Toribash
Originally Posted by EpicFailDude View Post
It's happened before, but you have to be very, very, very fucking drunk.

so,so true....

Ok here is my opinion,gays should have the exact same rights as other people,im Christian and i still think so.If u look at it the christian way,its one rule colliding against the other.

Jesus says that gays shouldnt be gays,but he says to love everyone for who they are,so this seems like a clash off opposites to me.

Finally,yes they should be married and they should have any rights straights have
Originally Posted by Boredpayne View Post
A textbook is not a source, a textbook cites actual sources, e.g. studies. You'd have to give me the study itself.
Anyways: http://www.nationalsexstudy.indiana.edu/
Most studies on this are inconclusive as the results between anonymous and non-anonymous surveys are wildly different.
Changing the marriage law would give bisexuals more freedom as well now that I think of it, so I wouldn't restrict statistics to just homosexuals. This says 7.5 percent or so.


I don't see exactly how you have sex with a same sex partner without being homosexual/bisexual.

It is around 7.5% according to your source. Using mine, that would equate to about 4% of the population as either homosexual or bisexual. I'll admit, the time the data I'm sourcing is a bit dated (1990's), but homosexuality should have stayed relatively constant in terms of percentage of the population in the time period of 20 years. Such a large leap in the time of 20 years almost certainly doesn't occur with something so based on genetics. While the source says that it aimed to protect the identity of respondants, it could have been that they were less inclined to tell the truth in the 90's. About half of respondants who were homosexual being unwilling to tell the truth is a little unlikely though, but it's plausible.

Your source also said that "While about 7% of adult women and 8% of men identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual, the proportion of individuals in the U.S. who have had same-gender sexual interactions at some point in their lives is higher." Which supports that behavior does not equate orientation.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Originally Posted by Boredpayne View Post
No.

Experts estimate between 1-20 percent of the population.
Surveys yield typically between 1 and 15 percent based on the demographic.
Many more than this have homosexual feelings/experiences, but do not identify themselves as homosexuals.

I will not respect willfully ignorant and bigoted people.
You don't want to explain because you have no valid explanation.

You throw the word bigot around a-lot. I'm entitled to my own opinion and I even said I don't agree with discrimination against gay marriage. Cry some more.

*Boredpayne impression*: Blah blah blah *Google/Wikipedia searches information* Bigot, bigot, bigot *Insults someone with a valid opinion* *Struts around on a self righteous pedestal*

^ That's you in a nutshell.
Last edited by Mookiefish; Apr 21, 2011 at 11:26 AM.
Not giving a fuck about hurricanes is pretty badass - Fee


#ItemRights!
Originally Posted by Mookiefish View Post
You throw the word bigot around a-lot. I'm entitled to my own opinion and I even said I don't agree with discrimination against gay marriage. Cry some more.

*Boredpayne impression*: Blah blah blah *Google/Wikipedia searches information* Bigot, bigot, bigot *Insults someone with a valid opinion* *Struts around on a self righteous pedestal*

^ That's you in a nutshell.

For someone with the capability to read you don't seem to be able to use it very well.
Lets list a few arguements from him
• There is no official definition that defines ‘marriage’ as christian, straight institution.
• Gay people are not responsible for their genes nor their enviroment, rejecting the idea of them having equal rights would be ridiculous.
• Government and religion should be separated.
• Discrimination is not cool, yo.

In other words: You are an idiot who tries to denunciate opponents with set up fabrications.
How are you?
Originally Posted by Redundant View Post
• Gay people are not responsible for their genes nor their enviroment, rejecting the idea of them having equal rights would be ridiculous.

I think this argument sidesteps the stronger argument, which is this: people should be allowed to live their lives however they want as long as they are not harming others. So whether or not being gay is a choice is meaningless. This is a civil rights issue.

Also, that argument is very insulting and patronizing. It's like saying, well maybe they are doing something wrong but they can't help it.... It's more logical to argue that it doesn't matter if it's a choice or genetics/social environment - it harms no one, and should not only be tolerated, but legally supported like heterosexual relationships (i.e. marriage).

Now some will whine that other people having the right to pursue happiness as they define it infringes on their rights/beliefs etc. Well, grow up. It's quite egomaniacal to require everyone to live by your standards, or to pretend to be harmed when they don't. As boredpayne has analogized, this is the same as those who whined that making slaves free would conflict with their personal or institutional beliefs. This is indeed bigotry.
People should live their lives as so long as it's not disrupting others.

Wouldn't it be annoying if some one was living there life ( the obnoxious white guy, 6 feet tall, on a lot of testosterone) Yeah, you in your mind wants that guy to settle the fuck down, but that's a little hypocrtical to someone who believes someone should be able to live their lives, or a guy who is just in your face asking a shit load of questions just being the nosy guy, you have not right to shut the guy up, well you do, but that's kind of wrong.

As long as the ceremony isn't religious or if any of the money goes to any church of any sort they should be allowed to marry.

I think it's also quite selfish to require a ridiculous amount of people to do what a few people want.

Also the first Amendment in america allows the free excercise of religion.

If they want to get married by the government go right on ahead.
If they want to get married by all means do, but make it unreligious, I hate to see more money go to religion.

Also I am aware that there are literally thousands of ways to get married as to which why I think the gay community trying to make what is already there different is retarded. Just look up every way to get wed and if they except you, then well, you can get married, but it seems the gay community in canada and america just really want to make a solid one, right in the middle of church. They can get married how the greeks and romans did, Of course the had same sex marriage.
Last edited by T0ribush; Apr 21, 2011 at 04:52 PM.
Originally Posted by T0ribush View Post
As long as the ceremony isn't religious or if any of the money goes to any church of any sort they should be allowed to marry.

I think it's also quite selfish to require a ridiculous amount of people to do what a few people want.

Also the first Amendment in america allows the free excercise of religion.

If they want to get married by the government go right on ahead.
If they want to get married by all means do, but make it unreligious, I hate to see more money go to religion.

Also I am aware that there are literally thousands of ways to get married as to which why I think the gay community trying to make what is already there different is retarded. Just look up every way to get wed and if they except you, then well, you can get married, but it seems the gay community in canada and america just really want to make a solid one, right in the middle of church. They can get married how the greeks and romans did, Of course the had same sex marriage.

So homosexuals now get denied the right to their own excercise of their religion of choice because the head honcho decides that homosexuality is immoral? A lot of homosexuals are devout Christians, Jews, or Muslim, and they only want acceptance within their religious community.

Plus, this isn't even about the religious ceremony. All a religious ceremony comes down to is a service provided to a client. Almost guarenteed if I had a store and denied service to all black people, I would have lawsuits thrown at me from all directions. This is no different from a church denying religious ceremony to a homosexual couple, except somehow it's considered acceptable.

And your right to free speech or practice of religion is not allowed here because it violates a clause that states said practice of free speech or religion cannot infring the rights of another individual. By denying service to a group because of your beliefs, you are infringing on their rights.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Originally Posted by OrAclE View Post
Plus, this isn't even about the religious ceremony. All a religious ceremony comes down to is a service provided to a client. Almost guarenteed if I had a store and denied service to all black people, I would have lawsuits thrown at me from all directions. This is no different from a church denying religious ceremony to a homosexual couple, except somehow it's considered acceptable.

And your right to free speech or practice of religion is not allowed here because it violates a clause that states said practice of free speech or religion cannot infring the rights of another individual. By denying service to a group because of your beliefs, you are infringing on their rights.

Religious groups are allowed to be discriminatory, because well, it's their religion. Try telling a fundamental Jew and a Palestinian to get along; shit doesn't work, intense hatred etc.

This is where the whole fundamental human rights thing gets fucked around. You have two contesting rights, rights to religious belief and rights to equality. Governments will never make a decision on which is more important, because a torrent of shit would come their way from global community.

^
That right there is why there will never be a consensus on this issue and why gays will never be able to marry under federal western countries law.




/thread
Originally Posted by Jim View Post
That right there is why there will never be a consensus on this issue and why gays will never be able to marry under federal western countries law.
/thread

Get your facts straight.
Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Kanada,, Norway, Sweden, a couple of US states etc are okay with gay marriage.
That started in 2001!
So, uhh, social structures are evolving and I don't see why there should not be more evolving in the future, as you say.
How are you?