Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-23-2019 4:54 AM
38 online now:
PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (3 members, 35 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,573 Year: 3,610/19,786 Month: 605/1,087 Week: 195/212 Day: 10/27 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1415161718
19
Author Topic:   New York Gay Marriage
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16085
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 271 of 284 (627615)
08-03-2011 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 267 by Chuck77
08-03-2011 1:12 AM


Are you a trained expert on gays or Bi men?

I await nuggin's outraged condemnation of you with unbated breath.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Chuck77, posted 08-03-2011 1:12 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by Nuggin, posted 08-03-2011 2:46 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 272 of 284 (627618)
08-03-2011 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 262 by hooah212002
08-02-2011 11:15 PM


Re: moving towards some understanding
You DO realize that Jaderis has since apologized for saying as much, doing so some 130 posts prior to this, and hasn't posted since, leaving only you saying anything remotley close to this.

You DO realize that any time anyone jumps into an ongoing discussion on one side or the other, one has to assume that that person is in agreement with his side.

None of the people in this debate had any problem with my post for the 4 days prior to Jaderis' comment. They didn't come in until he raised the issue of my not having the right to make comments.

And they haven't left since. So, I'm still operating under the assumption that they are in agreement with the initial argument in which they are participating.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by hooah212002, posted 08-02-2011 11:15 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 273 of 284 (627619)
08-03-2011 2:38 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by Dr Adequate
08-03-2011 1:04 AM


Re: Dog pile x2
That was not in fact what he started off saying.

That's correct, what I started off saying was that gay recruitment was a myth.

Dear me, did a self-confessed troll get a response?

The only difference between us is that I'm willing to admit what I'm doing. You are doing the exact same stuff, but aren't man enough to own up to it.

If, in plain English, you mean "why disagree with someone who's wrong?" I think that that's a question that answers itself.

How do you know it's wrong? Are you gay enough to make that call?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-03-2011 1:04 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 274 of 284 (627620)
08-03-2011 2:39 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by Dr Adequate
08-02-2011 11:22 PM


Re: moving towards some understanding
* sighs deeply *

Not exactly a response is it?

Try again.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-02-2011 11:22 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 3:33 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 275 of 284 (627621)
08-03-2011 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by hooah212002
08-03-2011 1:16 AM


Re: Go back to the start
Here's the thing: by you automatically trying to labelm that's the problem. What the fuck do you care what their sexual preference is? If they tell you they are bi, they are bi. if they say they are gay, they're gay. It's no business of yours otherwise. You can *think* a bisexual person is gay all you want, but if they tell you "no, I'm bi", who the hell are YOU to tell them they are gay?

So, you are walking down the street and you see a black guy. You think that's a black guy.

Who are you to make that call? What the fuck do you care if he's black? If he tells you he's a negro, if he says he's African American. It's not business of yours to make an observation of what you see.

You shouldn't have looked. You should keep your eyes closed at all times lest you accidentally see someone and jump to a conclusion based on what you are seeing.

You can *think* a negro is a black guy all you want, but you have to actually go up and confront them, demand that they identify themselves by race. Otherwise, who the hell are you to think they are black?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 1:16 AM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 3:27 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 276 of 284 (627622)
08-03-2011 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by hooah212002
08-03-2011 1:22 AM


Re: Go back to the start
Your point? It's not hard at all to differenciate someone saying "I'm bisexual" and "I'm gay". They are two completely different sounding words.

Ahh, I see. You are suggesting we draft legislation that requires all gay and bisexuals to publicly announce their preferences every time someone new walks by just to make sure everyone knows all the time.

Excellent. Let's see what the gays have to see about this plan of yours.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 1:22 AM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 3:30 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 277 of 284 (627623)
08-03-2011 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Dr Adequate
08-03-2011 1:32 AM


I await nuggin's outraged condemnation of you with unbated breath.

Or this?

Edited by Nuggin, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-03-2011 1:32 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 278 of 284 (627624)
08-03-2011 2:59 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by hooah212002
08-03-2011 1:22 AM


Re: Go back to the start
hooah writes:

Your point? It's not hard at all to differenciate someone saying "I'm bisexual" and "I'm gay". They are two completely different sounding words.

Boy, you are really dense. The two guys making out every night in front of their apartment didn't tell me they were gay of bi, im only going by what I see.

Should I assume that every guy who is having sex with another man is bi-sexual?

I have NO problem with anyone being gay, and I HATE gay bashers but you seem confused as to what being gay means.

BTW, im half dog half human because I SAY SO. It doesn't matter what you see, it only matter what I say. Numbskull...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 1:22 AM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by hooah212002, posted 08-03-2011 3:29 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 279 of 284 (627627)
08-03-2011 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by Nuggin
08-03-2011 2:44 AM


Re: Go back to the start
It's funny you mention this, I was thinking the same thing. However, what YOU seem to be saying is that when you ask the guy what ethnicity he is (let's say he is dominican), you tell him that he is not dominican, but african american.

You are, of course, free to judge and assume what ethnicity he is. But how does it make you look when you judge someone based on first appearance?

You shouldn't have looked. You should keep your eyes closed at all times lest you accidentally see someone and jump to a conclusion based on what you are seeing.

The rest of us don't seem to have a problem with preconceived notions.....The rest of us don't seem to be so judgmental.


"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Nuggin, posted 08-03-2011 2:44 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 280 of 284 (627629)
08-03-2011 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Chuck77
08-03-2011 2:59 AM


Re: Go back to the start
Should I assume that every guy who is having sex with another man is bi-sexual?

What business is someone else's sexuality of yours that you just NEED to label and judge them?

but you seem confused as to what being gay means.

No, it appears as though I know full well what gay means. It appears that you, on the other hand, don't seem to know how to tell the difference between gay and bisexual.


"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Chuck77, posted 08-03-2011 2:59 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 281 of 284 (627630)
08-03-2011 3:30 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Nuggin
08-03-2011 2:46 AM


Re: Go back to the start
Yes, Nuggin. All of my posts have indicated that each individual persons sexual preference is the business of everyone else.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Nuggin, posted 08-03-2011 2:46 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 282 of 284 (627631)
08-03-2011 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by Nuggin
08-03-2011 2:39 AM


Re: moving towards some understanding
It was a great response. He proved what a troll you are. See Message 45

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Nuggin, posted 08-03-2011 2:39 AM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 554 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(1)
Message 283 of 284 (627635)
08-03-2011 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 8:46 PM


Re: Closet bisexuals.
Nuggin writes:

This isn't a thread about same sex marriage. It's a thread about gay marriage.

You can tell by looking at the top of the page where it says "New York Gay Marriage".

It's about both. Click into the article linked to in the O.P.

quote:

Midtown Mayhem As Anti-SSM Groups Send Mixed Messages

Same-sex Sunday was anything but a day of celebration for the groups that remain adamantly opposed to gay marriage, and whose protests collided in midtown in the afternoon. A rally organized in part by the National Organization for Marriage, but where the main draw seemed to be State Senator Ruben Diaz Sr., perhaps New York's most vocal opponent of gay marriage, collided with two smaller but slur-hurling groups -- a five-person contingent from the Westboro Baptist Chuch, and a few dozen members of the Williamsburg Satmars.

Just a month after Governor Andrew Cuomo signed New York's same-sex marriage bill, the NOM march aimed at de-legitimizing the new law by calling for a popular referendum on the issue. Diaz told the Voice after the rally that New York and the five other states with same-sex marriage have it only "because a judge or a legislature imposed it" -- suggesting that only a popular vote could validate the change.


The article uses the same casual language as you and the O.P. author. Although New York and five other State legislatures have passed "same-sex marriage bills", the journalist uses the casual term "gay marriage". So, when you have your same-sex marriage of convenience with a heterosexual Mexican immigrant, you're welcome to call it, casually, a "gay marriage" if you want to.

Nuggin writes:

You keep trying to relabel it, while jumping on a bandwagon full of people who are bitching and moaning about people relabeling stuff in ways they don't approve.

I'm using the correct phrase. Because people have got into a discussion on labels, that's the best thing to do. Go for the phrase used in the marriage laws that led to the protests, the article and the O.P.

Do you accept that bisexuals and heterosexuals do not suddenly have a homosexual orientation merely because they participate in a same-sex marriage?

Now, think about adjectives and nouns. Surely you accept that someone could engage in homosexual (gay) sex without being a homosexual? And that people can engage in heterosexual sex without being heterosexuals? I think it was probably your description of bisexuals as being homosexual attention seekers that led to most of the controversy.

Nuggin writes:

You can sort everyone into two groups: Those who WANT to have sex with people with matching parts and those who don't.

Did you mean "the same" or matching? Keys match locks.

Where do closet gays, closet bisexuals, and voluntary celibates of all sexual orientations fit into that?

It's always complex.

Nuggin writes:

It's not about what I want.

You make it sound like I'm the _only_ person in the entire world to use terms like "gay marriage" or "gay rights".

Far from it. There's nothing wrong with those terms. And, as I've pointed out, the article above not only uses them, but also has your casual use of "gay marriage" as interchangeable with "same-sex" marriage. It's only because the thread got onto the subject of bisexuals and because you seemed to be making all kinds of sweeping generalizations about things related to the highly complex subject of human sexuality that it was necessary to get more precise with terminology.

Nuggin writes:

Again. You seem to think that I somehow invented the term gay and that no bisexual anywhere at anytime used the word "gay" in an inclusive fashion.

Do I? You don't actually think that I think that, so it's a rather odd thing to say. And we haven't established that you're not bisexual yet.

I'm sure there are bisexuals who describe themselves as gay, and there are bisexuals who describe themselves as heterosexual. There are also bisexuals (and others) who'll point out that people whose sexual orientation includes being attracted to members of both sexes are best described as "bisexuals", because that's literally what they are, and calling them homosexuals (or gays) is no more technically correct than calling them heterosexuals (or straights).

Modulous gave you a good analogy with omnivores. While they can be carnivorous and herbivorous, they are not actually carnivores or herbivores.

Bisexuals could have homosexual relationships or heterosexual relationships, but their sexual orientation is not actually homosexual or heterosexual.

I know language is sometimes confusing.

Edited by bluegenes, : minor addition for clarification


This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 8:46 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3879
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 284 of 284 (627637)
08-03-2011 4:56 AM


Enough
.

Adminnemooseus


Please be familiar with the various topics and other links in the "Essential Links", found in the top of the page menu. Amongst other things, this is where to find where to report various forum problems.

  
RewPrev1
...
1415161718
19
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019