I am a lesbian and was married to my partner some years ago. It is my belief that as long as two people are interested in bettering the welfare of each other, creating a welcoming and loving home environment that fosters a sense of family and companionship, and are able to effectively work through their issues, then marriage is for them, regardless of sexual identity.

Cheers,

A

Hahaha... i never thought about that. Yeah maybe God accept lesbians more. He just dont like men that are gay. He never ment to put the prostata a place where it can be reached lol



________________
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900) - "Man is more ape than many of the apes."

Jean-Paul Sartre - "You are--your life, and nothing else."

Henrik Ibsen - "The majority is always wrong; the minority is rarely right."

Sorry but why is homosexuality a waste of resources and bad for the "unit"? What is really a waste of resources and bad for the "unit" is all those heterosexuals that mass produces kids at early age and that aftrwards need help from others to feed them. And normaly their kids follow in the same footsteps as their parents.

We have a problem with overpopulation and limited resourses. More gay people would help solv that lol

But either way... Even if it was bad for the society in some strange way, then It still is no argument agaist homosexuality or homosexual marriage. We dont have a moral obligation to always act in accordance with the greater good of society. First of all we should have a right to act in our own good and to take care of our selves. If not we are just equal to ants or some altruistic robots.


Actually I havent heard one good argument agaist homosexual marriage.

Okey.. if some churches dont want to allow it in their particular congregation then we should respect that. We dont have a good reason to intrude on that as long as homosexuals have the opportunity to marry in other churches or have a normal civil marrige at the local town hall (without church involved).

But people that argue for an total prohibition of homosexual marriage are just being prepotent and homophobic. Its that kind of people that goes arround desiring to controll other humans private lives and that belive they are carrying some kind of ultimate truth about how things should be and how others should live. They often belive in old dogmas created in the dessert for many years ago and they despise anyone that desire change and freedom.

People that have a tendency to fear other humans freedom are the ones that we should really be careful with. Becouse their fears are just a product of their own problems and conflicts being projected on others.


Last edited by lambchopsil at 9:30 pm, Jul 13 2012

________________
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900) - "Man is more ape than many of the apes."

Jean-Paul Sartre - "You are--your life, and nothing else."

Henrik Ibsen - "The majority is always wrong; the minority is rarely right."

im gay and always thought that debating about it is so stupid,if everyone just carry about their own lifes and respect each,they dont have to agree.

but not only gay marriage,marriage in general is kind of overrated

I think I wasn't clear enough in my previous post, and I apologize about it.

I don't think I am being a hypocrite because I am addressing fellow members of the Christian community. If they're non Christians, I would not say anything about this to them. I believe I have previously stated before that The Bible clearly stated that if we find our fellow Christians straying from Biblical laws, we must try to help them back or else the blame for their disobedience would also be put on us if we ignore them. If the Christian is someone who has read the Bible, they would understand what I am doing and would not be offended by my actions. I may be invading their privacy and personal preference in the eyes of a non Christian, but a Christian would understand that I am acting according to Biblical rules and not out of any other intent. Whether or not they take my heed, that's their choice. I'm in no position to force them to change or anything.

I specifically stated during religious events to mean events that pertain to religion [such as talk that involves my religion like this, hence my ambiguity in word choice], not religious movements, sermons, etc. It is during a Christian affair. When a person participates in a religious event they are part of a Christian affair. These religious events can occur anytime and anywhere. It has nothing to do with where God is, sorry about that. My purpose is to remind Christians of Biblical laws, not force gay Christians to be straight or force anyone to listen to me. [In fact, I really hope people take what I say about Christianity with a grain of salt, because I'm definitely not even close to an ideal Christian... orz I'm just a nerd who enjoys studying everything, including religious text.] And I don't remind people of religious teachings, such as God being against homosexuality, all the time during all religious events; probably only during one and that's about it.

And to start, I never really said I was against homosexuality. I said in a religious viewpoint and based on my religious background, I do not support it. However, I also said that I honestly don't care what sexuality people are unless you're a Christian because that will be too nosy of me. I'll say that God doesn't support homosexuality, but that's as far as I'll go.

Even though this is against my religion, I really don't care what sexuality people are. If it wasn't required by the Bible for me to tell fellow Christians that homosexuality isn't appreciated by God, I really don't care. Sexuality is a preference, and I don't care about people's preferences unless they involve hurting others or me. I also apologize for the late reply to you Nani0918. Been having internet issues

Last edited by melon-ramune-freak at 8:22 pm, Jul 13 2012

Not true, humans live in groups and as such it is not always necessary to directly have an offspring for your genes to be passed on.
Homosexual people, not having children of their own, are more likely to care for their grandchildren and their nephews or nieces.
So while at first glance it might appear a flaw from evolutionary point of view, it's just another variation that has no real significance in the big picture.

Also, you make it sound as if love is governed purely by chemical attraction driven by need to procreate. Setting aside the fact that it's an incredibly sad and un-romantic vision, how would you explain people who fall in love over the internet, stay faithful through years of separation or fall for people unable to have children?
It might be simple in animals, but humans, as social creatures, are much, much more complex than that.

Besides, even if we assumed that homosexuality is a flaw, it's still something decided at birth, independently from will of the person in question so why should they suffer for it? Would you like your right to live as yourself to be decided by a dice roll? I certainly wouldn't.

This is where I laugh!


Wrong. Gender recognition and sexual preference are two different things.
There are gays, who consider themselves as men (their gender recognition is in line with their physical gender) but they love men (which is their sexual preference is toward the same gender).
There are people who undergo sex-change procedure to change their gender, that is a form of gender recognition where they believe that they are the opposite gender in their souls and are born with the wrong body parts. They love the same gender (with them) before the sex-change procedure, and love the opposite gender after the procedure (sexual preference). This sexual preference stays the same.


What baffles me is why homosexual relationship is considered a sex crime under "lawful reasons". If you say that under religious reasons, I can understand. But if it's about the law, I dont see it. Homosexual relationship is the relationship built on the consent of 2 individuals that are fully capable of making rational decisions about their lives. Why is it a sex crime? Nobody is raping anyone here...



This whole part makes no sense. You talk like they're one very smart virus... This group of individuals seeks the lawful recognition and approval because they are facing an incredible amount of lack of rights and support that they should have, if they were heterosexuals and married to the opposite sex. Being homosexuals is not a choice, however, because of something that they cannot change, they are facing the discrimination from our pre-set society, laws and mindset.

No such thing as looking for a formidable ally or insecure or manipulating. It's more of doing what's right for yourself (if you're gay), for your partner (if you love him/her) and for others (if you care).

As a scientist, you should have looked into the part where they were born with this preference wired into themselves. It's not a vacation fling. It's something that people are born with and from a scientific point of view, this should be the first and foremost recognized point.

fact: Homesuxuality can be choose or forced on people trough education and there are several historical references that can easily prove such statement.

Among other things, traumatic experience can , notice the can, too cause androphobia or gynophobia and derive on homesexuality..


i don't mean anything bad with that, i just really enjoy pointing out facts that can be easily proven and provide suffering to random persons... because i'm douche.


one of many historican proofs of choosen or deliberated Homosexuality

Here


There are better examples, although the most notable ones are from that period, but this one come out first on wikipedia

Dear melon-ramune-freak,

Regardless of anyone's religion, it is still his/her own rights to believe, to love and to live. If you separate between the Christians and non-Christians and to drop a comment "God doesn't support homosexuality," I still think it's very rude... to them, not to you, of course.

If I go to a gay bar and someone steps up to me and ask "what's a straight lady doing in a gay bar?" I probably would smack that person. It's my right to go where I want, when I want, if the store is opened, right?

If we take the matter in a very very simple way, marriage is the lawful recognition for two adults, who are capable of making that decision by themselves, to be wed and to have the rights, responsibilities and benefits to each other's life.

If that is the definition, would you support them then?

Amendment:
There is a whole lot more than just being straight or gay, and being male or female. These four are miles apart and can be combined in varying degrees. (not just homosexual, heterosexual, transsexual, male, androgyny, and female). It's a very complex system, one of the reasons it can become very confusing.
There is a difference between romance, sexuality, gender, and sex.

The sex in a human being is not defined by a simple boolean bit, no-one is 100% male or female (if such a thing even exists). But, admittedly, humanity is generally divided into two groups that are sufficiently distinctive as not to confuse with each other.

The gender is something that a person either gets forced upon it or grows into. It's the assumed role, what this entail to differs from culture to culture and changes with time. Gender is in my opinion completely unrelated to sexual preference (but does influence preference/type)... [offtopic]hence I believe "Gender Bender" is an incorrect term, does sound better than the alternative though[/offtopic]

Romance and sexuality are also two different things, but often confused. It's quite possible to be hetero-romantic and homosexual, or in my case bi-romantic asexual... Meaning I could see myself dating both men and women, but I'm not interested in anything "more" of either (not that I'm particularly interested in the romance part).
It's also quite possible to fully heterosexual, but be in love with a single person of the same sex (he or she being the exception).


Possible, if the person in question was for instance bi-romantic, he/she had at least the "capacity" to love someone of the opposite gender. The sexual preference would not go away entirely, but could be suppressed... It's called conditioning (doesn't make it a viable solution though), sexuality is personal and simply not the business of others. Unless the person in question actually wants to go through the process, "they" should just shut up and learn to accept things that are different.
Don't forget that we can't see into other peoples mind and know what he/she is truly feeling. For some it's easy to pretend. Someone can say that he/she is cured/straight... doesn't mean he/she actually is.

Possibly not quite relevant for the OP, but something I believe to be quite relevant to subject this thread is starting to float to.

Last edited by Joentjuh at 4:53 am, Jul 14 2012

________________
Who they, what are, and why?
- Manga Cover Database -

Hey, had the debate. It was for WA Youth Parliament. 58 people debated on the issue of legalising homosexual marriage, everyone spoke, when it came time to vote, four people were against it and ten people abstained, the remaining 44 were for the motion. A great day for one sided debating and the fall of democracy, tee he he.


________________
We work in the dark, we do what we can, we give what we have, out doubt is our passion and our passion is our task, the rest is the madness of art. Henry james

\o/

Always good to know people for gay marriage are becoming less of a minority.

________________
Who they, what are, and why?
- Manga Cover Database -

You know, homosexual sex != homosexuality, just how not having sex doesn't imply being asexual.

As for your link, sexuality in ancient Greece was much different from our views on it so it's not really a proof of any kind.


Sorry, but please don't label stuff pulled out of your ass as facts. The fact is that there is no scientific consensus regarding causes of homosexuality.


Androphobia or gynophobia doesn't make you homosexual.


Being a douche is not a good reason for making up bullshit and calling it facts.

If you're going to talk about a subject you don't know anything about, you could at the very least glance through relevant wikipedia articles.

Few quotes straight out of wikipedia article on homosexuality:







Sorry for being offensive, but what you're saying is nothing more than unsubstantiated bullcrap.

chill out bro, as i stated i just pointed that out, doesn't really matter to me. And i would also like to point out that forcing something on someone always have that kind of reaction, but in the example i give it was the norm and so it was "normal" for them to have an homosexual relationship while young and then move on to marring a woman- I can't prove it, but it seems to me that there were no terrible scars for "forcing" then to do that.
In the animal kingdom some males mate among them when i they can't found a female, it's not that odd really.




something really similar happen in a debate held a few years ago in my among high schoolers. It was a pretended senate and at the moment of voting everybody agreed on passing the gay marriage (i don't believe it was for lack of homophobia but rather due to fear of been called homophobic)
A friend of mine tough that was stupid so he changed his vote in a rather "noise" manner making some other people who were holding back, because they didn't want to be the only one against it, join him, and creating a rather candid discussion.
I know this doesn't sound like much fun, but it was rather hilarious from a 3th person perspective, such as mine, and i still remember it and laugh.

Please don't take this the wrong way, it's meant as advise not critique.

First of all, don't say something controversial followed by something like "but I don't really care". What was the point then?

Secondly, there is a difference between being forced, and given the choice.
Force: being sent to i.e. a religious gay reformation seminar, via (verbal) violence, or "law".
Choice: settle down with someone of the opposite gender (or at least break up with...) or get shunned/"banished".

Both may sound harsh, but in the second case the choice lies with the person in question (for some not much of a choice, but a choice nonetheless). It wouldn't make them any less "gay", but they have more motivation to try and adhere to their cultural standards (begrudged acceptance), in the first case the choice was made for them.
What matters is how these choices were presented, and whether the person is allowed to make the decision for him/herself. Push and people will either break or hate(rebel).

Sigh, if history teaches us anything, it's that people just don't learn from history.

"In the animal kingdom" (which we also belong to!) sexuality is just as diverse and interesting as with humans. I'm not even going to bother quoting wikipedia, it's not that hard to find.

Also, don't forget that, and this might be familiar to people with children, to deny someone something only leads to him/her wanting to do it all the more (if not openly, than behind closed doors)... Something we should have learned from Japan by now (with sex having been such a social taboo for so long... and still largely is?)

All of which totally not related to this topic, homosexual MARRIAGE.

________________
Who they, what are, and why?
- Manga Cover Database -