San Fransisco Gay Marriages
-
AdventureBoy wrote: Many would argue that we are talking about biology. Alot of gays realize their sexual orientation as young as puberty. As a hetero male, if I see a sexually attrative naked woman, I'm going to sprout a woody. That's not by decision, I'm not saying 'C'mon little buddy, time to wake up' My litle buddy wakes when he wants to. That's the nature of a hetero. A gay guy can try as hard as he wants, but a naked female figure standing 6 inches from his face is just not going to do anything for him. Show him biceps and beards though, and he'll pitch a tent. How many times have you seen a guy walking down the street, and you just know that he's a homosexual. Why is that gay men are nearly always effinate in some way, no matter what culture he's from? My answer is that there is a 'gay gene' and it carries along with it a set of characteristics. I'm very familiar with that rediculous argument. Recessive or otherwise, any gene that caused someone to actually want to have sex in a way that assured the impossibility of a genetic offspring would quickly be eliminated from the gene pool. You might as well teach creationism as to teach such nonsense. Take a course in genetics sometime. I accept that some men are genetically predisposed to be more effiminate than others, and some women are more masculine than others, but that doesn't equate to homosexuality. I've known men who were extremely effiminant who were happily married and had large families. I absolutely believe that it has far more to do with nurture than with nature. AdventureBoy wrote: Seconldy, once again, you're confused. If either o us is, it's you who are suggesting that the government should dictate our beliefs and enforce laws to that end. No, I'm saying any society has the right to define what is "normal" and that the government should respect that decision, but beyond that, I should be free to follow the dictates of my own conscious and discriminate freely against anyone's behaivor. AdventureBoy wrote: look up the definition of tyranny. hmmm, my dictionary shows a Canadian flag. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate
Stan Shannon wrote: I'm very familiar with that rediculous argument. Recessive or otherwise, any gene that caused someone to actually want to have sex in a way that assured the impossibility of a genetic offspring would quickly be eliminated from the gene pool. You might as well teach creationism as to teach such nonsense. Take a course in genetics sometime. Well, there are genetic disorders that are carried by the female line that kill off male offspring. At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
AdventureBoy wrote: Complete legalizing of homosexuality is inevitable. Being somewhat conservative, America is a bit behind some other countries in recognition of homosexuality as a valid type of relationship, equal in every way to hetero relationships and hetero marriages. How so? If gay marraige is allowed, and marriage is based soley on peoples "love", then why can't I marry more than one person? I can surely love more than one person. Now I'd be discriminated against! Why not have whole family marriages, or neighborhood marraiges? Now the idea of 2 people is merely a fixation on numbers. ~Nitron.
ññòòïðïðB A
startWorks for me. "Marriage" is a religious institution and has been given the wink and nod by governments. Secular governments should get out of the marriage business and have only secular unions if they want to regularize property rights, etc, for couples or even group unions. If you want your religion to "sanctify" your union, that's up to you. If you get "married" in the church and DON'T register a civil union and your partner takes a powder with the "joint" bank account, don't run to the government to get it back... At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
Stan Shannon wrote: If someone finds homosexuality to be morally offensive, they should be free to discriminate against them. Ok, I find YOU morally offensive so here it comes..... Anyone want to join me and make it a crusade? At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
Tim Craig wrote: Ok, I find YOU morally offensive so here it comes..... Anyone want to join me and make it a crusade? And you should be free to do that. How would you like having the government step in and force you to accept my behavior. Discriminate away... The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate
-
On the surface, you raise a good point, but there's a difference that is important. Placing the 10 commandments on public property is a public matter, while two people choosing to live together is a private matter. It would be comparable if the judge had decided to put the 10 commandments on his on private lawn at home.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
Daniel Ferguson wrote: On the surface, you raise a good point, but there's a difference that is important. Placing the 10 commandments on public property is a public matter, while two people choosing to live together is a private matter. It would be comparable if the judge had decided to put the 10 commandments on his on private lawn at home. I agree that they are only comparable to the extent that you have two public officials who broke the law in order to achieve their own personal political views. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate
-
Works for me. "Marriage" is a religious institution and has been given the wink and nod by governments. Secular governments should get out of the marriage business and have only secular unions if they want to regularize property rights, etc, for couples or even group unions. If you want your religion to "sanctify" your union, that's up to you. If you get "married" in the church and DON'T register a civil union and your partner takes a powder with the "joint" bank account, don't run to the government to get it back... At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
Daniel Ferguson wrote: On the surface, you raise a good point, but there's a difference that is important. Placing the 10 commandments on public property is a public matter, while two people choosing to live together is a private matter. It would be comparable if the judge had decided to put the 10 commandments on his on private lawn at home. I agree that they are only comparable to the extent that you have two public officials who broke the law in order to achieve their own personal political views. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate
Stan Shannon wrote: I agree that they are only comparable to the extent that you have two public officials who broke the law in order to achieve their own personal political views. Yes, the law was broken in the gay marriages case, but should that law exist? To the state, marriage should be like dog licences: they take the money give out a certificate. The government shouldn't be in the business of making rules to govern behaviour that only effect an individual's private life.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
-
Brian Gideon wrote: So why isn't anyone getting arrested? the mayor apparently claims it's not illegal, or that the law forbidding it is unconstitutional (CA state constitution). so it's not really clear if he's breaking a law or not. there are lawsuits pending on both sides of the issue. at least that's what the news networks tell me. if Schwollenpecker wanted to send in the CA state troopers to arrest the mayor, he probably could - after all, he did say they represent "an imminent risk to civil order". Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer
He is breaking the law until a court says that the law (passed by public referendum with 66% majority BTW) is unconstitutional. however, Liberals who break the law are just excercising their right to protest, Conservatives (like the appeals court judge in Alabama) who do the same are fired or worse... IMO, the mayor should lose his job. if he wanted to overturn the law, he should go to court and contest the constitutionallity of the law there. He has no more right to simply ignore the law than I do to speed when I think the law is wrong. Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
-
What is doubly interesting is what occured when a judge in Alabama broke the law in defense of traditional values juxtaposed to what happens in California when an official breaks the law to subvert those values. In the former case, the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge. In the latter case, even the state authorities are loath to take any legal action what so ever. Very interesting. Very revealing. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate
Stan Shannon wrote: In the former case, the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge. In Actually, it was the Alabama Supreme Court that interceded, and dismissed the Judge. Never made it to US Supreme court, and Feds had no grounds to interfere. Now the Media, that's another story. Your observation is a good one though: If a Liberal flaunts a law, he's just protesting, if a conservative does the same, he gets fired. Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
-
He is breaking the law until a court says that the law (passed by public referendum with 66% majority BTW) is unconstitutional. however, Liberals who break the law are just excercising their right to protest, Conservatives (like the appeals court judge in Alabama) who do the same are fired or worse... IMO, the mayor should lose his job. if he wanted to overturn the law, he should go to court and contest the constitutionallity of the law there. He has no more right to simply ignore the law than I do to speed when I think the law is wrong. Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
Rob Graham wrote: Liberals who break the law are just excercising their right to protest, Conservatives (like the appeals court judge in Alabama) who do the same are fired or worse... zzzz someone wake me when conservatives grow a pair and stop relying on the "poor persecuted me" defense. Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer
-
Anybody whose seen commercials for The Underground Comedy Movie would know that he didn't.
Who am I? Currently: A Programming Student trying to survive school with plan to go on to Univeristy of Advancing Technology to study game design. Main career interest include: Multimedia and game programming. Working on an outside project: A game for the GamePark32 (GP32) portable gaming console. My website: www.GP32US.com
nssone wrote: The Underground Comedy Movie yeah, that's it. i forgot the name of that thing. Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer
-
It is not a question about where you stick your penis, it is more about who will inherit you when you die. Your partner or somebody else. jhaga --------------------------------- Every generation laughs at the old fashions, but follows religiously the new. Henry David Thoreau, "Walden", 1854
jhaga wrote: It is not a question about where you stick your penis, it is more about who will inherit you when you die. Your partner or somebody else. B*ll Sh*t! ANYONE can leave their money to anyone else or to any organization they please. All they need to do is write a legal will. Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
-
jhaga wrote: It is not a question about where you stick your penis, it is more about who will inherit you when you die. Your partner or somebody else. B*ll Sh*t! ANYONE can leave their money to anyone else or to any organization they please. All they need to do is write a legal will. Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
Well, in scandinavia you have to pay taxes (15-30%) if you get an inheritance from somebody unrelated to you. jhaga --------------------------------- Every generation laughs at the old fashions, but follows religiously the new. Henry David Thoreau, "Walden", 1854
-
Well, in scandinavia you have to pay taxes (15-30%) if you get an inheritance from somebody unrelated to you. jhaga --------------------------------- Every generation laughs at the old fashions, but follows religiously the new. Henry David Thoreau, "Walden", 1854
In the US you pay taxes (20-50%) regardless for everything above a certain minimum (used to be $100,00) but I think congress just raised that to 1,000,000). Besides, is this really about the right to avoid taxation?, if so, .then lets just eliminate the tax law. Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
-
Rob Graham wrote: Liberals who break the law are just excercising their right to protest, Conservatives (like the appeals court judge in Alabama) who do the same are fired or worse... zzzz someone wake me when conservatives grow a pair and stop relying on the "poor persecuted me" defense. Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer
Thank you for your intelligent, carefully considered response.:zzz: Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
-
Thank you for your intelligent, carefully considered response.:zzz: Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely. - Vint Cerf
yeah. follow the link, and you'll see that Stan and I already had that conversation. zzzz. Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer