civil unions have been granted, they have not had ALL the benefits of heterosexual marriage. If they did, I personally think many gays would be more willing to compromise on the terminology.

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/civil-union.jpg

[bu villain]

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/civil-union.jpg

Sure, many will not be happy with anything less than "marriage" because as I said, to have two different words under the law implies they are not the same as married people. You still haven't addressed the fact that the church's definition and the legal definition don't have to be the same.

[David88vert]

you're guilty of the same thing he is, but actually more so. You use "not true because it's in the bible" at least as much as he uses the the bible as a reference. You cant declare that you're right on the issue of religion and say that he's wrong anytime he uses the bible. You dont win arguments from thinking that you're right.... hell, i think i'm right about everything. I'll consider the argument "won" when i convince you that i'm right. So far, Geoff doesnt seem to be anywhere near considering your argument.

"im right, you're stupid" is not winning an argument. I want to make Geoff second guess the bible or to produce a question that he cant find the answer for, anything that changes his way of thinking. Then i will consider that a victory. Declaring yourself the winner of an argument is usually a sign that you're not winning an argument. If you have to declare to the other person that you're right, your argument obviously wasnt that compelling.

and as previously stated.... again, you walk the path i laid out for you and responded to me the same way you do Geoff, with a declaration of your own perceived intellect followed by an insult. You know this isnt a rap battle right?

There is really no victory in convincing anyone of anything. If everyone agreed, then we would just be robots. It's ok to not agree.

[David88vert]

geoff, i would love to but unfortunately i don't have much free-time on my hands...

perhaps some other time

i usually stop by IA for a week or so then leave for a year. if the illuminati doesn't take me out or nibiru doesn't crash into earth by then im down to battle you next year. hows that sound, bro?


it's been fun, guys.



We will all be gone in December. The Mayans said so.

[David88vert]

Hey 12/21/12 man. If we make it all out alive then I'm down. Take care of yourself man



Where is that date in the Bible??????

[David88vert]

Well I did, but it was statements I was referring to, not a single letter. There are far more founding members of the Constitution whom believe the same. Moreover, in that letter that you posted, it implies the backwards thinking of Christians rather than the progression of science for modern thought. That thought reigns today by most Christians, and the easiest example is Creationism Vs. Evolution.

You need to read and understand what was implied by the context of the letter you quoted.

I've read most of Jefferson's writings, as well as most of the founding fathers. I understand quite well.

[David88vert]

Because marriage is both a Christian tradition and a legal status. While they share the same name and roots, they are not the same thing. Gays aren't trying to change the Christian tradition, they are trying to change the legal status definition. That's why you don't see gays protesting church's for not marrying them. In the states where civil unions have been granted, they have not had ALL the benefits of heterosexual marriage. If they did, I personally think many gays would be more willing to compromise on the terminology.

Interestingly, they have not had any of our state congressmen submit a resolution calling for marriage to be re-defined. They have not tried to change the law in the correct legal way at all - instead, they have mounted a media blitz and have attempted to find a way to force the federal government to override the states' rights and go outside the correct legal process that everyone else has to follow.
Don't you think that if the majority of Georgian's wanted marriage to be redefined for same-sex marriages that it would be passed? The fact is that Georgians supported the Defense of Marriage Act in 2004 overwhelmingly.

[David88vert]

What exactly are they doing that is illegal? Much of our country's application of law is not based on popular vote. Shit, I wish I got to vote on the Citizens United decision.



As I stated, the marriage license laws are defined at a state level. Georgia has overwhelmingly voted to clarify the definition of marriage as man-woman in 2004. There are no resolutions being promoted in the state legislature to change that. Instead, the gay community wishes to have DC override the states area of management of marriage laws and redefine it from a federal level. This is not how the structure of government was setup, nor has ever been managed like this. it is against everything the founding fathers setup.

[.blank cd]

This is not how the structure of government was setup, nor has ever been managed like this. it is against everything the founding fathers setup.Class, can anyone tell David88 why this is incorrect? Can anyone think of any state and local laws that were nullified by a federal act in recent history? Maybe there's a REALLY important example?

[Echonova]

I'm going to post in this thread until everyone thinks like me.

[David88vert]

Class, can anyone tell David88 why this is incorrect? Can anyone think of any state and local laws that were nullified by a federal act in recent history? Maybe there's a REALLY important example?

Do you realize that the color of one's skin is not the same as the actions of an individual?
Do you realize that gay people are allowed to marry? They can legally marry anyone from the opposite sex that they choose. They have the same rights as anyone else.

Read the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the Amendments, and case law, then come back.

[.blank cd]

Do you realize that the color of one's skin is not the same as the actions of an individual?What you don't realize (or fail to grasp anyway) is that, like skin color, sexual orientation is something some individuals have no control over. Discrimination is discrimination. Period. If you want to sugar coat it to make yourself sound less homophobic, go right ahead. But that's neither here nor there.


Read the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the Amendments, and case law, then come back.what are you talking about? Case law for what? Do you know what "case law" means?

[.blank cd]

Do you realize that gay people are allowed to marry? They can legally marry anyone from the opposite sex that they choose. They have the same rights as anyone else.This is not an equal right. I, as a straight man, want the right to marry the person I'm in love with, regardless of their gender.

[.blank cd]

I'm going to post in this thread until everyone thinks like me.

I'm gonna post as long as beliefs are being touted as facts. Lol.

[David88vert]

What you don't realize (or fail to grasp anyway) is that, like skin color, sexual orientation is something some individuals have no control over. Discrimination is discrimination. Period. If you want to sugar coat it to make yourself sound less homophobic, go right ahead. But that's neither here nor there.

what are you talking about? Case law for what? Do you know what "case law" means?

Seriously, are you trying to say that a person has no choice on what he does/does not do? If you really believe that, then there is no help available for you. I choose my actions, and I am responsible for them. You appear to have no concept of personal responsibility. Make a choice, be responsible, and live with the consequences. The consequence for being gay is that you cannot legally marry your homosexual partner. That's a fact. It's also fact that gays can marry just like anyone else - to the opposite sex. It's also fact that they have the same rights to petition to have the law changed through the same process that everyone else has to go through (something you fail repeatedly to address, as you know it is true).
This is not oppression like slavery or racial discrimination, and is it unfair to our ancestors and heritage to treat it as being on the same level. Being black is not an action, and there is nothing that any of them could do about it.

Read through court rulings from the formation of the country up through now, and find where the federal judical branch overruled laws concerning state laws on gay marriage.
I'll give you a start:
Defining Marriage: Defense of Marriage Acts and Same-Sex Marriage Laws (http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx)
Federal Appeals Court Invalidates California Ban on Same-Sex Marriage (http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/federal-appeals-court-california-ban.aspx)

Note that 6 states have gay marriage - these states went through the legislative process. This is what I have stated multiple times that the gay community needs to do to have legal gay marriage. What part of that do you not understand?

[David88vert]

This is not an equal right. I, as a straight man, want the right to marry the person I'm in love with, regardless of their gender.



How is it not an equal right? Anyone is allowed to marry an opposite gender spouse, in any state in the USA.

[David88vert]

I'm gonna post as long as beliefs are being touted as facts. Lol.


That's going to be a lot of posts from you, as you keep stating as fact that your BELIEF that homosexuality is genetic (which does not have the consensus that you previously stated as fact, nor does it have the proof to be scientific fact).
BTW - It is fine for you to believe that, and take it completely on faith. Perhaps one day science will discover a genetic link and be able to prove it as scientific fact. They just can't do that right now.

[.blank cd]

That's going to be a lot of posts from you, as you keep stating as fact that your BELIEF that homosexuality is genetic (which does not have the consensus that you previously stated as fact, nor does it have the proof to be scientific fact).
BTW - It is fine for you to believe that, and take it completely on faith. Perhaps one day science will discover a genetic link and be able to prove it as scientific fact. They just can't do that right now.Hmm. Never said that. This whole time I've only asserted what has been scientifically researched, you told me I was wrong and then posted up information proving I was right and tried to use it to say I was wrong. Good job.

[.blank cd]

This is not oppression like slavery or racial discrimination, and is it unfair to our ancestors and heritage to treat it as being on the same level.Funny, black civil rights leaders would disagree with you. Actually, not that funny:

"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group." -Coretta Scott King

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" -Martin Luther King Jr.

[Sinfix_15]

Seriously, are you trying to say that a person has no choice on what he does/does not do? If you really believe that, then there is no help available for you. I choose my actions, and I am responsible for them. You appear to have no concept of personal responsibility. Make a choice, be responsible, and live with the consequences. The consequence for being gay is that you cannot legally marry your homosexual partner. That's a fact. It's also fact that gays can marry just like anyone else - to the opposite sex. It's also fact that they have the same rights to petition to have the law changed through the same process that everyone else has to go through (something you fail repeatedly to address, as you know it is true).
This is not oppression like slavery or racial discrimination, and is it unfair to our ancestors and heritage to treat it as being on the same level. Being black is not an action, and there is nothing that any of them could do about it.

Read through court rulings from the formation of the country up through now, and find where the federal judical branch overruled laws concerning state laws on gay marriage.
I'll give you a start:
Defining Marriage: Defense of Marriage Acts and Same-Sex Marriage Laws (http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx)
Federal Appeals Court Invalidates California Ban on Same-Sex Marriage (http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/federal-appeals-court-california-ban.aspx)

Note that 6 states have gay marriage - these states went through the legislative process. This is what I have stated multiple times that the gay community needs to do to have legal gay marriage. What part of that do you not understand?

i agree with this 100%, but you word it better than i do.

[Sinfix_15]

Funny, black civil rights leaders would disagree with you. Actually, not that funny:

"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group." -Coretta Scott King

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" -Martin Luther King Jr.

Using black civil rights leaders as a reference is about as viable as using the bible. I'm an atheist, i trust what i read in the bible more than i trust the NAACP.

[.blank cd]

Using black civil rights leaders as a reference is about as viable as using the bible. I'm an atheist, i trust what i read in the bible more than i trust the NAACP.That's fine. To be honest, I don't expect too many people to grasp the concept of social injustice anyway. It's rather difficult unless you've personally experienced it.

[Sinfix_15]

That's fine. To be honest, I don't expect too many people to grasp the concept of social injustice anyway. It's rather difficult unless you've personally experienced it.

The root of this comment has an underlying tone of racism. I cant understand your point of view without being black? I'm a white guy that lives in a city that is 72% black. I played basketball in HS. When i go to the local rec center or park, i'm often the only white guy. When a white kid walks on to an inner city basketball court with 20-30 black guys there, do you think they welcome him with open arms? If you do, you're a fool. But, i wouldnt expect you to grasp that concept if you havnt experienced it. You deal with the bias, racism, prejudice or whatever you want to call it and you work thru it. They make fun of you, so what. They try to shove you around, so what. You keep coming back. Next thing you know, you're standing on a court together covered in each other's sweat and you look the other person in the eyes and realize you're not all that different. You can either be a victim or stereotypes or you can overcome them. You are the person who decides how powerful racism is. When i'm faced with these situations, i dont come back the next day with protest signs blaming everything on me being white and have Jesse Jackson give a speech about trying to shut down inner city parks.

[.blank cd]

I can't believe we're in 2012 and people actually try and twist reality to rationalize bigotry. Lol. Sad stuff.

[Sinfix_15]

I can't believe we're in 2012 and people actually try and twist reality to rationalize bigotry. Lol. Sad stuff.

I cant believe it's 2012 and black people still think "the black experience" is reality and try to rationalize that somehow the world is any different for them than it is for me.

[.blank cd]

The root of this comment has an underlying tone of racism. I cant understand your point of view without being black?For whatever reason, you and David fail to understand the concept of social injustice because you believe it's not happening. You think that the right for a homosexual to marry someone of the opposite sex is an equal right, because you believe he should suffer the consequences because it was "his choice" to be a homosexual. Because you believe its some kind of christian tradition that shouldn't be tarnished. Lol. Even if science proved it was a choice, so what? Let me take you back 60 years and explain what anti-miscegenation is. This is a biblically-derived belief that god separated the people of the earth and put them all on their own continents for a reason and we shouldn't mix races. Black people had every right to get married to someone in their own race. White people had every right to get married to someone in their own race, both enjoyed all the benefits of being married Are you black and want to "choose" to be with a white person? You have to suffer the consequences of not being able to share the benefits of getting married. Anti-miscegenation was a biblically rooted concept, just like this "Neo-miscegenation", prevalent in the bible belt (surprise, surprise) for as long as America had been around. Separate but equal is still alive and well, some people are just clever enough to sugar coat it and deliver it to the masses to save their own skin....

[Catnip]

For whatever reason, you and David fail to understand the concept of social injustice because you believe it's not happening.



I feel like his previous post was supporting that it does happen, but it's dependent on the "victim" to, for lack of better words, not be a pussy.

[dc5-rsx]

I cant believe it's 2012 and black people still think "the black experience" is reality and try to rationalize that somehow the world is any different for them than it is for me.

There you go placing the race card. Be proud that you live in white America.

Sent From My Omega Red Galaxy S2

[.blank cd]

There you go placing the race card. Be proud that you live in white America.

Sent From My Omega Red Galaxy S2Thats just social conditioning, Cant really fault him for that. Anytime you mention "civil rights" in the context of the early 20th century, people automatically think you're talking about black Americans and violent racial oppression. Like there wasnt anything else that was going on during that time. LOL

[Sinfix_15]

Thats just social conditioning, Cant really fault him for that. Anytime you mention "civil rights" in the context of the early 20th century, people automatically think you're talking about black Americans and violent racial oppression. Like there wasnt anything else that was going on during that time. LOL
We were on the same page.


I feel like his previous post was supporting that it does happen, but it's dependent on the "victim" to, for lack of better words, not be a pussy.
Pretty much. You hear about racism against blacks more because you hear about racism against blacks more. It's that simple.


For whatever reason, you and David fail to understand the concept of social injustice because you believe it's not happening. You think that the right for a homosexual to marry someone of the opposite sex is an equal right, because you believe he should suffer the consequences because it was "his choice" to be a homosexual. Because you believe its some kind of christian tradition that shouldn't be tarnished. Lol. Even if science proved it was a choice, so what? Let me take you back 60 years and explain what anti-miscegenation is. This is a biblically-derived belief that god separated the people of the earth and put them all on their own continents for a reason and we shouldn't mix races. Black people had every right to get married to someone in their own race. White people had every right to get married to someone in their own race, both enjoyed all the benefits of being married Are you black and want to "choose" to be with a white person? You have to suffer the consequences of not being able to share the benefits of getting married. Anti-miscegenation was a biblically rooted concept, just like this "Neo-miscegenation", prevalent in the bible belt (surprise, surprise) for as long as America had been around. Separate but equal is still alive and well, some people are just clever enough to sugar coat it and deliver it to the masses to save their own skin....

That's a fair argument. I'll have to let that one soak for a few and think of an answer.

[Sinfix_15]

There you go placing the race card. Be proud that you live in white America.

Sent From My Omega Red Galaxy S2

America is predominantly white because white people settled here. Black people "migrated" here. No other reason. Typical attitude though, throwing blame in every direction. It's you against the world, i know.... i read the memo. Everybody tryin to hold the black man down, that's why "white america" elected an african american president.

I'll tell you like i said to blank a few posts up. You decide how powerful racism is. Black people are the reason racism is alive in today's world. When you stop "Being a pussy"-Cat H. Nip (2012), things will improve. Might not happen over night like you want it, but it will happen.

I would be proud of living in white america, but being proud of being white would make me a racist. So i'll continue being apologetic to the poor black man to keep the peace.

[.blank cd]

I feel like his previous post was supporting that it does happen, but it's dependent on the "victim" to, for lack of better words, not be a pussy.And thats fine. But why put it all on the victim? If you call me a nigger or a fag, and you get your ass beat, doesnt mean you're no longer a bigot. We need to be more proactive, and not reactive in educating people on what bigotry is. My post was more directed towards David88, who cant make that connection, most likely because this is what he has grown up believing. He believes in separate but equal, so I drew him a parallel. In the 50's, this would be akin to being against interracial marriage, even earlier--interfaith or intertribal marriage.

[Sinfix_15]

And thats fine. But why put it all on the victim? If you call me a nigger or a fag, and you get your ass beat, doesnt mean you're no longer a bigot. We need to be more proactive, and not reactive in educating people on what bigotry is. My post was more directed towards David88, who cant make that connection, most likely because this is what he has grown up believing. He believes in separate but equal, so I drew him a parallel. In the 50's, this would be akin to being against interracial marriage, even earlier--interfaith or intertribal marriage.

Do we need to be equally as proactive in the black community about racism towards white people? Do we need to stop putting a mic in front of Jessie Jackson and the NAACP? do we need to start viewing the black panthers the same as the KKK? do we need to view redneck, honkey, and cracker the same as we do the word nigger?

If so, sign me up. I'm on your side. Lets get rid of all racism.

[Catnip]

And thats fine. But why put it all on the victim? If you call me a nigger or a fag, and you get your ass beat, doesnt mean you're no longer a bigot. We need to be more proactive, and not reactive in educating people on what bigotry is. My post was more directed towards David88, who cant make that connection, most likely because this is what he has grown up believing. He believes in separate but equal, so I drew him a parallel. In the 50's, this would be akin to being against interracial marriage, even earlier--interfaith or intertribal marriage.


Why put it all on the victim? No one said to do that, but everyone knows if you run from a dog it'll chase you.


The dog isn't clear of blame because a dog chases, but that pussy running should stand his ground or not get butt hurt over it.


I'm not disagreeing with educating, but we've been educating for years. There's nothing wrong with instilling a sense of thick skin. My parents taught me the world is full of assholes and getting my feelings hurt gets me no where.


I can laugh it off when a piece of trash black person calls me a honkey or cracker in a derogatory manner, because I have no hatred towards blacks so their ignorance towards me is funny... oh poor me, I'm so misunderstood.

[dc5-rsx]

America is predominantly white because white people settled here. Black people "migrated" here. No other reason. Typical attitude though, throwing blame in every direction. It's you against the world, i know.... i read the memo. Everybody tryin to hold the black man down, that's why "white america" elected an african american president.

I'll tell you like i said to blank a few posts up. You decide how powerful racism is. Black people are the reason racism is alive in today's world. When you stop "Being a pussy"-Cat H. Nip (2012), things will improve. Might not happen over night like you want it, but it will happen.

I would be proud of living in white america, but being proud of being white would make me a racist. So i'll continue being apologetic to the poor black man to keep the peace.

When u say migrate. Do mean forced here by the white man and enslaved? Black ppl didn't migrate here. Native Americans may have. Then their land was stolen by the white man.

Sent From My Omega Red Galaxy S2

[Sinfix_15]

When u say migrate. Do mean forced here by the white man and enslaved? Black ppl didn't migrate here. Native Americans may have. Then their land was stolen by the white man.

Sent From My Omega Red Galaxy S2

Na, not exactly what i meant...... i was more leaning towards, sold to us like dogs by their own people who already enslaved each other over in "black africa". A few years go by and over here in "white america" the white devil up and decides that letting those people who were sold to them free is a big enough deal worth our own country going to war with each other. In said war, "good" prevails and those black people are set free. Few more years go by and "good" continues to prevail as black people began to join in the fight for civil rights.

White people didnt steal land from the indians. We're all here. We have to settle somewhere. However you think we landed on this planet, whether you think we were shot out of Jesus' ass like lawn darts or that we evolved here, we're here and dont have much of a choice about it, so we settled in what is now known as the united states. Much like black people did when they were set free. I suppose upon release, you should of all been sent back to africa to be re-enslaved by your own color? but then who would you blame.....

oh yeah.... ps, how's africa doing after all this time? Over here in white america, we're the most powerful nation on the planet and we're led by a black president.

[Elbow]

When u say migrate. Do mean forced here by the white man and enslaved? Black ppl didn't migrate here. Native Americans may have. Then their land was stolen by the white man.

Sent From My Omega Red Galaxy S2

Slavery should be forgotten.

White people have been slaves too.

[Genji-Sama]

Do we need to be equally as proactive in the black community about racism towards white people? Do we need to stop putting a mic in front of Jessie Jackson and the NAACP? do we need to start viewing the black panthers the same as the KKK? do we need to view redneck, honkey, and cracker the same as we do the word nigger?

If so, sign me up. I'm on your side. Lets get rid of all racism.

Yes! Yes, we do. This is one of those rare cases, where if we ignore the problem it will go away. Start with getting rid of "black" history month and integrating that into the regular course curriculum. Next stop being butthurt when someone calls us nigger, wetback, spick or cracker, it's a word that only has as much meaning as we give it. Buuut this is all off-topic, I was particularly enjoying the "gay" debate :goodjob:

[Catnip]

Yes! Yes, we do. This is one of those rare cases, where if we ignore the problem it will go away. Start with getting rid of "black" history month and integrating that into the regular course curriculum. Next stop being butthurt when someone calls us nigger, wetback, spick or cracker, it's a word that only has as much meaning as we give it. Buuut this is all off-topic, I was particularly enjoying the "gay" debate :goodjob:

This.

Smart guy, right here.
Aside from the gay debate. More gays there are, the more people will accept it. Stop making it a big deal and it'll work it's way into "normal."

[BanginJimmy]

Yes! Yes, we do. This is one of those rare cases, where if we ignore the problem it will go away. Start with getting rid of "black" history month and integrating that into the regular course curriculum. Next stop being butthurt when someone calls us nigger, wetback, spick or cracker, it's a word that only has as much meaning as we give it. Buuut this is all off-topic, I was particularly enjoying the "gay" debate :goodjob:

But no one can profit from a non-issue.






This.

Smart guy, right here.
Aside from the gay debate. More gays there are, the more people will accept it. Stop making it a big deal and it'll work it's way into "normal."



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Genji-Sama]

But no one can profit from a non-issue.

Well maybe the topic could make a slight shift, from the social acceptance of gay to the political implications :goodjob: you know why is this really a prevalent topic when there is a supposed separation of church and state. The bible is really the only defense i've seen from the "anti"-gay side (and i quote "anti" on purpose, so don't flame me)

[geoff]

You know what I find extremely funny and ironic? You talk about separate but equal, racist views, and interracial relationships; but here it is 2012 and if a "white boy" like me dates a "sista" I face prejudice and decriminalizing from blacks. I can't tell you how many times I've gotten evil looks from blacks for "taking all the good sistas". Or the snide remarks I would get from her family because I didn't "understand the black struggle". Not to mention how her father would constantly tell her how she would be better off dating a decent and strong black man. Get real man, racism is alive no matter the color. Get over it already. P.s. separation of races is not biblical, some white supremesist churches came up with the bible banning mixing of races based on color. What the bible banned was mixing of races based on faith. For Jews not to marry those who were pagans or worshiped false idols. "Christians" have often used supposed biblical meanings and man made regulations to force a belief on their own people. This kind of practice is not limited to religion only, see my story above.

As far as the gay issue goes. What about bisexuals? You can't tell me there is no choice involved when it comes to attraction. Why don't I like fat chicks or super skinny ones? Why do I like brunnettes more than blondes or red heads? Why do I not really care for breast size or how come Indian women do absolutely nothing for me? Get real man, attraction is a choice just like "love" is. Have you never had a "friends with benefits" relationship? Have you never been with a woman you felt nothing for yet stayed with cuz the sex was great? Is it not your choice that you are with the woman you are currently with instead of someone else? Or we're you "genetically" programmed to be attracted to only one type of woman or that one woman in particular?

Here is a simple fact for you. Marriage is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. How then can ones civil rights be violated if that said "right" is not guaranteed nor listed as a "civil right" any where?

[quickdodge®]

As far as the gay issue goes. What about bisexuals? You can't tell me there is no choice involved when it comes to attraction. Why don't I like fat chicks or super skinny ones? Why do I like brunnettes more than blondes or red heads? Why do I not really care for breast size or how come Indian women do absolutely nothing for me? Get real man, attraction is a choice just like "love" is. Have you never had a "friends with benefits" relationship? Have you never been with a woman you felt nothing for yet stayed with cuz the sex was great? Is it not your choice that you are with the woman you are currently with instead of someone else? Or we're you "genetically" programmed to be attracted to only one type of woman or that one woman in particular?

Lolol @ apples and oranges. Later, QD.

[geoff]

Of course, because sexual preference and sexual attraction have nothing to do with eachother...:rolleyes:

[quickdodge®]

^^^ You're trying too hard to make it work in your favor, man. Later, QD.

[geoff]

I'm merely stating the obvious and asking simple questions. I'm not scholar or scientist but surely I can theorize and speculate things of my own life. Can a scientist study my brain and DNA and tell me why I prefer a certain type of woman better than I can? Most guys are attracted to a certain type of woman, even gay men have their own preferences. If one is born gay and has absolutely no choice in the matter of sexual orientation ( which is the same exact thing as sexual attraction) then why do they have a choice in the "type" of guy they like? One would think that if sexual attraction was purely genetic then we would all be "programmed" to find the perfect life mate. Think about it man, it's not a concept that's "far out there". Ask yourself a simple question, why are you attracted to specific types of women? Attraction is a choice, I can speak from experience that on more than one occasion, I have grown to be attracted to a woman whom I at first did not find attractive sexually.

[quickdodge®]

I'm merely stating the obvious

Of course you are, Geoff. Have a good evening. Later, QD.

[geoff]

Instead of sarcastic remarks, I'd love to know your views on this subject or better yet, for you to answer the simple question I asked...

[Sinfix_15]

You know what I find extremely funny and ironic? You talk about separate but equal, racist views, and interracial relationships; but here it is 2012 and if a "white boy" like me dates a "sista" I face prejudice and decriminalizing from blacks. I can't tell you how many times I've gotten evil looks from blacks for "taking all the good sistas". Or the snide remarks I would get from her family because I didn't "understand the black struggle". Not to mention how her father would constantly tell her how she would be better off dating a decent and strong black man. Get real man, racism is alive no matter the color. Get over it already. P.s. separation of races is not biblical, some white supremesist churches came up with the bible banning mixing of races based on color. What the bible banned was mixing of races based on faith. For Jews not to marry those who were pagans or worshiped false idols. "Christians" have often used supposed biblical meanings and man made regulations to force a belief on their own people. This kind of practice is not limited to religion only, see my story above.

As far as the gay issue goes. What about bisexuals? You can't tell me there is no choice involved when it comes to attraction. Why don't I like fat chicks or super skinny ones? Why do I like brunnettes more than blondes or red heads? Why do I not really care for breast size or how come Indian women do absolutely nothing for me? Get real man, attraction is a choice just like "love" is. Have you never had a "friends with benefits" relationship? Have you never been with a woman you felt nothing for yet stayed with cuz the sex was great? Is it not your choice that you are with the woman you are currently with instead of someone else? Or we're you "genetically" programmed to be attracted to only one type of woman or that one woman in particular?

Here is a simple fact for you. Marriage is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. How then can ones civil rights be violated if that said "right" is not guaranteed nor listed as a "civil right" any where?

100% true, but it would be easier to house train a rhino than convince a black person that black racism is a common thing. I've had soooooooo many black people tell me that black people are not even capable of racism, that anything they do is just in response to white supremacy.

I've said how i feel about this a while back. Black people are the most racist group in america, but so many people are apologetic towards them that they get free run to say whatever they want.

[Sinfix_15]

I'm merely stating the obvious and asking simple questions. I'm not scholar or scientist but surely I can theorize and speculate things of my own life. Can a scientist study my brain and DNA and tell me why I prefer a certain type of woman better than I can? Most guys are attracted to a certain type of woman, even gay men have their own preferences. If one is born gay and has absolutely no choice in the matter of sexual orientation ( which is the same exact thing as sexual attraction) then why do they have a choice in the "type" of guy they like? One would think that if sexual attraction was purely genetic then we would all be "programmed" to find the perfect life mate. Think about it man, it's not a concept that's "far out there". Ask yourself a simple question, why are you attracted to specific types of women? Attraction is a choice, I can speak from experience that on more than one occasion, I have grown to be attracted to a woman whom I at first did not find attractive sexually.

Seems like a decent question to ask IMO. If sexual orientation is decided in your DNA, then id assume that other attractions could be explained in your DNA also. Does my DNA decide why like brunettes over blondes? skinny over fat? ect ect....

I've seen scientific shows on TV explain attraction and most of the laws of attraction were based on the ability to reproduce. Hip to waist ratios that were most suited for child birth ect ect.... most animals in the world are "programmed" to survive and reproduce, would it be safe to say that homosexuality is a "misfire" that needs to be retuned? It's hard for me to believe that there's anything like this in my life that is not a choice.

[Genji-Sama]

I've said how i feel about this a while back. Black people are the most racist group in america, but so many people are apologetic towards them that they get free run to say whatever they want.

Whoa, there cowboy I'm not so sure about all these generalizations i'm readin. I (a black man/ or young man, whatever you prefer) understands that discrimination comes from both sides of the spectrum. Nobody feels any more apologetic towards black people than any other race, we've become a very culturally sensitive nation and as per, it just so happens you're a lot more likely to get sued for calling me nigger than I am you cracker. This has nothing to do with apologetic, empathetic, or teaching rhinos it's all in the name of being politically correct. :goodjob:


You know what I find extremely funny and ironic? You talk about separate but equal, racist views, and interracial relationships; but here it is 2012 and if a "white boy" like me dates a "sista" I face prejudice and decriminalizing from blacks. I can't tell you how many times I've gotten evil looks from blacks for "taking all the good sistas". Or the snide remarks I would get from her family because I didn't "understand the black struggle". Not to mention how her father would constantly tell her how she would be better off dating a decent and strong black man. Get real man, racism is alive no matter the color. Get over it already. P.s. separation of races is not biblical, some white supremesist churches came up with the bible banning mixing of races based on color. What the bible banned was mixing of races based on faith. For Jews not to marry those who were pagans or worshiped false idols. "Christians" have often used supposed biblical meanings and man made regulations to force a belief on their own people. This kind of practice is not limited to religion only, see my story above.

As far as the gay issue goes. What about bisexuals? You can't tell me there is no choice involved when it comes to attraction. Why don't I like fat chicks or super skinny ones? Why do I like brunnettes more than blondes or red heads? Why do I not really care for breast size or how come Indian women do absolutely nothing for me? Get real man, attraction is a choice just like "love" is. Have you never had a "friends with benefits" relationship? Have you never been with a woman you felt nothing for yet stayed with cuz the sex was great? Is it not your choice that you are with the woman you are currently with instead of someone else? Or we're you "genetically" programmed to be attracted to only one type of woman or that one woman in particular?

Here is a simple fact for you. Marriage is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. How then can ones civil rights be violated if that said "right" is not guaranteed nor listed as a "civil right" any where?

I'm not gonna spend too many words on this b/c surely you know this happens to everybody, for a variety of reasons, many more than just ethnicity. If a family doesn't like a quality about you, they don't like it whethter it be that you're white, you have freckles or you wear a size 10 shoe. If you're different expect somebody to say something about it, that's the day and age we live in. The real irony is this is the same type of discrimination ur planning on teaching ur kids, b/c someones sexual orientation is different

I think you're confused as to the extent to which a person is able to make decision. Yes, you may prefer brunettesto blondes, or whites to indians, but the overall choice is that you are attracted to women. Think of the characteristics of those women that attract you as a sub-category to the fact that you like women and those characteristics are all subject to that initial statement. Now lets say you came across a white brunette male, do you think you could get an erection for him? Doubtful, b/c you don't find him attractive, now you could choose to pop the blue pill and bang it out like baby monkeys, but that doesn't mean that you find him anymore attractive. Choosing to have sex with a person, is not the same as choosing to be attracted to person, one is a choice, one is not. If you think that's not so I want you to choose to be attracted to blank cd :goodjob: tell me how that goes

War Eagle (sorry if the colors blind you)

[Sinfix_15]

Whoa, there cowboy I'm not so sure about all these generalizations i'm readin. I (a black man/ or young man, whatever you prefer) understands that discrimination comes from both sides of the spectrum. Nobody feels any more apologetic towards black people than any other race, we've become a very culturally sensitive nation and as per, it just so happens you're a lot more likely to get sued for calling me nigger than I am you cracker. This has nothing to do with apologetic, empathetic, or teaching rhinos it's all in the name of being politically correct. :goodjob:



Cant just write off any comment because it's a "generalization". Nothing i could possibly say would apply to ALL black or white people, so anything i ever said about black or white people could be dismissed as a generalization. Even if i said "black people are black" that wouldnt even apply to everyone. So with that said..... when i make a comment, obviously i'm not speaking to 100% of the population. If there are 10 black people and 6 of them enjoy apples, i feel justified in saying "black people like apples" even if the other 4 hate apples. When i make a comment, i feel it should be obvious to anyone reading it that i'm not speaking for 100% of the black population.

i feel there's a double standard in the way we view things and that black people are WAY more "culturally sensitive" as you say. This exchange for example....

a comment like "whoa there cowboy", i take zero offense to that, i know it had nothing to do with racism and it didnt distract me in any way from the message you were trying to deliver. It seems that black people always have their racism spotlights out and falsely accuse racism constantly. if i said "whoa there homeboy" to a black person, it would be called racism. Anything that can even remotely be twisted into racism is called racism by black people. Everything is "because im black"

[ItODDospeed]

I don't need to be religious to know that another man taking a shot in the mouth is not right or normal. I also don't need to be religious to know the anus/colon is not meant to be plowed. It is not a sexual organ, it is for waste. You claim superior intellect yet you can't see those two simple truths. You and the rest like you come up with lame rebuttles and stupid jokes and call yourselves "intellects". I don't hate gays. Does gay sex disgust me, yes. Unlike you, I don't find a guy rimming a dudes ass attractive or beautiful. I have so much to say, but I can't ask God to forgive me for something I don't feel bad about. I'm stepping out of this thread because you and blank have exhausted me. It's like trying to teach long division to a freakin retard. This is not simply a religious issue for me. I have long determined that this world is too f@cked up to be "saved". Put the gay issue to a vote. The states that vote gay marriage, let em have it.

Pretty sure Jesus say's don't judge...right? What is normal to one doesn't have to be normal to another, and if you think your right, then you're being judgmental. You are not anything thing close to being an intellectual or reasonable if think what you said to be 2 simple truths. Gay sex disgusts you, but your not homophobic...right. You've really put a lot of thought into gay sex. I also must applaud you for using the word retard - very Christian like...

[ItODDospeed]

You see, even atheists know Christians live to a higher code of morality. Just goes to show that an atheist can not show the same level of respect or humanity that a Christian would show them. Your whole post just let me know you know nothing about Christianity. We don't follow some ancient book. Everyone has morals. I don't need the Bible to tell me it's wrong, I already know it is. The bible is very much relevant to a Christians life, but I wouldn't expect you to know anything about that. You did say one thing true though. The bible is not relevant in this "modern" world. People don't care for Christ or what he did. He said Homself it would be like this.

Seriously? I am a scientist, and most (88%) do not believe in God. The scientists that are Atheists (5%) certainly know that the bible is a human doctrine. No Atheist would ever say that a Christian has a higher moral ground. The very reason they question Christianity is, because of the actions of so called Christians.

The ONLY reason the bible even was able to say the world would be like this is, because the two testaments are so far apart, and science was already taking the place of faith. The bible doesn't have a place anymore, because it's an antiquated story of fiction. There isn't a person out here who can say a single word from the bible, God's or Jesus's existence is a fact. It's a belief, but if you need an antiquated story of fiction to bind you to be a better person - please, keep following your FAITH.

[ItODDospeed]

It is everyone's problem when they do not wish to follow the process to properly change the law. Everyone else has to petition their state congressmen when they want a marriage law changed, why should a specific special interest minority group be allowed to overthrow the normal process?

In 1996, GA enacted section 19-3-3.1 in the Georgia Code, stopping gay marriage in other states from being recognized in GA. The gay community has not even bothered to make much of a challenge to the law.

In 2004, GA's state congress passed SR 595, which ameded the GA state Constitution to define marriage as one man - one woman. Again, the gay community has not mounted any real challenge to the law.

Why can't the gay community work to change the GA law through the legal process? Do they think that they cannot get enough support?

GA also voted for Slavery. Every man and woman is created equal. This can not be a state issue, it's a U.S. issue. Remember when some states allowed slavery and some didn't - that didn't work out at all for the States. If gay marriage isn't accepted in one state, but is in another - how do you not see the same separation of states during the civil war. A war when the purpose was equality, and freedom. There is no way equality can be meet without the states acting as the U.S.A. I don't think you understand history to well, or you'd have seen what I said, instead of your short-sighted comment.

[Elbow]

Seriously? I am a scientist, and most (88%) do not believe in God. The scientists that are Atheists (5%) certainly know that the bible is a human doctrine. No Atheist would ever say that a Christian has a higher moral ground. The very reason they question Christianity is, because of the actions of so called Christians.

The ONLY reason the bible even was able to say the world would be like this is, because the two testaments are so far apart, and science was already taking the place of faith. The bible doesn't have a place anymore, because it's an antiquated story of fiction. There isn't a person out here who can say a single word from the bible, God's or Jesus's existence is a fact. It's a belief, but if you need an antiquated story of fiction to bind you to be a better person - please, keep following your FAITH.

Fact: Jesus was real.

Whether or not he was some magician or just a guy with some good tips for life is all about what you believe.

[ItODDospeed]

As far as lesbians go, lots of them enjoy the company of a man every now and then.

So what was the point of this? Some gay men have sex with women every now and then.

[Elbow]

I'm merely stating the obvious and asking simple questions. I'm not scholar or scientist but surely I can theorize and speculate things of my own life. Can a scientist study my brain and DNA and tell me why I prefer a certain type of woman better than I can? Most guys are attracted to a certain type of woman, even gay men have their own preferences. If one is born gay and has absolutely no choice in the matter of sexual orientation ( which is the same exact thing as sexual attraction) then why do they have a choice in the "type" of guy they like? One would think that if sexual attraction was purely genetic then we would all be "programmed" to find the perfect life mate. Think about it man, it's not a concept that's "far out there". Ask yourself a simple question, why are you attracted to specific types of women? Attraction is a choice, I can speak from experience that on more than one occasion, I have grown to be attracted to a woman whom I at first did not find attractive sexually.

What is with you and sex? I'm starting to think you may be questioning your manhood and may have strange feelings towards men and that scares you. I also can't grasp why people think gay people choose to be gay purely for sexual pleasure. Any gay guys I know are far more into each other than just in bed.

I somewhat agree if you're "bi" you're probably just bi because you have some freaky sexual desires, it's sort of hard to be in between I would imagine, but I'm not a scientist.



...it just so happens you're a lot more likely to get sued for calling me nigger than I am you cracker.

Good luck suing someone because they called you a name.

Really though racism is stupid and there are many to blame. Whites that hate blacks, hispanics that hate whites, blacks that hate asians, it's everywhere. It comes from stupidity and nothing more, blacks blame whites for their lack of a job or their lack of education while whites blame hispanics for lack of work, it's just everywhere.

[ItODDospeed]

I've read most of Jefferson's writings, as well as most of the founding fathers. I understand quite well.

I really don't think so. While you may have read, but reading comprehension is key.

[ItODDospeed]

Interestingly, they have not had any of our state congressmen submit a resolution calling for marriage to be re-defined. They have not tried to change the law in the correct legal way at all - instead, they have mounted a media blitz and have attempted to find a way to force the federal government to override the states' rights and go outside the correct legal process that everyone else has to follow.
Don't you think that if the majority of Georgian's wanted marriage to be redefined for same-sex marriages that it would be passed? The fact is that Georgians supported the Defense of Marriage Act in 2004 overwhelmingly.

This is the exact short-sighted comment I was speaking of. If some states still had slavery, and some didn't; what kind of mess between the states would exist. GA wanted slavery, and for the topic's sake let's say it still exists. Yet, in Ohio it isn't, does the slave now have new rights in Ohio, or is he still property of the slave owner in GA? It would be too muddled if it wasn't a United State's issue as a whole - as it became, and started the only war of with our own states. It's about human rights in a free society - our society to be exact. Gay marriage has to be approved in all states, so that the same rights are in each state. Otherwise, IMO, it goes back to the Civil War, and the foundation of what caused it - equality.

[ItODDospeed]

As I stated, the marriage license laws are defined at a state level. Georgia has overwhelmingly voted to clarify the definition of marriage as man-woman in 2004. There are no resolutions being promoted in the state legislature to change that. Instead, the gay community wishes to have DC override the states area of management of marriage laws and redefine it from a federal level. This is not how the structure of government was setup, nor has ever been managed like this. it is against everything the founding fathers setup.

Yeah, some of the founding father's owned slaves. How did that work out for us as a country? It's a federal matter, not a state matter, or we'd still have slavery. You really don't understand history that well.

[ItODDospeed]

Do you realize that the color of one's skin is not the same as the actions of an individual?
Do you realize that gay people are allowed to marry? They can legally marry anyone from the opposite sex that they choose. They have the same rights as anyone else.

Read the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the Amendments, and case law, then come back.

Yes.

No, they aren't allowed to marry whom they choose, so they aren't allowed the same rights as everyone else.

You need to read the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the Amendments, and case law, and then come back with an intelligent response that doesn't have religion biased orientations. This issue that we're talking about is what separated us a Union, and marriage for gays is doing nothing less.

[Elbow]

Multi-quote is your friend.

[ItODDospeed]

This is not an equal right. I, as a straight man, want the right to marry the person I'm in love with, regardless of their gender.

Anything less is being judgmental on religious BELIEFS, and is the degradation of a free society.

[ItODDospeed]

Seriously, are you trying to say that a person has no choice on what he does/does not do? If you really believe that, then there is no help available for you. I choose my actions, and I am responsible for them. You appear to have no concept of personal responsibility. Make a choice, be responsible, and live with the consequences. The consequence for being gay is that you cannot legally marry your homosexual partner. That's a fact. It's also fact that gays can marry just like anyone else - to the opposite sex. It's also fact that they have the same rights to petition to have the law changed through the same process that everyone else has to go through (something you fail repeatedly to address, as you know it is true).
This is not oppression like slavery or racial discrimination, and is it unfair to our ancestors and heritage to treat it as being on the same level. Being black is not an action, and there is nothing that any of them could do about it.

Read through court rulings from the formation of the country up through now, and find where the federal judical branch overruled laws concerning state laws on gay marriage.
I'll give you a start:
Defining Marriage: Defense of Marriage Acts and Same-Sex Marriage Laws (http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx)
Federal Appeals Court Invalidates California Ban on Same-Sex Marriage (http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/federal-appeals-court-california-ban.aspx)

Note that 6 states have gay marriage - these states went through the legislative process. This is what I have stated multiple times that the gay community needs to do to have legal gay marriage. What part of that do you not understand?

You sound like the biggest closet homosexual with those comments, and you stifle them by claiming your faith. Not allowing gay marriage is discrimination, and you obviously need to understand what that means.

The courts still ask you to swear on the bible to tell the truth...yeah, that's gonna make someone say the truth. Whatajoke. The separation of church and state is not what it should be, or gay marriage would exist, swearing on the bible would cease to exist, our license plates would say "In God I trust," and the ten commandments wouldn't be outside or in court-houses. Even on a federal level, paper money still says a belief as well - "In God We Trust." Our country needs a real separation of State and Federal government from beliefs.

[ItODDospeed]

Multi-quote is your friend.

I know Simon, but it's hard to address properly without taking each post seperately. This is a subject that should be addressed properly, and that's why I'm doing it one at a time.

[ItODDospeed]

Thats just social conditioning, Cant really fault him for that. Anytime you mention "civil rights" in the context of the early 20th century, people automatically think you're talking about black Americans and violent racial oppression. Like there wasnt anything else that was going on during that time. LOL

For real...

[ItODDospeed]

You know what I find extremely funny and ironic? You talk about separate but equal, racist views, and interracial relationships; but here it is 2012 and if a "white boy" like me dates a "sista" I face prejudice and decriminalizing from blacks. I can't tell you how many times I've gotten evil looks from blacks for "taking all the good sistas". Or the snide remarks I would get from her family because I didn't "understand the black struggle". Not to mention how her father would constantly tell her how she would be better off dating a decent and strong black man. Get real man, racism is alive no matter the color. Get over it already. P.s. separation of races is not biblical, some white supremesist churches came up with the bible banning mixing of races based on color. What the bible banned was mixing of races based on faith. For Jews not to marry those who were pagans or worshiped false idols. "Christians" have often used supposed biblical meanings and man made regulations to force a belief on their own people. This kind of practice is not limited to religion only, see my story above.

As far as the gay issue goes. What about bisexuals? You can't tell me there is no choice involved when it comes to attraction. Why don't I like fat chicks or super skinny ones? Why do I like brunnettes more than blondes or red heads? Why do I not really care for breast size or how come Indian women do absolutely nothing for me? Get real man, attraction is a choice just like "love" is. Have you never had a "friends with benefits" relationship? Have you never been with a woman you felt nothing for yet stayed with cuz the sex was great? Is it not your choice that you are with the woman you are currently with instead of someone else? Or we're you "genetically" programmed to be attracted to only one type of woman or that one woman in particular?

Here is a simple fact for you. Marriage is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. How then can ones civil rights be violated if that said "right" is not guaranteed nor listed as a "civil right" any where?

Racism is always odd to me, and I'm a Southerner, but when Blacks are racist, it always seems so weird. I've heard some call that reverse racism, but truly it's simply racism.

First of all Jews only marry Jews, because it's part of Judaism. If two Jewish people of the same sex wanted to be married under Judaism, I'm sure they would be allowed, if it was allowed under law.

Marriage has lots of rights that aren't afforded to those that aren't. Tax breaks, federal loans, and etc. - I'm not sure you have a grasp on what your talking about, besides your own beliefs. If two people want to be married they should be allowed, no one should have the right to they can't. It's considered a civil right, because it's a choice for an individual, that affords them the same benefits as those who have the right. The choice of what your attracted to is a choice, but sexual orientation has been proven on a genetic level.

[ItODDospeed]

How is it not an equal right? Anyone is allowed to marry an opposite gender spouse, in any state in the USA.

You are such a simpleton if you believe what you just said.

[ItODDospeed]

Do we need to be equally as proactive in the black community about racism towards white people? Do we need to stop putting a mic in front of Jessie Jackson and the NAACP? do we need to start viewing the black panthers the same as the KKK? do we need to view redneck, honkey, and cracker the same as we do the word nigger?

If so, sign me up. I'm on your side. Lets get rid of all racism.

This is a great statement, I'd sign up immediately, and practice it everyday as well. I also do all that without the belief in a God. I do it because it's the right thing to do, I don't need a human doctrine to tell me so...

[ItODDospeed]

FTR, I had CFA for breakfast, and it was good.

There is so much ideology going on here. Some people are born gay, and some chose. Some people like this or that, and that's another set of choices. However, therein lies the point, we live in a free society, one where we get to choose. Even more so, a Democratic society where we get to vote. Yet, all those choices are lost when we define what's right for one because of our own ideology. If you wanna be whatever you want to be sexually, socially, intellectually, politically, or etc. it's your choice, and if we live in a free society no one should be able to tell you otherwise.

[quickdodge®]

Instead of sarcastic remarks, I'd love to know your views on this subject or better yet, for you to answer the simple question I asked...

Here's the thing, dude. No one is arguing that being gay can be a choice. You're still trying to push a debate that is currently only yours to debate because everyone is agreement with that issue. As far as attractions go, I believe that to be a choice that a person has. You can choose to like blondes over brunettes. You can choose to like heavier set women over thinner ones. I think that's your choice to make. But, if you prefer blondes over brunettes and you decide to go out with a brunette one time and you like it, you may end up swaying yourself into making more long term your commitment to that person who you initially didn't have an attraction to. I honestly don't see how this is relative to being born genetically gay. And it sure doesn't disprove the "gay gene."

I've given you my views on homosexuals. If you don't like them, fine. No big deal. Who cares what they do? If you do, why? Who cares if they can get married? Doesn't hurt anyone, so why not. If your life is to a point where you have this much time to focus on an issue that has nothing to do with you, then kudos. I have work, a house, a wife, children and others to fulfill my time and life.


I know Simon, but it's hard to address properly without taking each post seperately. This is a subject that should be addressed properly, and that's why I'm doing it one at a time.

Multi-quoting will still keep your addresses separate, dude. It really pushed things back when you address every post in a different. If you would, please use multi-post. Thanks! Later, QD.

[ItODDospeed]

Multi-quoting will still keep your addresses separate, dude. It really pushed things back when you address every post in a different. If you would, please use multi-post. Thanks! Later, QD.

I fully understand that it would have kept my replies to posts separate, and from each member. I felt I'd get lost with all the posts with my replies, and I still did on one or two chronologically. I wanted to address properly, therefore, I took my singular approach.

Any other time, and from here out on this thread, I will. Later, T.

[Sinfix_15]

I never want to see the day that being gay is normal enough that kids are sitting in sex ed class being told that it's normal for two guys to fuck each other in the ass. I personally do not care what they do and wouldnt say i'm disgusted by them *YET*, because at this current time, i can avoid seeing or hearing about it. If i was gay, i would want to be discrete about it. I really dont understand the "make the world accept me" campaign theyre on.

A lot of you are supporting gays because its the trendy hipster thing to do. You're all attacking Geoff because he's christian and doing it in a way that you're trying to frustrate him and make him step beyond the "boundaries" of his faith. Do you really feel that passionately about your argument?

Would any of you sit down with your son or nephew and tell him that if he has feelings for one of his friends that it's ok to explore them sexually? Some people are gay and we have to accept them, but is this really a part of society that we want to encourage?

[quickdodge®]

I never want to see the day that being gay is normal enough that kids are sitting in sex ed class being told that it's normal for two guys to fuck each other in the ass. I personally do not care what they do and wouldnt say i'm disgusted by them *YET*, because at this current time, i can avoid seeing or hearing about it. If i was gay, i would want to be discrete about it. I really dont understand the "make the world accept me" campaign theyre on.

The reason why this part is off is because for one, homosexual sex will not be taught in schools because it isn't conducive to reproduction. Sex ed isn't taught in school for the sex of it. It's taught in school as part of the reproduction process. Secondly, if you "do not care what they do," then why worry about their "'make the world accept me'" campaign? They just want to be able to get married. Nothing wrong with that.


A lot of you are supporting gays because its the trendy hipster thing to do. You're all attacking Geoff because he's christian and doing it in a way that you're trying to frustrate him and make him step beyond the "boundaries" of his faith. Do you really feel that passionately about your argument?

Would any of you sit down with your son or nephew and tell him that if he has feelings for one of his friends that it's ok to explore them sexually? Some people are gay and we have to accept them, but is this really a part of society that we want to encourage?

I'm neither a "trendy hipster" nor trying to attack Geoff because he's "Christian." I've never had any dislike towards people of a gay nature. I don't get in all their businesses because I don't care enough to. But when it's brought up, I voice my opinion. And OPINION is what it is. Where my (what you call attack) responses back to Geoff are letting him know that what he tries to come off as fact is really his opinion. I didn't attack his religion.

As far as encouraging society goes, I may not encourage it, but I wouldn't discourage it either. I wouldn't shame them. It's not like they're aliens. They're still human beings with emotions and feelings. Later, QD.

[Sinfix_15]

The reason why this part is off is because for one, homosexual sex will not be taught in schools because it isn't conducive to reproduction. Sex ed isn't taught in school for the sex of it. It's taught in school as part of the reproduction process. Secondly, if you "do not care what they do," then why worry about their "'make the world accept me'" campaign? They just want to be able to get married. Nothing wrong with that.



I'm neither a "trendy hipster" nor trying to attack Geoff because he's "Christian." I've never had any dislike towards people of a gay nature. I don't get in all their businesses because I don't care enough to. But when it's brought up, I voice my opinion. And OPINION is what it is. Where my (what you call attack) responses back to Geoff are letting him know that what he tries to come off as fact is really his opinion. I didn't attack his religion.

As far as encouraging society goes, I may not encourage it, but I wouldn't discourage it either. I wouldn't shame them. It's not like they're aliens. They're still human beings with emotions and feelings. Later, QD.

Sex ed teaches a lot of things beyond reproductive purposes. I remember sex ed being mostly about the diseases you can get from having sex and that you could still get them from oral sex, kissing ect. If i had to sum it up, id say the class should have been named "only way to avoid disease is to not touch a woman in any way". I'm pretty sure they'd talk about gay sex if it became more prevalent.


>>>> i feel our view is the same on this, but we're leaning in slightly different directions. I dont want to encourage it or discourage it, but feel the need to discourage people from encouraging it.

[quickdodge®]

Sex ed teaches a lot of things beyond reproductive purposes. I remember sex ed being mostly about the diseases you can get from having sex and that you could still get them from oral sex, kissing ect. If i had to sum it up, id say the class should have been named "only way to avoid disease is to not touch a woman in any way". I'm pretty sure they'd talk about gay sex if it became more prevalent.

You're right in the teachings of diseases as well. I did exclude that as I wasn't thinking in that spot, but you're right.


[QUOTE=Sinfix_15;39438642]>>>> i feel our view is the same on this, but we're leaning in slightly different directions. I dont want to encourage it or discourage it, but feel the need to discourage people from encouraging it.

I feel our views on this are similar as well. Later, QD.

[nelson9995]

I never want to see the day that being gay is normal enough that kids are sitting in sex ed class being told that it's normal for two guys to fuck each other in the ass. I personally do not care what they do and wouldnt say i'm disgusted by them *YET*, because at this current time, i can avoid seeing or hearing about it. If i was gay, i would want to be discrete about it. I really dont understand the "make the world accept me" campaign theyre on.

A lot of you are supporting gays because its the trendy hipster thing to do. You're all attacking Geoff because he's christian and doing it in a way that you're trying to frustrate him and make him step beyond the "boundaries" of his faith. Do you really feel that passionately about your argument?

Would any of you sit down with your son or nephew and tell him that if he has feelings for one of his friends that it's ok to explore them sexually? Some people are gay and we have to accept them, but is this really a part of society that we want to encourage?

why do I often find myself agreeing with you 100%?

[geoff]

I'm not gonna spend too many words on this b/c surely you know this happens to everybody, for a variety of reasons, many more than just ethnicity. If a family doesn't like a quality about you, they don't like it whethter it be that you're white, you have freckles or you wear a size 10 shoe. If you're different expect somebody to say something about it, that's the day and age we live in. The real irony is this is the same type of discrimination ur planning on teaching ur kids, b/c someones sexual orientation is different


Ah yes, when it comes to blacks being racist then you make this argument. Double standard? This woman's family discriminated me simply because i was white. So with this statement from you, i can assume that you believe its ok for whites to do the same thing to blacks? I will not teach my children to discriminate. I will teach them what is right and wrong and then teach them my faith. What they do with that is on them, this is a simple fact.....the anus is not intended to be a sexual organ, therefore making gay sex a perversion of natural intent. or do you wish to argue that the anus/rectum is indeed intended to be used for anything other than excretion of waste?


I think you're confused as to the extent to which a person is able to make decision. Yes, you may prefer brunettesto blondes, or whites to indians, but the overall choice is that you are attracted to women. Think of the characteristics of those women that attract you as a sub-category to the fact that you like women and those characteristics are all subject to that initial statement. Now lets say you came across a white brunette male, do you think you could get an erection for him? Doubtful, b/c you don't find him attractive, now you could choose to pop the blue pill and bang it out like baby monkeys, but that doesn't mean that you find him anymore attractive. Choosing to have sex with a person, is not the same as choosing to be attracted to person, one is a choice, one is not. If you think that's not so I want you to choose to be attracted to blank cd tell me how that goes
I'm confused as to the extent to which a person is able to make a decision? I'm sorry, but i was under the impression that we as a species are cognitive and self aware and very capable of making decisions. There is always a choice to be made, we are not dogs or beasts that react on impulse alone. I made this part of your statement bold, i agree with this 100%. Sexual attraction is very much a choice which is heavily influenced by society and many other environmental aspects. For example, many whites don't find blacks attractive because they are taught it is wrong. Overweight people are not seen as "attractive" because society teaches us that skinny is "pretty"...i.e. look at all the young women who read magazines and such and the image they are shown of "beauty".


Pretty sure Jesus say's don't judge...right? What is normal to one doesn't have to be normal to another, and if you think your right, then you're being judgmental. You are not anything thing close to being an intellectual or reasonable if think what you said to be 2 simple truths. Gay sex disgusts you, but your not homophobic...right. You've really put a lot of thought into gay sex. I also must applaud you for using the word retard - very Christian like...
Do not assume that you know anything about my beliefs nor what my Bible teaches me. Passing judgement would be me condemning this lifestyle to hell or saying that these people are evil. I have done neither, but according to my faith, this lifestyle is sin and therefore i am not out of place to say it is "abnormal". Even science agrees with me, normal sex encompasses that which is for reproduction. Yes gay sex disgusts me in the fact that i personally do not find it an act that is "beautiful". To think of two men having sex is a turn off for me, that does not in any way shape or form make me homophobic any more that a gay man viewing hetero sex or the female body as "disgusting". No it is not very "Christ like" of me to insult anyone on here or use "retard". please quote me where i said i was the standard for the Christian "image". I am human and have faults and can only be pushed so far, I made this argument earlier as to this being yet another double standard.


Seriously? I am a scientist, and most (88%) do not believe in God. The scientists that are Atheists (5%) certainly know that the bible is a human doctrine. No Atheist would ever say that a Christian has a higher moral ground. The very reason they question Christianity is, because of the actions of so called Christians.

The ONLY reason the bible even was able to say the world would be like this is, because the two testaments are so far apart, and science was already taking the place of faith. The bible doesn't have a place anymore, because it's an antiquated story of fiction. There isn't a person out here who can say a single word from the bible, God's or Jesus's existence is a fact. It's a belief, but if you need an antiquated story of fiction to bind you to be a better person - please, keep following your FAITH.

So you're a scientist huh? Please show me any study of genetics you have conducted that would qualify you to make any assumptions that are more relevant than my own. Otherwise, you have read the articles, read the studies, and then have taken a stance on which side you believe; just like everyone else in this thread. So the (5%) of scientists that are atheist can speak to the bible being a human doctrine for the other 95% and also the billion people world wide that do believe.....Richard Dawkins must be your "god", and I can show you examples of atheist scientists that disagree with him and his tactics. There are apprx. 400 years in between the old and new testament. If you knew anything of the Bible then you would know why. Jesus and many events/people in the Bible can be historically proven therefore making it fact. For an educated man, you lack the simple ability to research historical accuracy.


So what was the point of this? Some gay men have sex with women every now and then.
There was a study that showed women to be "turned on" by all types of sex, straight, gay, even between primates. Therefore, showing that they indeed were not "programmed" or born to be simply attracted to women or gay sex.


What is with you and sex? I'm starting to think you may be questioning your manhood and may have strange feelings towards men and that scares you. I also can't grasp why people think gay people choose to be gay purely for sexual pleasure. Any gay guys I know are far more into each other than just in bed.

I somewhat agree if you're "bi" you're probably just bi because you have some freaky sexual desires, it's sort of hard to be in between I would imagine, but I'm not a scientist.
Ah yes, because I disagree with the gay agenda and have an opinion against it, that automatically makes me a bigot or a closet homosexual myself. I forgot that these are the only two options. Do people not have sex for pleasure? If that were not the case then only sex for reproduction would take place and there would be no gay people. Its funny, but no one here has even touched the topic of transexuals. Care to explain if thats a choice or genetic programming?


Yes.

No, they aren't allowed to marry whom they choose, so they aren't allowed the same rights as everyone else.

You need to read the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the Amendments, and case law, and then come back with an intelligent response that doesn't have religion biased orientations. This issue that we're talking about is what separated us a Union, and marriage for gays is doing nothing less.
Show me one example of marriage being a civil right. The fact remains that gays are given every single right that a straight individual is guaranteed in the bill of rights, ect....If marriage is to be a civil right then it should be illegal to get divorced. There have been countless studies done that show divorce harms all those involved, especially children. I believe that gay couples who perform a civil union are to be given the same rights as a married couple, but to not change tradition or the definition of marriage. I'm highly suspicious though that even this would not be enough to satisfy them.



It is not discrimination. It is the will of the majority over the will of the minority. It has been put up to a vote before and the people spoke. That is what a democracy is no? Or should things of this magnitude of importance not be left up to the people to decide but rather the government? How about no presidential elections, the government can chose whom they believe would be the best candidate for our country? Also, your liberal kind argue that nothing should be illegal as long as it does not harm anyone or take away their rights. Therefore, who is being harmed and what rights are being taken away by having "in God we Trust" on our money, the 10 commandments outside court houses, or anything religious listed in the constitution ect....? Separation of Church and State was included so that no single religion would be endorsed by the government and then forced on others like it was in England; therefore taking away ones right to follow any religion or lack there of they wish. Talk about taking something out of context.


First of all Jews only marry Jews, because it's part of Judaism. If two Jewish people of the same sex wanted to be married under Judaism, I'm sure they would be allowed, if it was allowed under law.
You realize there is a difference between the Jewish people and the people of Judea right? Jew is a term used for those that practice a faith. The Jewish Law is reliant upon and dictated by their faith passed down from father Abraham and Moses.


Marriage has lots of rights that aren't afforded to those that aren't. Tax breaks, federal loans, and etc. - I'm not sure you have a grasp on what your talking about, besides your own beliefs. If two people want to be married they should be allowed, no one should have the right to they can't. It's considered a civil right, because it's a choice for an individual, that affords them the same benefits as those who have the right. The choice of what your attracted to is a choice, but sexual orientation has been proven on a genetic level.
Would you then legalize incestuous relationships or those between a 50 year old man and 14 year old girl? What if sexual orientation was proven to be strictly genetic and doctors could determine that a child will be gay even before they are born; would you then make it illegal to terminate that pregnancy simply because the parents don't want a gay child? I say all this to make the point of " where does one draw the line on morality and values"?


FTR, I had CFA for breakfast, and it was good.

There is so much ideology going on here. Some people are born gay, and some chose. Some people like this or that, and that's another set of choices. However, therein lies the point, we live in a free society, one where we get to choose. Even more so, a Democratic society where we get to vote. Yet, all those choices are lost when we define what's right for one because of our own ideology. If you wanna be whatever you want to be sexually, socially, intellectually, politically, or etc. it's your choice, and if we live in a free society no one should be able to tell you otherwise.
You just supported a company that donates profits to organizations that believe contrary to your own beliefs. They donate to "Christian" organizations that believe in traditional marriage. Does that then make you a hypocrit? or is this a ridiculous argument to make? Addressing the bold part; see my above comment.


Here's the thing, dude. No one is arguing that being gay can be a choice. You're still trying to push a debate that is currently only yours to debate because everyone is agreement with that issue. As far as attractions go, I believe that to be a choice that a person has. You can choose to like blondes over brunettes. You can choose to like heavier set women over thinner ones. I think that's your choice to make. But, if you prefer blondes over brunettes and you decide to go out with a brunette one time and you like it, you may end up swaying yourself into making more long term your commitment to that person who you initially didn't have an attraction to. I honestly don't see how this is relative to being born genetically gay. And it sure doesn't disprove the "gay gene."
How can one separate sexual orientation from sexual attraction? Sexual attraction in fact describes sexual orientation. True it does not disprove the "gay gene". Rather, it provides evidence that suggests sexual orientation is a choice. There also is no "proof" or a "gay gene/genes" but again, rather evidences to suggest their existence. The whole purpose of this debate was to say that one can not claim that sexual orientation is genetic any more than one can claim it is pure choice. Yet, the gay community would have you believe it is nor more a decision than choosing what color skin you are born with. How then can one support the notion of a "gay gene" and simply dismiss all the arguments and research that says the opposite? How does one take one researchers word as true and dismiss another's as false? What qualifies one over the other? Is it perhaps because one supports a minorities views and jumps on the "gay is good" band wagon; while the other dismisses this argument? Do you understand now the argument I am making? What if it is proven by FACTS that sexual orientation is pure CHOICE? How would that effect this "progressive" gay movement?

[quickdodge®]

How can one separate sexual orientation from sexual attraction? Sexual attraction in fact describes sexual orientation.

I was thinking something else. You discover yourself (by either choice OR genetics) when you discover who you are attracted to. How about this for an argument for the genetics side of the coin? A guy grows up with a Mom and a Dad in a traditional home. He's not subjected to any of lifestyle but the one he grows up in and even dates females through high school. Then all of a sudden he turns up at home telling his family he is gay. He has always felt that way but didn't understand it. Even while going out with girls, he felt uncomfortable or out of place. This, to me, seems like it could be a choice he made due to a genetic cause. He tried to fight it and it won. Not saying this is any proof, but yet another theory that could point towards a DNA link.


True it does not disprove the "gay gene". Rather, it provides evidence that suggests sexual orientation is a choice.

My example above shows that it does not provide any evidence towards choice.


The whole purpose of this debate was to say that one can not claim that sexual orientation is genetic any more than one can claim it is pure choice.

Exactly! We agree.


How then can one support the notion of a "gay gene" and simply dismiss all the arguments and research that says the opposite? How does one take one researchers word as true and dismiss another's as false? What qualifies one over the other?

Again, I agree with you. You've got researches that support both sides. How is one supposed to know which side is right? You know?


Do you understand now the argument I am making?

Honestly? No, lolol.


What if it is proven by FACTS that sexual orientation is pure CHOICE? How would that effect this "progressive" gay movement?

For me, it would produce nothing different. I still wouldn't care. If gay people want to be gay, then that's fine. If they want to get married, let them. Doesn't ruin my life. Later, QD.

[.blank cd]

I believe that gay couples who perform a civil union are to be given the same rights as a married couple, but to not change tradition or the definition of marriage.You mean the "Christian" tradition of marriage, which no one is trying to change, right?

[nelson9995]

IMO if you feel, see things, and news channels and scientists are predicting exactly what the bible predicts then it is indeed fact. Do you guys not see how many things the bible states that are being stated by news channels, scientists, etc... therefore those things are facts!

[quickdodge®]

IMO if you feel, see things, and news channels and scientists are predicting exactly what the bible predicts then it is indeed fact. Do you guys not see how many things the bible states that are being stated by news channels, scientists, etc... therefore those things are facts!

How contradictory. Later, QD.

[nelson9995]

How contradictory. Later, QD.

you always try to find a way to make people look dumb w.o EVER having anything to say.
i.e: above

[quickdodge®]

you always try to find a way to make people look dumb w.o EVER having anything to say.
i.e: above

Good, aren't I. Later, QD.

[nelson9995]

Good, aren't I. Later, QD.

Not really. More like weak.

[quickdodge®]

Not really. More like weak.

You said I made you feel stupid without saying anything.

Not that that was my intention. I'm assuming you didn't understand what my initial reply to you really meant. Later, QD.

[Matt300ZXT]

I can't believe you guys are still arguing about this. If there were any self respecting mods on this forum, they would have closed this long ago.

[geoff]

QD: we seem to agree on what the real issue is, yet we find ourselves taking a stance on opposing views of the evidences provided. I can give you details on how this effects me personally, but these reasons are my own and not shared by the entire population opposed to gay marriage. So will these reasons suffice as "good enough" to you? Probably not, therefore there is no reason to list them. We can agree to disagree on this and shake hands as "friends".

I will address something you asked me before, which also happens to be relative to the debate. You asked when did I decide to be attracted to women instead of men. I can not give you a detailed moment as to when the choice was made, but I gave rather an example of when I first realized my attraction to women. So, I leave you with this to ponder...what if sexual orientation is neither genetic nor realized choice I.e. we remember precisely when we made the choice. What if sexual orientation is a subconscious choice we make? Is it possible that this is the case? The subconscious mind is very powerful and at the same time very mysterious. I have looked into it a bit recently and found the research very interesting. I might add that I believe sexual attraction/preference to be a subconscious decision as well. Check out the study, " Science of Sex Appeal". It is very interesting to see how at first glance it would seem attraction is purely an "evolutionary" program of which we have no control over; yet when studied in depth, the brain is very much involved and at work in our "idea" of what's is "sexy" and what is not and how society as a whole influences it.

Also, I have yet to provide my faith based belief on this topic. One which may surprise everyone here if they would care to know.

[nelson9995]

You said I made you feel stupid without saying anything.

Not that that was my intention. I'm assuming you didn't understand what my initial reply to you really meant. Later, QD.

you didn't, you tried! lol

[.blank cd]

IMO if you feel, see things, and news channels and scientists are predicting exactly what the bible predicts then it is indeed fact. Do you guys not see how many things the bible states that are being stated by news channels, scientists, etc... therefore those things are facts!There is no scientific fact in the bible because the bible and modern science are about 1600yrs apart. It's easy to get relatively close when the bible tries to make incredibly broad and vague predictions.

[quickdodge®]

QD: we seem to agree on what the real issue is, yet we find ourselves taking a stance on opposing views of the evidences provided. I can give you details on how this effects me personally, but these reasons are my own and not shared by the entire population opposed to gay marriage. So will these reasons suffice as "good enough" to you? Probably not, therefore there is no reason to list them. We can agree to disagree on this and shake hands as "friends".

Although I can't even fathom why you would be affected by gays being allowed to marry, I can agree to disagree and now give you a virtual handshake.


I will address something you asked me before, which also happens to be relative to the debate. You asked when did I decide to be attracted to women instead of men. I can not give you a detailed moment as to when the choice was made, but I gave rather an example of when I first realized my attraction to women. So, I leave you with this to ponder...what if sexual orientation is neither genetic nor realized choice I.e. we remember precisely when we made the choice. What if sexual orientation is a subconscious choice we make? Is it possible that this is the case? The subconscious mind is very powerful and at the same time very mysterious. I have looked into it a bit recently and found the research very interesting. I might add that I believe sexual attraction/preference to be a subconscious decision as well. Check out the study, " Science of Sex Appeal". It is very interesting to see how at first glance it would seem attraction is purely an "evolutionary" program of which we have no control over; yet when studied in depth, the brain is very much involved and at work in our "idea" of what's is "sexy" and what is not and how society as a whole influences it.

The subconscious? I don't know about all that for sure. I would assume genetics over the subconscious. My opinions are choice and DNA.

And you've been a good boy by not bringing in your faith talk, lolol. Later, QD.

[quickdodge®]

you didn't, you tried! lol

Lolol. I wasn't really trying. Honest! I was referring to you saying "in my opinion," "this is fact." Lolol. Later, QD.

[geoff]

QD: at this point in time in the study of sexual orientation and sexual attraction, can anything be ruled out? I'm not trying to "get you to see things my way" or "win this debate". Take some time to think about this, is it possible that sexual orientation/attraction is a subconscious decision?

[.blank cd]

QD: at this point in time in the study of sexual orientation and sexual attraction, can anything be ruled out? I'm not trying to "get you to see things my way" or "win this debate". Take some time to think about this, is it possible that sexual orientation/attraction is a subconscious decision?Layman subconscious tends to be dismissed by modern psychologists because of its lack of testability and falsifiability. However, the science behind subconsciousness is still based off of information the brain collects from its senses, therefore sexuality would still be a choice, albeit one we are unaware we've made, and one we're incapable of making until a certain age.

[geoff]

Layman subconscious tends to be dismissed by modern psychologists because of its lack of testability and falsifiability. However, the science behind subconsciousness is still based off of information the brain collects from its senses, therefore sexuality would still be a choice, albeit one we are unaware we've made, and one we're incapable of making until a certain age.

Again blank you show your excellent ability to search google and then copy and paste from wikipedia. :yay: That being said, lack of testability and falsifiability does not make the study of subconscious irrelevant. The part i made bold, this is exactly what I am trying to say and what I believe. Are we actually in agreement on something for once?

[.blank cd]

Again blank you show your excellent ability to search google and then copy and paste from wikipedia. That being said, lack of testability and falsifiability does not make the study of subconscious irrelevant. :facepalm:


The part i made bold, this is exactly what I am trying to say and what I believe. Are we actually in agreement on something for once?IF it were a subconscious choice, it would still require the cognitive ability for rational thought (which arguably some humans don't possess, but that's another topic for the religion section), and since this trait has been observed in vertebrates without this ability, it means it's deeper than just a choice.

[geoff]

Animals react to instinct and impulse. How can you compare the intricate brain and cognitive ability of humans to the unrational mind of a beast. The day I take the actions of a beast as comparable to the rationality of the human decision making process is the day I see a dog work out a word problem.

[.blank cd]

Animals react to instinct and impulse. How can you compare the intricate brain and cognitive ability of humans to the unrational mind of a beast. The day I take the actions of a beast as comparable to the rationality of the human decision making process is the day I see a dog work out a word problem.What are you talking about?

You do know scientifically you're just a "beast" with a little more brain function, right? You do things animals do for themselves every single day

[.blank cd]

Oh I forgot, god put humans on the earth to rule over animals.....right.

[geoff]

Yeah I get that. I'm not stupid. But don't sit there and try to tell me that animals are the same as humans. When it comes to cognitive ability, might as well compare us to rocks. Animals are not capable of thought or choice. They act on instinct and impulse.

[.blank cd]

Yeah I get that. I'm not stupid. But don't sit there and try to tell me that animals are the same as humans. When it comes to cognitive ability, might as well compare us to rocks. Animals are not capable of thought or choice. They act on instinct and impulse.

This is exactly what I said! Almost word for word! Do you disagree with me for the sake of disagreeing with me? Lol

[geoff]

So how then can you rationalize that humans also have no choice in sexuality/orientation/attraction? We are on a level WAY beyond that of any living species on this planet. I see the connection you're trying to make, it's just a poor one.

[geoff]

Oh I forgot, god put humans on the earth to rule over animals.....right.

Um.....yeah. You call it chance/evolution, i call it purpose/God. That doesn't change the fact that you don't see dog's walking humans or cows eating manburgers. What does this have to do with anything?:thinking:

[nelson9995]

Lolol. I wasn't really trying. Honest! I was referring to you saying "in my opinion," "this is fact." Lolol. Later, QD.

gotcha... well let me rephrase that... half the things in the bible are proved by science.

[.blank cd]

So how then can you rationalize that humans also have no choice in sexuality/orientation/attraction? We are on a level WAY beyond that of any living species on this planet. I see the connection you're trying to make, it's just a poor one.Stop being simple. You're trying to say its simply a choice. Since humans are one of few species that have the ability for rational thought, it would only be expressed in those species. It's not. Many animals exhibit homosexuality, even those that aren't capable of rational thought.

[geoff]

I stated that it's possible that sexual orientation/attraction are a subconscious decision. You brought up the animals. Animals have no rules, no goals, no rationality. You can not compare their behavior to a humans. Talk about apples and oranges. Animals also eat their own crap and children, females eat their mates, homosexuality, ect...how can you compare that to humans. Sure homosexuality happens in animals, it's an impulse to "bust a nutt". But can one say if that male heyena is attracted to that other male, or is he simply in heat and will screw anything at that point? Do animals have long term same sex relationships that involve "love"?

[.blank cd]

I stand corrected. Even some humans aren't capable of rational thought.

[quickdodge®]

QD: at this point in time in the study of sexual orientation and sexual attraction, can anything be ruled out? I'm not trying to "get you to see things my way" or "win this debate". Take some time to think about this, is it possible that sexual orientation/attraction is a subconscious decision?

To be honest, man, anything is probably possible until proven otherwise, I suppose.


gotcha... well let me rephrase that... half the things in the bible are proved by science.

Haha. Either way you rephrase it, it still isn't so, dude. But this topic isn't for that discussion, my man. Later, QD.