Alright I am American..so some of the rules of government are simple...Life liberty and happiness and so on and so forth.. So lets begin... the topic is Same Sex marriage... and should it be allowed or not..in the US... Alright I sat and read all the topic has covered... for so long and so forth... it seems.. that there isn't much cover of how the idea has to be ruled for it to be passed or any thing... Let go to ... say... For same sex marriage to work it has to meet a few understandings... What is the point of the legal binding? Marriage set up in at least the bible is set to go accord with nature... in to promote offspring... life and the like... IN all total... Jews (reading from the old testament here...) your decedent will be come like the stars in the sky...... Its not really stated... that homosexual is openly wrong.. If so..find me a verse.. . I am kinda taking a middle road so both sides can take from this argument and use it for fuel... Now this is at least the point of Marriage to my understanding...I mean... besides civil union with a women and loving her..and having a family what would be the point? Like take it to..the point as.... I want kids... I want a wife... I think we would have to agree with wanting kids before we got married..its something I would talk to her about... I am guessing IN a homosexual relationship there would be the same..but its prone to have no promise of full union... Now this is a bit out dated..but usually Families that are all blood related..(ie. having there own.. tend to say together more often than not.. because of the child... ) Now I am not assuming that just because it isn't theres they will not say with the child just again its human logic... would it be about the child or them self... Now moving on to ... this horrible topic about right and wrong business... there is to big diffence from Moral and legal wrong...the government makes it clear It can on tell you something is morally wrong..It would be acting as a religion in doing so...it Can Under good reason limit something though... 1 term any for you.. about to take Government class will know this term after it... Compelling public interest... - there is a risk of some one getting hurt abused ..so on and so forth... being put into harms way...- now getting back to the topic... Homosexual hasn't really been said to a crime... it has been called at least in my state a crime against nature...(I live in Virgina... and yes it is a law..look it up..) Its plainly a law almost non enforceable... its the same crime... as when you sexually assault someone..or generally do something out of natural course... I mean..its a law... but its to touch of a law to really enforce with homosexuality..but cause what is fully homosexuality and how can you fully ID it from any thing else...? So I am kinda not taking a side here...but God never said he hated homosexuals...nor did he every say it wasn't right... just simply its a event not in the course of nature...I kinda lost in the amount of homosexually being genetic... because if you look at some notes in Evolution..... (talk to some people that know about it.. or look at the debate about it as well...) there is a rule... those that don't breed don't pass on... and its kinda odd to say its genetic..when homosexuals...don't' breed...so how can it be genetic... unless its a terminal gene with makes the offspring not pass on...I mean it could be that the person..in personal mind gets confused as to which gender to link but... I don't know ... I am not gay... but in all regards again... it doesn't matter..if they love a gender ... or a person of the same gender, I rewrite it sorry didn't mean to offend... Now for human rights... I totally agree if some one wants to smoke its not in our place to stop them... I mean we can tell them not to ..but simply... making a law for them to stop doesn't keep them from doing it.. now I am not going to say its wrong for you to be homosexual... I wouldn't dare say it... but I would think its out of nature...... So your a freak... but don't take that as an insult..we are all special in some way or another...I mean I am Gopher... and I use ( ... ) to much and people know me by it.. so w/e I am going to close of my thoughts on this matter soon... I haven't seen much of a calling for why Homosexuals want marriage rights... in the course of what legal gains do they want... I understand what rights they could have..but not what they are aiming for... much Legal rights in marriage are logically given... it was for the most part for the youth in the union..and proof who was related to who...that was a big deal for almost any family for ages... Love was a part of it..but that was in there also... alright this has gotten to long and My GF want to talk to me.. GTG there will be a part to... I will finish this.. but feel free to comment and if there is a typo I will fix it.. so you don't need to bring it up.. but w/e...night!
How is being homosexual getting compared to suicide? Really though, I don't understand how living, happy, loving people are getting compared to what someone does when they've got nothing left. I mean really. Comparing it to suicide is like comparing the blue sky to a brown chair, you've got nothing similar. I don't see the argument trying to be made here.
When you "the argument", do you mean the argument that homosexuality is akin to suicide? (I'm genuinely not sure what you mean here BTW, if you don't want me to use the argument then why are you defending it. If by "the argument" you mean something else the please tell me) Looking back on our discussion yesterday, I do agree that, actually, this train of discussion should be abandoned (If this is what you are saying). A comparison of suicide and homosexuality isn't really being taken seriously by anyone anyone here as a reason why same sex marriage shouldn't be allowed and so the argument isn't really of much consequence in the discussion. Its just a comparison that angered me because I find it to insulting to homosexuals. I shouldn't have started to bring criticisms of logic into the discussion - a logical argument and covering all angles are obviously different things, the latter being almost impossible generally. For this I would like to apologise, it may have been a strong argument that I believe in but is off the topic and, seeing as the discussion isn't hinging around this point, has little place in this thread. I still hold strong opinions on the subject, but will start a new thread when I have time to find a substantial amount of evidence to cite. Because when we are talking about psychological analysis of homosexuality and the idea of treatment, respected academic studies on the subject must be taken as a consideration, so look out for it ferretness, I'm sure I'll see you there. (Oh and could you please remove your sig in your posts in all Debate forum threads as per the rules, I forget too pretty much everytime and have to edit my posts to remove it, but it is a fair rule and has a good reason) To GO43R I would like to say thanks for a good debate post. Its detailed, reasoned and follows a sensible progression of ideas. One point I would like to respond to is your question about the aims of achieving same sex marriage: I think the main legal rights, which you already know of judging from your post, are things like the right to decide on the fate of a partner in hospital situations, or legal rights over organisation of a funeral. These are matters that are important to any person in a relationship and, If I were gay and in a loving relationship, I would certainly want to have the same legal entitlements in these situations. I believe another positive about same sex marriage is one that isn't legal but social. Marriage is a declaration of love and commitment, not only to each other but to the community around you- your neigbours, friends, relatives etc.- denying same sex couples marriage not only denies them this proclamation which is available to heterosexual couples, but sends a message to society at large saying- gay relationships are, in some way, less valid than straight relationships. Same sex marriage is an important step in, not only achieving equality through law, but extending that attitude of equality throughout society. Letting people know that prejudice has no real basis and showing that the government does not support any kind of prejudice towards homosexual relationships. But the most simple answer to the question "why should same sex marriages be allowed, what's the actual point?" is- because they want to. They should need no other reason, as straight couples need no other reason. They are in love and want to get married, there is no reason to deny them this, so why should we?
Leviticus 20:13 NIV -- "`If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads I stopped reading after that. It got boring. hopefully this will clear it up for the person above you too. The "Argument" is the typical "gay" argument. That it is (supposedly) natural, that they can't help it, and that we should be loving and let them be happy. The comparative to suicide is taking that argument and applying it to the act of killing yourself. We can thus prove that it is an illogical argument and should not be used. *NOTE* I never compared gays to suicidal people, I used the same argument to show that it was incorrect.
Ok, I think we can put that discussion aside then, I don't think anyone's taking it seriously anymore, thanks for clearing it up for me. I have previously argued against use of the word "natural" in this sense, as so many accepted and similar things are not "natural" (i.e serve no biological purpose in this case) sex for pleasure, for example. I know from another thread that you disagree with sex unless people want to get pregnant (sorry if I have paraphrased here, please correct me if so) and thus sex for pleasure is not, to you, a valid example, as you believe it also to be wrong. Can I ask where this idea of what is "natural" comes from? Are you, as I am guessing, Christian in faith? I personally do not believe in the idea of "natural" but do accept that Christianity has pretty defined ideas about what is natural and what itsn't. If this is the case then I do not mean to disrespect you, I do not agree with the view point but I accept it respect that you are basing your argument on a premise, even if its a different premise from mine. If you are not Christian or any other religion which forbids homosexuality, then please explain your definition of "natural". Oh and will people PLEASE remove their sigs in this forum, its crowding it up and making it harder to follow the debate, the rule is there for a good reason and we need to prove that we're gonna follow the rules if this Forum is to succeed
It doesnt matter if its not natural. People should ****ing live how they want rednecks wanna live like rednecks, gangsters wanna live like gangsters, whores wanna be whores. Why question gays if you dont question society?
Pro-sex, anti-idiots-who-arn't=smart-enough-to-have-safe-sex sex. [SIZE=-1]in accordance with nature; relating to or concerning nature; "a very natural development"; "our natural environment"; "natural science"; "natural ... [/SIZE] OHHH shedo you used the argument again.....
Disable your sigs and get back on topic people! And attack the issue, not the people. You know who you are.
First of all I never said homosexuality was natural, but I believe we should let them do something for the good of the community, I have said that I openly do not believe in marriage but I do believe in a union between two gays that give them the same rights and privilages as a strait man and women receive when they get married. for example some of them being shared property, health insurance, life insurance, etc. They are legally bonded, and that is what marriage is. A legal bond between one person and another, or for the people that are religous, a bond between a man and a woman. On your argument with suicide, does suicide cause happiness? If so how many people are happy? One? I do not find that fair. While marriage results in happiness widespread throughout different people. This goes beyond just the couple's happiness, but their parents, family, and friends. They would all be happy for them. By saying you deny gay marriage or gay union, you state that you would deny these many people of happiness. Also on your suicide note, there is nothing illegal about commiting suicide, they could do it if they wanted, it is just frowned upon. No one likes death, and that is it. ~Randle $candal
We already had this argument, since people are using an invalid argument to support gay marriage, then it is completely on topic to argue against that argument. If your talking about me, (which would kind of defeat the last part since I don't know) I have been attacking the issues.
There will be no more discussion about suicide in this debate. NO MORE. It is irrelevant and off topic. Anyone who uses it from now on will have their post deleted and possibly receive an infraction. If you feel like debating suicide, feel free to do so in the "Suicide" debate I just created, which can be found here: http://www.forgehub.com/forum/debates/17264-suicide.html#post221325 Thank you.
I'm not debating suicide, i am debating gay marriage. Just because you don't understand my argument does not make it off topic or invalid. I thought you were leaving? Gimmi the infractions if it will make you feel better. "I don't like you opinions so I hurt you" very tolerant.
It is a valid point that Ferretness is bringing up, that is as much as I will weigh in on this topic for now though.
As someone who hasn't really been paying attention to the debate, I'd like to try to offer some fresh eyes to the thread to hopefully clear up the whole "suicide" thing. I don't agree with Ferretness's argument, but I think it is on topic. He's trying to show that the reasons behind supporting gay marriage may be illogical. Here's the comparison he's making: Some people are gay, possibly born that way. Some people are chronically depressed, possibly born that way. Gay people sometimes want to marry other gay people. Depressed people sometimes want to commit suicide. Gay marriage is harmless to everyone else (excluding possible family drama). Suicide is harmless to everyone else (excluding possible family drama). We should accept gay people and their right to get married. We should therefore accept suicidal people and their right to commit suicide. But society tries to prevent suicide, so perhaps we should try to prevent gay marriage. The argument itself is pretty valid. If we should respect a gay person's right to choose how they want to live their life, perhaps we should respect a suicidal person's right to choose how they want to live their life. Perhaps society should have a different view on euthanasia. But like Projectt said, that's a whole different topic. In an effort to get back on the topic of gay marriage and stay there, I'd like to leave you with a quote from earlier in the thread. That's a damn nice way to sum up the debate, squid. The only problem I see here is that you give me too many reasons to give you positive rep, but the stupid system won't let me give it out yet.
Whatever. I just don't want people saying that homosexuality is as bad as suicide. I find it highly disrespectful.
Yes, I think that the stigma and connotations associated with suicide made it difficult for people to see the argument he was making, and instead people thought he was comparing the two morally. I sat in front of the screen for several minutes before I could reply. At first I wanted to yell and say that the two are totally different, but I had to see past that to the argument.
I'm sure we all understood Ferret's argument, but it's things like the custom signatue he made mocking of the 'support love' signatures that are both completely unnecessary and intentionally harmful in a debate, which angers me (in the least) when one claims this to be key in an argument. But yes, thank your for not involving yourself in the argument and such a well thought out post, that calls for my respect. Don't let anyone let you think that, especially with people that don't care about what they say anymore.
I don't get why people think homosexuals are so unnatural. They're just as good as everyone else (If not better)! Seriously, they must be wrong in the head. You find this most in America, land of Christians and it annoys me. Freedom Man supports gay rights!
Admittedly that was a bit over-the-top. But on the same plane the "support love" signatures annoy me for opposite reasons.