|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Discrimination against homosexuals carried into the 21st century | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
... I'm not a bigot because I support cilvil unions for gays. That's like saying, "I'm not a bigot because I support concentration camps for Jews."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
I was married once to a wiccan. She was straight, but many of the other wiccas in her coven were not.
Yeah, this is going to be relevant to gays in general. Why don't you title you next post "Hoot Mon's excuse for being a boot"? It'll have as much relevance to the contents, I bet, as this one does. ”Hoot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hoot Mon writes: What are you smokin' up there in Canuckistan? Buffalo chips? You should have quoted the rest of my post:
quote: Respond to that instead of wasting posts. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
docpotato wrote:
OK, maybe you're right. Maybe the gays have changed. Fine. But I still don't know why I should change my mind and support the "marriage" between same sexes. Marriage is between opposite sexes. Let the fairies do it their own way. Give them have whatever they want, but don't let them change the meaning of "marriage." Why? Because we don't need to if they have civil unions. That's my opinion, OK. Even if we accept, for argument's sake, that your limited experience with gay culture (I use limited in the sense that everyone's experience is, by the fact that it's not the totality of all experience, limited) can stand for the whole of gay culture... how on earth is it hypocritical for people to change? (Lordie, Lordie, I tried to explain sincerely where I'm coming from and look at all the grief I got for it.) ”Hoot Mon
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
Ringo wrote:
Oh, please. I have a clearly stated my opinion that marriage is between opposite sexes. Gay "marriage" doesn't qualify. Why am I a bigot for holding that opinion? Is it just because it differs from yours? That strikes me as a bigoted attitude. It's separating out gay people for "civil unions" that makes it unequal. And it's supporting unequal treatment that makes one a bigot.Respond to that instead of wasting posts. ”Hoot Mon
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hoot Mon writes: Why am I a bigot for holding that opinion? What part of "unequal" do you not understand? You might as well say, "I have a clearly stated my opinion that marriage is between white people. Black 'marriage' doesn't qualify." The opinion is bigoted. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
DC wrote:
Oops. Admin, isn't that inflamatory? Stoopid uppity fags. ”Hoot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
Ringo wrote:
Ringo, that is positively ridiculous! You know it, too, because I know you are an intelligent person. I just happen to hold the opinion that marriage is for opposite sexes in order for them to start a family. That's all. Just why is my opinion so bigoted? What is bigoted about me if I support equal civil-union rights for gays? And please don't send me back to those water fountains again. You might as well say, "I have a clearly stated my opinion that marriage is between white people. Black 'marriage' doesn't qualify." ”Hoot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
docpotato Member (Idle past 5048 days) Posts: 334 From: Portland, OR Joined: |
OK, maybe you're right. Maybe the gays have changed. Fine. "The gays" have only changed if we accept that the viewpoint of the gay people you knew was the viewpoint of all gay people. Of course they weren't. And, anyway, it doesn't matter whether or not they've changed.
Fine. But I still don't know why I should change my mind and support the "marriage" between same sexes. You should only change your mind if you wish to support equality.
Marriage is between opposite sexes. Let the fairies do it their own way. Doubtless they will, as do most married couples. Some married people aren't even sexually monogomous, or so the legend goes.
Give them have whatever they want, but don't let them change the meaning of "marriage." Why? Because we don't need to if they have civil unions. That's my opinion, OK. Yeah, I get that it's your opinion. So, basically, you want to give them whatever they want up until the word "marriage" is threatened? I understand that with civil unions you feel we won't have to change the meaning of marriage. But why is it your opinion that we need to preserve this word? What good does it do anyone to preserve the definition of a word?
(Lordie, Lordie, I tried to explain sincerely where I'm coming from and look at all the grief I got for it.) I, for one, appreciate your sincerity. But I find where you're coming from rather appalling for reasons that others have already gone over.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
docpotato wrote:
What good does it do anyone to destroy it? What good does it do anyone to preserve the definition of a word? ”Hoot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hoot Mon writes: What is bigoted about me if I support equal civil-union rights for gays? There is nothing "equal" about civil unions for gays. It segregates them. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
There is nothing "equal" about civil unions for gays. It segregates them.
That's NOT a fact. That is only an opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hoot Mon writes: There is nothing "equal" about civil unions for gays. It segregates them. That's NOT a fact. That is only an opinion. Nonsense. How is "gay people can not marry" equal? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
docpotato Member (Idle past 5048 days) Posts: 334 From: Portland, OR Joined: |
Hmm. I don't see that something is being destroyed, only expanded upon.
Changing "Marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman." to "Marriage is sometimes between a man and a woman, two men, or two women". (for simplicity's sake I've left out the polygamous marriages out there in the real world) Oh wait, I do see something being destroyed: exclusivity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
Boys, boys. In the Land of Milk and Honey, just south of Canuckistan, the MAJORITY of people agree with me. Every poll show that. We are dealing with opinions here, not facts of civil equality. And your opinions are not going anywhere important soon, because your opinions are basically not biological.
”hoot Mon
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024