Page 41 of 45 FirstFirst ... 313940414243 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 443

Thread: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

  1. #401
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,936

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Nope

    They do not change the definition of marriage from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?.
    On this point alone, it should be mentioned that we don't care that this is a problem for you. As we do not care about "changing the definition", you're appealing to an emotion we don't have. "You're trying to change the definition!!" is the biggest yawn inducing argument the anti-gay-marriage crowd has, as far as we're concerned. If you want it to have an impact, that argument is best reserved for people who already agree with you. We simply don't care.

  2. #402
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Got it! You don't like gay people. Pretty simple. All the rest is just your rationalizations.
    I like people just fine, don't care much whether they are gay or straight ... actually I rather care not to know, so just don't tell me as I am not going to bed with you so why would I need to know or care? So, I am tolerant. That is all I can be. If I genuinely thought that this, along with other things not just this, would not hurt society much less help it, I wouldn't speak out so vociferously. Fine with it just being there, part of life, not in any frame of mind to endorse the behavior, not support it Behooves one to look ahead, too, envision ahead of what you are dismantling. Weaken society to such an extent it can no longer defend such tolerance...and then where are you?

    So, I don't care what you are, just don't make such a big deal of it. I think you all just like the attention.

  3. #403
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    You have to resort to ad hominems and emotional arguments because you're grasping at straws

    Promiscuity is far more prevalent in the homosexual community and within their relationships than heterosexual relationships as a % of population. Sexual compulsion among gay men is unusually high as well.

    Big spike in cases of syphilis in S.F. / Gay, bisexual men affected most - SFGate
    Imagine that...unmarried men having sex. What a surprise! I wonder if there was some sort of institution out there that would promote monogamous, committed relationships so that these gay men would be less likely to practice promiscuous sex. Hm...what kind of institution could manage to accomplish such a task?

    I love that you are making such a great case for same sex marriage. Please continue.

    Secondly, the weakness of individual people does not tarnish the credibility of the institution. Marriage is one of the oldest institutions of the human race, with specific social and economic purposes. Gay "Marriage" doesn't fit into the institution anymore than I would fit in at all an all female fitness club as a male, or that woman marrying a roller coaster does. Any marriage other than man + woman is not real marriage. They are pretend marriages. Homosexuals are defined by their sexual behavior while heterosexuals are defined by their roles as parents. Biologically it's irrefutable. Children do best when raised by their biological parents in a low conflict household. I find it ironic that you're projecting that other people have "childlike views on marriage" when the notion of "Gay Marriage" is about as childlike a want as there could be. Wanting Gay Marriage is an emotional and selfish need, with no respect for the institution, much like how a when a 5 year old wants something, he just "wants it", regardless.
    Meh. The evidence clearly shows that children do just as well raised by same sex couples as they do raised by opposite sex couples and that is the consensus of just about every child welfare and mental health organization in the country...so your statement is self serving not factual.

    Gay "Marriage" isn't real marriage

    It's pretend marriage
    Uh huh. When Britney Spears filed annulment after mere hours of marital bliss with Jason Alexander that was totally "real marriage".

    This notion you have that you can declare what marriages are real and which are "pretend" is rather grandiose. Call it what you please. Marriage is what the participants make it, and if you want to pretend that you have the power to decide whose marriage is real and whose is pretend, then feel free to entertain that delusion, but the rest of us like to live in reality.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  4. #404
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    I like people just fine, don't care much whether they are gay or straight ... actually I rather care not to know, so just don't tell me as I am not going to bed with you so why would I need to know or care? So, I am tolerant. That is all I can be. If I genuinely thought that this, along with other things not just this, would not hurt society much less help it, I wouldn't speak out so vociferously. Fine with it just being there, part of life, not in any frame of mind to endorse the behavior, not support it Behooves one to look ahead, too, envision ahead of what you are dismantling. Weaken society to such an extent it can no longer defend such tolerance...and then where are you?

    So, I don't care what you are, just don't make such a big deal of it. I think you all just like the attention.
    You argue that gays are hurting society just because they want same sex marriage. You admit you have no evidence to support the claim that same sex marriage does harm society, but you have no problem accusing gays of harming society nonetheless. When you accuse an entire group of people of harming society without any evidence to support that claim it is animosity. It is prejudice. It is bigotry. Whatever you want to call it, you clearly do not like gay people and that mars any chance of you looking at this from a reasonable point of view. You destroyed your entire credibility in this debate when you crossed that line. It would be like me arguing "Christians hurt society by promoting their religion". What basis is there for an intellectual or reasonable discussion at that point?

    I'm sorry, but you put yourself in the same category as the Westboro Baptist Church when you asserted harm without evidence. Distasteful at best.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  5. #405
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    You argue that gays are hurting society just because they want same sex marriage. You admit you have no evidence to support the claim that same sex marriage does harm society, but you have no problem accusing gays of harming society nonetheless. When you accuse an entire group of people of harming society without any evidence to support that claim it is animosity. It is prejudice. It is bigotry. Whatever you want to call it, you clearly do not like gay people and that mars any chance of you looking at this from a reasonable point of view. You destroyed your entire credibility in this debate when you crossed that line. It would be like me arguing "Christians hurt society by promoting their religion". What basis is there for an intellectual or reasonable discussion at that point?

    I'm sorry, but you put yourself in the same category as the Westboro Baptist Church when you asserted harm without evidence. Distasteful at best.
    No, minimum what we need from your side is proof that your major tinkering with one of our most integral societal building blocks does no harm. Society has that right, has that obligation to posterity. You are the one wanting something special, prove it to us. We don't have to prove anything, we like things just fine right now. We know what works for society, we have over 200 years of continuous prosperity and enlightenment overcoming tyranny of our own from our own, ended it with the Revolutionary War, then tyranny of our own by our own ending with the Civil War. What our founders understood was slow change means solid and stable change, change for change's sake is simply common-sensically imprudent.

    And when one sets the parameters of bigotry to suit their own ends, well, I might suggest that those who bandy about such words as bigot, accusing another, who is only speaking their mind honestly, as showing animosity... further even, to call it prejudice... that seems a mirror to your own remarks, some call it projection.

    Listen, you want intellectual debate, would first suggest you dial back on the ad hominem attacks, not start calling people names like bigot. Or when losing control pulling out the most radical group on the other side and, because you cannot mount a proper argument, you say another is in the same category as that group? Those are not arguments, my fellow citizen.

    Regroup, maybe re-figure and then restate.

  6. #406
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Verthaine View Post
    Then what are you trying to do?
    How does changing the definition of marriage affect YOU personally?
    When did I ever claim it affected me personally? You're falling into the old cliche canards that don't interest me.

    Radical militant homosexual community?Ohhh spooky language.Why are you allowed to other demonize people?And are others allowed to demonize you?
    Are people allowed to call you a megalomaniac?Since you insist that your opinions are facts.
    Homosexuals are demanding special rights to change institutions and definitions of words that have existed since the beginning of human history. It's radical and extreme. There is no reason why gays can't create their own institutions of civil unions and have their own exclusive institutions, but that isn't good enough for them. They want to change existing institutions that have specific social and economic purposes for their own selfish gain while at the same time excluding other groups that would want to join this same club based upon their sexual behavior too. In the end, all these different combinations of people based upon sexual behavior that fall outside of institution of marriage are just make believe pretend marriages.

    Since you are constantly on these types of threads,doesn't that make you a militant?
    No it doesn't. This is a message board where political discussion takes place.

    And since the majority of this country supports SSM,doesn't that make you the radical?
    If the majority of the country supports it then let's vote on it state by state. That's not what is happening here though. CA (the most liberal state in the union) voted AGAINST gay marriage and that wasn't good enough for radical militant homosexuals. They are using the courts to go around the will of the people. I have no problem with each state voting for what kind of "marriage' they want because that was intent of the Founders. Social experiments be left to the states. The Feds should stay out of it. That isn't what's happening now though. The radical left abuses the courts to mainstream their agenda against the will of the people.

    Yet you trying to prevent others from choosing for themselves how they define a word, and prevent them from joining an exclusive club,and trying to prevent others from changing an institution.
    Marriage has always meant man + woman. Words and institutions have meaning and purpose. If you want to call ketchup mustard by all means, go for it. You're just pretending ketchup is mustard however. Ketchup is still ketchup.

    Explain to me again just why institutions aren't allowed to be changed,if the majority of poeple want to?
    There is no need to change the institution of marriage to appease the feelings of homosexuals. It just trivializes the institution. If you open the door for teh gays, other groups who want to "marry" based upon sexual behavior or whatever combination they can think of will want to as well like the woman marrying a roller coaster.

    Gay Marriage isn't real marriage

    It never will be

  7. #407
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Imagine that...unmarried men having sex. What a surprise! I wonder if there was some sort of institution out there that would promote monogamous, committed relationships so that these gay men would be less likely to practice promiscuous sex. Hm...what kind of institution could manage to accomplish such a task?

    I love that you are making such a great case for same sex marriage. Please continue.
    Dodge noted

    It's amazing how all of the sudden you think because gays are married, that somehow they don't divorce, cheat on each other, ect. while at the time ranting that marriage is already tainted because of the high divorce rate among heterosexuals. It's laughable.

    Meh. The evidence clearly shows that children do just as well raised by same sex couples as they do raised by opposite sex couples and that is the consensus of just about every child welfare and mental health organization in the country...so your statement is self serving not factual.
    Children do BEST when raised by their biological parents in a low conflict household. Any other parental environment is not optimal and vastly inferior.

    Uh huh. When Britney Spears filed annulment after mere hours of marital bliss with Jason Alexander that was totally "real marriage".
    So we're judging an entire institution on the behaviors of celebrities now? You're getting desperate. Maybe you have not heard of this:

    'My Fair Wedding' Host David Tutera -- Allegations of Sex Addiction ... Prostitutes | TMZ.com

    This notion you have that you can declare what marriages are real and which are "pretend" is rather grandiose. Call it what you please. Marriage is what the participants make it, and if you want to pretend that you have the power to decide whose marriage is real and whose is pretend, then feel free to entertain that delusion, but the rest of us like to live in reality.
    Marriage is not what participants make it. Marriage is a specific institution with social and economic purposes that has existed since the beginning of human history. Gay Marriage no more relevant than roller coaster girl's marriage. Both are pretend marriages. Not real marriages.

  8. #408
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    07-25-13 @ 09:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    3,328

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    When did I ever claim it affected me personally? You're falling into the old cliche canards that don't interest me.



    Homosexuals are demanding special rights to change institutions and definitions of words that have existed since the beginning of human history. It's radical and extreme. There is no reason why gays can't create their own institutions of civil unions and have their own exclusive institutions, but that isn't good enough for them. They want to change existing institutions that have specific social and economic purposes for their own selfish gain while at the same time excluding other groups that would want to join this same club based upon their sexual behavior too. In the end, all these different combinations of people based upon sexual behavior that fall outside of institution of marriage are just make believe pretend marriages.



    No it doesn't. This is a message board where political discussion takes place.



    If the majority of the country supports it then let's vote on it state by state. That's not what is happening here though. CA (the most liberal state in the union) voted AGAINST gay marriage and that wasn't good enough for radical militant homosexuals. They are using the courts to go around the will of the people. I have no problem with each state voting for what kind of "marriage' they want because that was intent of the Founders. Social experiments be left to the states. The Feds should stay out of it. That isn't what's happening now though. The radical left abuses the courts to mainstream their agenda against the will of the people.



    Marriage has always meant man + woman. Words and institutions have meaning and purpose. If you want to call ketchup mustard by all means, go for it. You're just pretending ketchup is mustard however. Ketchup is still ketchup.



    There is no need to change the institution of marriage to appease the feelings of homosexuals. It just trivializes the institution. If you open the door for teh gays, other groups who want to "marry" based upon sexual behavior or whatever combination they can think of will want to as well like the woman marrying a roller coaster.

    Gay Marriage isn't real marriage

    It never will be


    Reread what you said " CA (the most liberal state in the union"...................It obviously isn't "the most liberal state in the union" and you just proved it in the conclusion to that statement....................

  9. #409
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Dodge noted

    It's amazing how all of the sudden you think because gays are married, that somehow they don't divorce, cheat on each other, ect. while at the time ranting that marriage is already tainted because of the high divorce rate among heterosexuals. It's laughable.
    You argued that promiscuity is high among unmarried gay men. I argued that allowing gay men to marry may lower promiscuity. Is that really that hard to follow?


    Children do BEST when raised by their biological parents in a low conflict household. Any other parental environment is not optimal and vastly inferior.
    Yeah...I'm gonna take the word of the child experts who actually study this and who are motivated to look out for the best interests of children over your word on this issue. Sorry, but a politically motivated individual who, as far as I can tell, has no education or professional background on this topic, is not going to outweigh the thousands of people who do.

    Now this is where you post fatherless statistics comprised of single mothers and try to make an uneducated ploy that they are somehow relevant to same sex couples.

    So we're judging an entire institution on the behaviors of celebrities now? You're getting desperate. Maybe you have not heard of this:
    Hey, you are the one trying to dictate "real marriage" on the basis of people's sex alone. It is your logic, not mine.

    Marriage is not what participants make it. Marriage is a specific institution with social and economic purposes that has existed since the beginning of human history. Gay Marriage no more relevant than roller coaster girl's marriage. Both are pretend marriages. Not real marriages.
    Well good for you. If that is the way you see it then fine. You are certainly entitled to your view. I recognize that same sex unions have existed in human history just as long as opposite sex unions, and whether or not you want to call them "marriages" is a matter of personal choice. I'm not gonna make you do it. I don't care what you think is "real" or "pretend" because you are just a random person with an opinion. Restating your opinion over and over again just makes you look like you are trying to force other people to accept it and that just comes across as desperate, but whatever. Do what you like.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  10. #410
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    No, minimum what we need from your side is proof that your major tinkering with one of our most integral societal building blocks does no harm. Society has that right, has that obligation to posterity. You are the one wanting something special, prove it to us. We don't have to prove anything, we like things just fine right now. We know what works for society, we have over 200 years of continuous prosperity and enlightenment overcoming tyranny of our own from our own, ended it with the Revolutionary War, then tyranny of our own by our own ending with the Civil War. What our founders understood was slow change means solid and stable change, change for change's sake is simply common-sensically imprudent.

    And when one sets the parameters of bigotry to suit their own ends, well, I might suggest that those who bandy about such words as bigot, accusing another, who is only speaking their mind honestly, as showing animosity... further even, to call it prejudice... that seems a mirror to your own remarks, some call it projection.

    Listen, you want intellectual debate, would first suggest you dial back on the ad hominem attacks, not start calling people names like bigot. Or when losing control pulling out the most radical group on the other side and, because you cannot mount a proper argument, you say another is in the same category as that group? Those are not arguments, my fellow citizen.

    Regroup, maybe re-figure and then restate.
    Dude, you stated, in your own words, that gays are harming society by seeking same sex marriage. You already made up your mind. I know your type. I could find all the evidence in the world, and you would move the goal posts in perpetuity because your problem is with gay people, not with same sex marriage. You will never be satisfied because you want to believe that same sex marriage is harmful. As I said, you lost your credibility when you are argued there wasn't enough evidence and then turned around and argued that gays were harming society. You can't have it both ways. Either you take back your statement that gays are harming society and admit you don't know what the long term effects of same sex marriage will be or you continue this charade that you actually care about evidence when it is clear by your own words that you have already made up your mind.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

Page 41 of 45 FirstFirst ... 313940414243 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •