View Full Version : :tu: to the city officials
san francisco...gay marriages :TU:
ain't civil disobedience a wonderful thing
Originally posted by slx
san francisco...gay marriages :TU:
ain't civil disobedience a wonderful thing
Damn I forgot my Enigma machine.
I gotta ask too. So does this mean you are for or against or just don't care.
Originally posted by jcmd62
Damn I forgot my Enigma machine.
I gotta ask too. So does this mean you are for or against or just don't care. absolutely i'm for it...why shouldn't all, unbiased be for it
don't we all share the same rights in this country regardless of race, religion
or sexual orientation
Originally posted by wishful thinking
what r u for again?
civlil disobedience or gay marriage? i'm in favor of both but i assume'd you were asking my position on gay marriage...i support it and think anyone trying to interfere is wrong...
and....
where would we be without civil disobedience harb?
Originally posted by slx
absolutely i'm for it...why shouldn't all, unbiased be for it
don't we all share the same rights in this country regardless of race, religion
or sexual orientation
I find it amusing that Gay couples seek marraige as if it is a divine stigma cleanser and once married the world will all of a sudden view their lifestyles in the same light as male female marraige.
Is marraige really such a prize, or might it cause them even more ridicule and prejudice?
How do you feel about gay couples parenting children that have not reached puberty or matured sexually yet?
Originally posted by jcmd62
I find it amusing that Gay couples seek marraige as if it is a divine stigma cleanser and once married the world will all of a sudden view their lifestyles in the same light as male female marraige.
i doubt it's even a consideration to a gay person that marriage will change the discrimination they endure or how "straight" people see them. i believe they have the same motives to marry as you and i do
Is marraige really such a prize, or might it cause them even more ridicule and prejudice?
depending on your viewpoint, marriage may or may not be a prize.....i can't answer though because i'm unsure of exactly what you're asking....as to the other....how could a gay couple possibly experience more or worse ridicule & or prejudice than they do already by being joined in matrimony?
How do you feel about gay couples parenting children that have not reached puberty or matured sexually yet
no different than i feel about you or your wife caring for your adolescent children....actually your question stumps me....what were/are your thoughts behind asking
jc....you didn't state your views....what are they on this issue?
I don't care if gays want to marry. More power to them. We passed ignorant laws trying to make homosexuality "illegal" and it didn't change a thing. What will change by denying them Marraige?
I just don't see the need to draw even more prejudiced attention to yourself, by being some kind of gay martyrs. Hasn't marraige descended into being used for nothing more than filing joint taxes and big business for divorce attorneys? I realize some people still believe in the sanctity of marraige but its not the wonderful union it used to be. I feel that maybe these gays that want to marry don't give a damn about marraige as much as they want to rub their homosexuality in as many faces as they can.
Saw a TV program a while back that interviewed children being reared by gay couples and it made me wonder if we aren't starting to fuck up the minds of a whole new generation of children. Its bad enough that gays "live in the closet" and live for years in heterosexual relationships that are bogus.
Do we really need or want to put heterosexual children through years of failed homosexual relationships until at some point they are forced to come "out of the closet" themselves and proclaim their heterosexuality. That they had been living a lie because they didn't want to disappoint their parents and because Daddy and Daddy are Gay they themselves must also be Gay.
As a Heterosexual parent I live a heterosexual life in front of my son, it's perfectly natural and accepted. Because it is "THE" accepted way of life I have no need to force it on my kids. No doubt Heterosexuality is "THE" accepted way of life on this planet, unlike Homosexuality which is not. We know that Homosexual children are BORN into Hetero families and that this alone ends up forcing these kids to live the lie and stay in the closet.
Do we really need to start this terrible cycle with heterosexual children? By "PLACING" them into homosexual homes? Do you not think that Homosexual Parents want their kids to grow up just like them, including being Homosexual? The fact that Homosexuality is not "THE" most widely accepted lifestyle won't make Homosexual parents tend to "force" their gay lifestyle on them?
Its a tough call when we still don't know why some are gay and others are not.
eclectica
2004-02-15, 07:26
Civil disobedience is a damned good thing. Usually when people argue against civil disobedience, they cite the most egregious violations of the law to support their position. They use the slippery slope (http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/distract/ss.htm) argument, which is that once you break the law a little you can then break it in large ways. Then mayhem, rape, murder and looting will occur.
For adoptions I am uncomfortable seeing homosexual couples adopt. I'm not sure how adoptions work, and if they are given to single parents or not. But if it is to a couple, does the couple have to be married? The thing that stops me from being strongly opposed to allowing homosexuals to adopt, is that from my understanding there is a shortage of people willing to adopt children who are in foster care. Also considering how many shitty parents there are, who are parents due to their fucking which led to pregnancy. Many homosexual couples by contrast are eager and willing parents, and perhaps better ones because of that.
I am opposed to Gay marriages. I support civil unions though.
What is marriage exactly? Well it could be a bond between a man and a woman for tax or legal reasons. But implicitly it is the building block of society. The marriage bonds a man and a woman, who start a family. Sure, some folks don't have children, but that's really what it's all about. The family is a fundamental unit of society.
Marriage has no meaning if it has no standards. When the State sets standards for marriage, it is also endorsing the very building block of society; the family.
I got into a big debate with my brother and mother during Thanksgiving about this issue. My mother made the argument that it is always a good thing to give people more rights and freedoms, as supposed to taking them away. By her line of reasoning, gay marriages are a good thing because they are giving more rights to more people.
People ask of me, why it's any of my business what people do in their bedroom or whether they can reproduce, and how that affects whether they should be married by the State. So I reply with a counter argument. Should brothers and sisters be allowed to marry? Or should parents be allowed to marry their children? How about polygamy? Clearly marriage is something which has to be defined and has to have standards. The line has to be drawn somewhere. Where we draw that line varies depending on our opinions.
Thanx to Eclectica for posting the most important FACT. That is Marraige has and still is described as the union of a MAN and a WOMAN.
As I said I could careless if Bob wants to marry John, but handing them impressionable young children to parent is only going to hurt these children and totally fuck their lives up in the long run.
Yes some may survive their gay upbringing unscathed, but just how many others will be sentenced to ridicule and hatred and years of complete confusion when it comes to their own sexuality?
Once again I ask aren't the homosexuals that are forced to go through this enough?
Must we put Heterosexual children through the same hell in the name of EQUALITY?
Originally posted by eclectica
I am opposed to Gay marriages. I support civil unions though.
What is marriage exactly? Well it could be a bond between a man and a woman for tax or legal reasons. But implicitly it is the building block of society. The marriage bonds a man and a woman, who start a family. Sure, some folks don't have children, but that's really what it's all about. The family is a fundamental unit of society.
Marriage has no meaning if it has no standards. When the State sets standards for marriage, it is also endorsing the very building block of society; the family.
we live in a society where government encourages marriage...ie; ssi benefits that go to survivors of a marriage....
employment provided insurance benefits for spouse & other family....
dual income qualifications in buying real estate for example...
having the authority to make decisions in the event of death or disability...and many states have community property laws that give each spouse certain rights in and out of the union
if a picture's worth a 1000 words, this flick says volumes in support of gay marriage and i would highly recommend that anyone not in support of gay marriages watch the 2nd installment of a movie titled "If These Walls Could Talk" the one starring Venessa Redgrave...if i taught a class on the subject this flick would be required study material
the marriage laws are archaic and like many laws, it's time for a revamp to include all citizens and taxpayers
marriage to many might be an expression....and we all should certainly have equal rights to make those xpressions....regardless of race, religion or sexual beliefs
by not allowing everyone equal rights under all of the laws you cherish, you are practicing discrimination
if you never watch'd that flick....do it, you may walk away with a more sympathetic & understanding viewpoint...
and i believe that's all the gays wanting to marry are asking for
and ec...personally....i believe that the "building block of society" is extending all rights & benefits to all members
Will it cost me money?
I've got that butt hole feeling it will.
Originally posted by nicobie
Will it cost me money?
I've got that butt hole feeling it will. it was an HBO movie so it may be or not re-run anytime soon....i know it's available on dvd
eclectica
2004-02-22, 20:27
Here are some civil disobedience tactics that will stop those San Francisco fruitcakes dead in their tracks.
1. Have some hideous looking grandfather and his beautiful granddaughter (blondes work best because the public loves them) apply for a marriage license, and sue the city if it is denied.
2. Enlist some fat Harley biker dudes to go into the women's bathrooms (with a sit-in like Martin Luther King) and take stinking, loud shits and then leave them unflushed.
assorted
2004-02-22, 20:42
the gospel according to assorted
civil disobedience = good
gay marriage = good
i'm not that big a fan of same sex couples demanding to be the same as all the hetero norms. i'd prefer if society had more outsiders, so that a total revolution or thriving counter-culture could develop. the idea of a same sex couple with a mortgage paying taxes with 3 kids and hating the homeless for dariing to smell next to them on the train and working their job as some anonymous cocksucker for a credit card company... whoopee. that's just as bad as the rest of the cocksuckers, being same sex as a couple or not doesn't matter to me.
I'm for gay marriage regardless simply because it falls under the fabric of equal rights for all. Comparing a homosexual act, eclectica, to incest, eclectica, is a bit um... well, that's what rick santorum did. he compared homosexuality to incest and bestiality in defending why marriage should be between a man and a woman.
well, unlike eclectica, i feel there are clear differences between homosexuality and incest. um, i hope that's a given for most people.
as for polygamy or bigamy, i'm not sure if that being banned is a moral issue. i think a lot of tax and citizenship scams could develop if one instituted that, and for that reason it needs to stay illegal to be married to more then one person.
Criminal_Sniper
2004-03-29, 14:44
its funny that millions of dude watch ass blasters porn movies with chicks getting done up the pie hole
when it comes to guys sure they are sick to the stomach about it
and they think its wrong
well guys are ugly what would u expect and most girls dont like anal so i dont think its much of a perpectives point of view
but its still not the point
if we have the right then why dont they?
because of how some shit has been worded?
well of course procecutors of gays would make such laws
vBulletin® v3.8.3, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.