Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-05-2004, 12:45 PM   #201
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
Weak, weak, WEAK! Lurikeen, why do you even try?
What you can't seem to understand is that nature doesn't know morals.
Who the hell is talking about morals? I am saying what is natural and what is unnatural. Try and keep up.
A lion who chases down a young calf, kills it, and eats it has done nothing immoral. A female salmon that lays eggs to be fertilized by a male has done nothing morally good. If another female Salmon mimicks a male fertilizing eggs, nature doesn't see a "lesbian Salmon", in other words, there is nothing immoral or moral going on.
You are comparing dumb animals to humans....why? Humans have risen above their base instincts and are capable of (except apparently in your case) reasonable thought. Translation: we know better.
(btw, it is perpetuate the species you clod, and not race)
I was referring to the human race, halfwit. Wasn't it you who chastized me for playing "spelling nazi" a week ago? Yet, here you are, harping on technicalities. More double standards from you...how typical.
Abuse is not just at a physical level of pain, nitwit. Following your illogic, if your minature version of a normal size penis could fit into an orifice of a human being, who hasn't a fully developed brain, then it would be acceptable to just haul off and sexually assault them, since you can't possibly harm them physically and mentally. Right?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! I'm sure the livestock is deeply traumatized.
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 12:45 PM   #202
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Rheaton
I just enjoy seeing Lurik flex his brain and give us guildence
Guidance can only be given to the intelligent.

Originally Posted by Rheaton
That, or perhaps come up with some new raging insults that we are in need of... the old ones have lost their pizazz
Sometimes they may be oldies, but they are still goodies. Fucktard.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 01:03 PM   #203
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Originally Posted by Lurikeen
Whether or not two consenting adults should have the right to get married has nothing at all to do with whether or not it is morally acceptable to have sex with animals or the incapacitated.
'Should' have the right, Lurik? I thought they already had the right but it was being denied...?? You mean if we 'should' grant them the right? I think the majority has spoken pretty much and said "nope".
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 01:07 PM   #204
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Wildane, your response is typical for the c0ns on this board. You are drawing the "naturual/unnatural" distinction for what purpose other than to make a moral judgement? What sense does "unnatural" make unless you are trying to make a moral judgement about homosexuality?

Unnatural is that which is not consistent with a normal course of events. You are attempting to reduce homosexual behavior to what you think is "abnormal sexual behavior" and my point has been that sexual behavior, in and of itself, is amoral. So claiming that homosexual sex is unnatural doesn't at all support your extended argument that homosexuality is immoral.

Edited for a spelling error.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"

Last edited by Lurikeen; 03-05-2004 at 01:50 PM.
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 02:30 PM   #205
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Rheaton
You mean if we 'should' grant them the right? I think the majority has spoken pretty much and said "nope".
Here's your answer, again.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 02:31 PM   #206
Kulani Autumnwood
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pit of Despair (So. Cal.)
Posts: 554
Still trying to figure out why you (generic you) persist in lumping pedophilia and zoophilia together with homosexuality.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Every time this discussion comes up, you (again, generic you) have the same responses... pedophilia and zoophilia. Every time. I lay bets with myself as to how soon someone will bring up that same old "slippery slope of pedophilia and zoophilia!" argument.

Please, give it a rest already.
Kulani Autumnwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 02:56 PM   #207
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
How are they different, Kulani? Because of the law structure in this country and the whole consent thing? Because the law tells us what is right and what is wrong?
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 03:15 PM   #208
Kulani Autumnwood
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pit of Despair (So. Cal.)
Posts: 554
Uhh... ok, I try to avoid calling people fucking morons, but... You're a fucking moron.

Broken down into the simplest possible terms (which in one case is rather inaccurate but this way they all match)

Homosexuality - sex with members of your own gender
Pedophilia - sex with children
Zoophilia - sex with animals

Has nothing to do with laws AT ALL once broken down to the basic level presented above.

Now, what makes homosexuality ok in my book and pedophilia and zoophilia not ok? Look at the "motivation" factor... pedophiles and zoophiles the motivation is CONTROL. The sex act is secondary... the motivating factor is that the victim CAN NOT RESIST. They get thier "thrill" without having any chance of being denied.

It is, to put it bluntly, rape.
Kulani Autumnwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 03:55 PM   #209
Everclear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 6,910
I agree with Trith:

Remember if you don't like the law or the constitution just go out and shit all over it, because you're special and your needs and petty desires outweigh everyone elses!!!

The stupid homophobe points out why his "straight" and VERY NARROW viewpoint is so pathetic. Good job =D
Everclear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 03:58 PM   #210
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Fucking Hetrophobes.



Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 04:01 PM   #211
Everclear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 6,910
I'm a straight woman. I am not a heterophobe, the only thing I am afraid of are the woman that buy underwear from large bins/ shiver.
Everclear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 04:08 PM   #212
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Kulani:

So your now an expert in these fields? You know that in every case it is just as you stated? I bet ya there would be some real professionals that would disagree. Let me inform you that there are studies out there, made by and for these perverts, that suggest that a child, or animal, can have a healthy relation with an adult. Sounds fucked up doesnt it? I agree that it is.

Let me ask you something, Kulani.. What would you say if there were suddenly a large collective of people who say they were molested as children and do not have any remorse about it nor was in any way physically harmed? Would you call them liers? Would you question their motive? In denial?

It is all a sickness, Kulani. Yes, even several forms of heterosexual sex between consenting adults is as well. The only difference is our acceptence of one over another.. Its plain right here, isnt it? I do not accept homosexual relations while you do. Niether of us agree with, or accept, any of the other types mentioned here...so we have a commond ground, right? That common ground is that we both dislike some peoples desires.

I said it before and will again. . I detest homosexual relations.. it makes me ill seeing it or thinking about it. Nothing that was instilled in me as a child by my parents, or a church, or peers.. Its a natural reaction to it. I do not accept it. However, there is also a part of me that says "They can do what they want to do just keep it away from me".. And that I understand that adults can make their own choices and they are liable for those choices....right or wrong. But what I also see is a rash of people, not claming any moral ties, usually stating that they do not believe in any moral authority, stating that they are not homosexual, that the idea grosses them out, but yet defend it as a choice. This I do not understand, and when I do try to understand all I see is a person defending the actions of individuals they would never live like. They support their right to act in ways that are counter to their own likes. Seems very noble indeed.. and it also seems far more open-minded.

But there is more to life then being 'open-minded'. There are indeed moral boundries that we must establish as a people and a culture. I know that most the extreme left do not wish for anyone to impose.. the key word here is 'impose'.. morals upon them.. And franky, I do not want someone to tell me that I cannot watch TV on Sundays. But you must understand that we are not talking about people who like raw fish and those who do not. We are talking about something that has a considerable impact upon our culture and our way of living. This isnt about allowing blacks the right to vote, or women to work,.. This is about the behaviors and interaction of a society that I feel... me, and a large majority feel, is not welcome and is a ill influence upon our family, our children and our lives.

This is why the 'neo-cons', or the right, seem like 'morons'.. It is because those with a ... gonna take a risk here with a can of worm... a lesser degree of moral standards find no harm in it at all. Take it for what it is worth.. but this is the general position of those opposed to gay marriage. Close-minded? Narrow? Ignorant? Say what you want, but this is the wishes of the people of this nation. And remember, there may come a day, say 20-30-40 years from now where you yourself may very well be considered 'a moron' for the beliefs you have that are in opposition to what you consider now morally bankrupt and void (take your pick).

Right now it is homsexual marriage, what will it be tomorrow? This isnt about allowing black the right to vote or women the right to work, etc.. This is about a loosening of moral restraints. Sure pedophilia in the open seems like it is a million miles away right now, but with the continuing loosening of these moral restaints, and what seems like absolutely nothing established as a stopping point, there is really nothing off limits if it is wanted...only a few obsticles to route around. This is why I stated in past threads that if we do not take a stand against a small collection of particular desires.. if we do not draw the line.. and if we allow these arguments that are gaining way now to succeed in 'changing' the will of the people, then nothing.. I mean absolutely nothing is off limits. The sky is the only limit.
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 05:55 PM   #213
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Rheaton
This is about the behaviors and interaction of a society that I feel... me, and a large majority feel, is not welcome and is a ill influence upon our family, our children and our lives.
When homosexuals marry, they can do so legally in one state so far, just how does that negatively influence your family's lives?

Let's put this into perspective. If you take your children into public they may likely see two males holding hands, hugging, or even french kissing. They don't have to be married to do that. Right? So how is their being married changing anything? I mean, do we married people run around with a large banner strapped to our backs reading "Hello World! I am Married!!"?

Do your children know who is married or not when you go to the mall, or walk down the sidewalk through your neighborhood? Huh?!

And, when your children fall in love are they going to be disuaded from marriage just because homosexuals are getting married (which they can legally do in one state right now)?

So, tell us all, Rheaton, what this mysterious "ill influence upon our family, our children and our lives" is as a result of homosexuals marrying each other.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 06:03 PM   #214
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
This is the type of marriage libs know the best.



GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 07:23 PM   #215
Veo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,926
Once again, from pg 28. of the conservative handbook:

"When presented with logical and sound arguments for the legalization of same-sex marriages, and all other avenues of pathetic reasoning are refuted, equate homosexuality with either pedophilia or zoophilia."
Veo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 07:28 PM   #216
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Veo,
Once again, from pg 28. of the conservative handbook:

"When presented with logical and sound arguments for the legalization of same-sex marriages, and all other avenues of pathetic reasoning are refuted, equate homosexuality with either pedophilia or zoophilia."
Which side does Peta belong to? We all know how much you Libs
love animals. Literally.


Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 07:30 PM   #217
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Originally Posted by Lurikeen
When homosexuals marry, they can do so legally in one state so far, just how does that negatively influence your family's lives?

Let's put this into perspective. If you take your children into public they may likely see two males holding hands, hugging, or even french kissing. They don't have to be married to do that. Right? So how is their being married changing anything? I mean, do we married people run around with a large banner strapped to our backs reading "Hello World! I am Married!!"?

Do your children know who is married or not when you go to the mall, or walk down the sidewalk through your neighborhood? Huh?!

And, when your children fall in love are they going to be disuaded from marriage just because homosexuals are getting married (which they can legally do in one state right now)?

So, tell us all, Rheaton, what this mysterious "ill influence upon our family, our children and our lives" is as a result of homosexuals marrying each other.
Gay Marriage = a wider 'acceptence' (or acknowledgement) of the already ill influence brought about by the homosexual culture. So yes, all those things you mentioned and then some.
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 07:30 PM   #218
Veo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,926
Only with relish, mustard, or hot sauce...
Veo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 08:21 PM   #219
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Rheaton
Gay Marriage = a wider 'acceptence' (or acknowledgement) of the already ill influence brought about by the homosexual culture. So yes, all those things you mentioned and then some.
What a load of bullshit. How does a "wider acceptance" of the "homosexual culture" influence your family or your children negatively?
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 08:34 PM   #220
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Lurikeen,
What a load of bullshit. How does a "wider acceptance" of the "homosexual culture" influence your family or your children negatively?
Explain how it doesn't.... LURI??




The homo's keep asking the Normals, how could it possibly effect normal people?
But they cannot explain how it dosen't effect the children of Normal people.

And they (homosexuals) expect normal people to accept their agenda.
Just because! No explaination.. Just because!



Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 08:47 PM   #221
Kulani Autumnwood
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pit of Despair (So. Cal.)
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by Rheaton
So your now an expert in these fields? You know that in every case it is just as you stated? I bet ya there would be some real professionals that would disagree.
Where did I ever state I was an "expert"? I posted that I believe, based on studies, that pedophilia and zoophilia are control issues not sexual issues, similiar to rape.
Let me inform you that there are studies out there, made by and for these perverts, that suggest that a child, or animal, can have a healthy relation with an adult. Sounds fucked up doesnt it? I agree that it is.
Yeah, and there were "studies" that "proved" blacks were sub-human too... not every study is actual science. This is not news to anyone. Consider the source.
Let me ask you something, Kulani.. What would you say if there were suddenly a large collective of people who say they were molested as children and do not have any remorse about it nor was in any way physically harmed? Would you call them liers? Would you question their motive? In denial?
Again, look for what they're getting out of it, look at who they are and what they do. Find thier motivations. My guess is either A) they're in denial... the whole sour grapes thing kinda "if I pretend it didn't hurt, maybe it'll stop". or B) they're pedophiles themselves, were never themselves molested, and are just doing it to give a false aura of legitimacy to thier sickness. Speaking of which...
It is all a sickness, Kulani. Yes, even several forms of heterosexual sex between consenting adults is as well. The only difference is our acceptence of one over another.. Its plain right here, isnt it?
<shrug> I disagree. If it's not hurting anyone except the consenting participents, who the hell cares how they choose to spend thier time? Let em sodomize each other with strap on cactuses for all I care, as long as I don't have to participate isn't any of my business.

Just because I, personally, do not wish to engage in certain activities doesn't mean that I think it's "sick". I don't wish to participate in an organized religeon either, but I don't claim you that do should be locked up as mentally unbalanced and are undeserving of entering into contracts with each other.
I do not accept homosexual relations while you do. Niether of us agree with, or accept, any of the other types mentioned here...so we have a commond ground, right? That common ground is that we both dislike some peoples desires.
No, I don't dislike some peoples desires. I dislike, or rather, detest the type of personality that NEEDS to have control over someone elses life or body. The two issues are entirely separate, despite repeated attempts by stone age cretins to link the two.
I said it before and will again. . I detest homosexual relations.. it makes me ill seeing it or thinking about it. Nothing that was instilled in me as a child by my parents, or a church, or peers.. Its a natural reaction to it. I do not accept it.
I detest liver and onions, it makes me ill seeing it or thinking about it. Does that mean I'd be fully within my rights to deny people who do like liver and onions the right to eat it? I have a similiar aversion to sushi, I think it's wrong to eat raw fish. My natural inclination is to cook my fish before eating it... does that mean there should be a law against people who like eating raw fish?
However, there is also a part of me that says "They can do what they want to do just keep it away from me".. And that I understand that adults can make their own choices and they are liable for those choices....right or wrong. But what I also see is a rash of people, not claming any moral ties, usually stating that they do not believe in any moral authority, stating that they are not homosexual, that the idea grosses them out, but yet defend it as a choice. This I do not understand, and when I do try to understand all I see is a person defending the actions of individuals they would never live like. They support their right to act in ways that are counter to their own likes. Seems very noble indeed.. and it also seems far more open-minded.
I would agree with the above (except for the part about keep it away from me... I don't care if they do it around me, just don't expect me to participate) if it wasn't just a lead in for more gay bashing. Except for the lack of morals part too actually.
But there is more to life then being 'open-minded'. There are indeed moral boundries that we must establish as a people and a culture. I know that most the extreme left do not wish for anyone to impose.. the key word here is 'impose'.. morals upon them.. And franky, I do not want someone to tell me that I cannot watch TV on Sundays. But you must understand that we are not talking about people who like raw fish and those who do not. We are talking about something that has a considerable impact upon our culture and our way of living. This isnt about allowing blacks the right to vote, or women to work,.. This is about the behaviors and interaction of a society that I feel... me, and a large majority feel, is not welcome and is a ill influence upon our family, our children and our lives.
"considerable impact"... and just what IS this "impact"? It doesn't "impact" me at all, much less "considerably". The most "impact" you could say it has is two very good friends of mine are homosexual. 99.9% of the time, I don't think of it... until people start assaulting thier status as human beings and calling them "sick" and claiming they don't have the same right to form a marriage as I did.
This is why the 'neo-cons', or the right, seem like 'morons'.. It is because those with a ... gonna take a risk here with a can of worm... a lesser degree of moral standards find no harm in it at all. Take it for what it is worth.. but this is the general position of those opposed to gay marriage.
The lesser moral standards are all in your heads. 99% of people I've talked to about this say that the reason they feel homosexuals are immoral has less to do with the mere fact of homosexuality and more to do with the perception that they're indiscriminate. That they jump in and out of beds on a whim. And what created that impression of instability? The fact that we, as a society, view any person (homo or heterosexual) that doesn't form a stable relationship as "players" or "sluts"... and what do we percieve as the epitome of a stable relationship?

You got it... Marriage.

We ignore the divorce rate, we just look at it as Married = Stable, Unmarried = Unstable. Doesn't matter that marriage, in and of itself, doesn't create a "stable" relationship. It doesn't even show a relationship IS stable. But we've been wedded to the idea that it does for so long that our perception of anyone who doesn't seek that state is to say "they're a slut, they're immoral, they're evil. That there's something wrong with them for not wanting marriage..."
Close-minded? Narrow? Ignorant? Say what you want, but this is the wishes of the people of this nation. And remember, there may come a day, say 20-30-40 years from now where you yourself may very well be considered 'a moron' for the beliefs you have that are in opposition to what you consider now morally bankrupt and void (take your pick).
Difference is... I'll at least be willing to look at the other side of the argument. I'll treat it the same way I do everything else in life... I'll look at all the factors, and I'll mine it for it's worth. Even your arguments are being carefully mined for every last smidgen of value... if nothing else, it gives me insight into the other side.
Right now it is homsexual marriage, what will it be tomorrow? This isnt about allowing black the right to vote or women the right to work, etc.. This is about a loosening of moral restraints.
You're right, this isn't about allowing blacks to vote or women to work... but it used to be. The same arguments were used... how it would ruin America's moral character, would change Life As We Know It. And it did... our perceptions of women and blacks as inferior beings has changed, and for the better. Maybe, if gays are allowed to get married, it will change societies perception of them as inferior beings, incapeable of having a stable moral relationship.
Sure pedophilia in the open seems like it is a million miles away right now, but with the continuing loosening of these moral restaints, and what seems like absolutely nothing established as a stopping point, there is really nothing off limits if it is wanted...only a few obsticles to route around. This is why I stated in past threads that if we do not take a stand against a small collection of particular desires.. if we do not draw the line.. and if we allow these arguments that are gaining way now to succeed in 'changing' the will of the people, then nothing.. I mean absolutely nothing is off limits. The sky is the only limit.
Pedophilia will never gain social acceptance... just take a look in the sexual assault thread. You'll see the staunchest supporters and the fiercest foes from the posts on this issue wholeheartedly agreeing with each other that the guy is sick and needs to be removed from society at the very least.

When a stand needs to be taken against pedophilia, take a stand against pedophilia... not against a totally unrelated issue.

Last edited by Kulani Autumnwood; 03-05-2004 at 08:50 PM. Reason: correcting formatting errors
Kulani Autumnwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 09:12 PM   #222
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Kulani?
Your trying to justify Pedophilia?

Are you saying that children that have sex are pedo's?


Or are you saying that since children can have sex, that adults can also
have sex with children also?


Just asking for clairification on the issue.



Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 10:18 PM   #223
LuxxorAutumnwood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Loseranna
Posts: 21
Send a message via ICQ to LuxxorAutumnwood
I know she's not saying anything to the likes of that pedophilia is okay. If you had read her previous posts you would realize that she does not think it's okay at all. I think the point she's trying to get across is just that people try to lump homosexuality in with other things that are totally different.

I've been hearing so much about this thread, I had to come and read it, and I'll admit that I didn't read every single post, but I think I got a halfway decent general idea of what most people are saying.

I honestly don't see what some of you have against gay people. I mean shit, if two consenting, sane, normal adults of the same sex fall in love and want to marry, why not let them marry?

The post that someone made saying that it would be less bad if you gave it a different name, like calling it a "union" instead of a "marriage" is just retarded IMO. If it's the same thing with a different name, what's the difference? Either you think it's okay or you don't, end of story. That's a lot like saying that murder would be okay if only you wouldn't call it murder.

As for the issue about it just being "wrong" because the bible says it's wrong... the bible says that a lot of things that are morally and socially accepted today are wrong, but if every person that engaged in HETEROSEXUAL anal or oral sex were to be pulled out into the streets and lynched for disobeying the bible, we'd lose probably 80% or more of the adult community. Now, take the previous statement and replace the word "bible" with "law". It's still a written law in a lot of states that anal sex and even oral sex of any sort, hetero or homo -sexual is illegal, and punishable by law. But again, that doesn't make it immoral and wrong in reality and practice. How many of you people that are against the whole gay issue and state the reason for being against it as either biblical or legal see it as being okay to engage in anal and/or oral sex activities? I'd be willing to bet that most have done these themselves.

As for people that feel it's morally wrong or unnatural, you're more than entitled to your opinion, but as you don't want other people's opinions being forced upon you, you shouldn't attempt to force yours on other people.

I totally agree with the point that I think it was Kulani again made that people USED to think that letting blacks and women vote, etc would *ruin* society, and on the contrary, it made our country stronger in the end to just have a little bit of understanding. One thing that makes us higher life forms than animals is that we have the ability to use our brains to a higher capacity, and to evolve mentally. We need to learn to take advantage of this capability, and try to continue to gain understanding of this issue as well as others, rather than to just sit in our dark little one-sided worlds hating everything that we dont' personally like or understand.
__________________
Luxxor Autumnwood
Kanilyo Autumnwood
LuxxorAutumnwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 11:45 PM   #224
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
I honestly don't see what some of you have against gay people. I mean shit, if two consenting, sane, normal adults of the same sex fall in love and want to marry, why not let them marry?
Look, shut the fuck up and get the fuck out, you didnt read shit and you dont have a fucking clue whats going on. Nobody has anything against gay acting people. Ill make it simple becuase thats what your peanut brain deals with. Marriage is between a man and a woman, you cant have that with 2 men and 2 women 2 german shephards or 2 orangutans. male+female+ married. man+man= lnot married woman+woman= not married. Wanna rename a new thing for 2 guys greasing up eachothers bunghole and hiding gerbils then go for it, but you wont be married and youll never be married.
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2004, 01:09 AM   #225
Ulujain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: La La Land
Posts: 1,930
The Autumnwood's spam the board two by two, hurrah, hurrah...
__________________
S.I.G.N.A.T.U.R.E.
Ulujain is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:14 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.