Homosexual Marraige

[~Sokar~]

Well, I may used a bad word. There is cure only for illness. So if we don't look at it as an illness we can't say that there is a cure cause there is nothing we need to heal. The fact is that we have the technology to change someone's identitly (man to woman, or woman to man) physically and mentally too. Most of the people know about the phsycial body is changed by doctors in an operation. Less ppl know that there is a same possibility when they open up your brain and do stuffs in it so you will like girlies or guys depend on your choice. (but they can stimulate everything, you can be happier or depressed etc.) I don't know that has ever anyone been operated cause of this exact goal, but fact that the technology is available. New, maybe dangerous but available.. So, we have to decide that is it problem, illness or a natural thing what do not need "repair". I don't wanna write stupidity so I don't know that thing will totally change the identity maybe some chemical stuffes and medicines or hormons will also need.. I am a tourism manager not a brain surgeon...

[buck]

As for "natural" we've evolved past "natural" we don't naturally need to drive cars, or eat a varied diet, we don't naturally need to have cities, or economies, the word "natural" cannot be used in regards to a human being, it's moronic to think it can.

I find myself agreein with Apandemek on that point. We can create offspring in Petri Dishes and test tubes nowadays. Thats not natural either, but we do it, because haveing a kid makes people happy. If being in a gay relationship is what someone finds makes them happy, then there is no reason to take that away. Futhermore to the point, gay marriage should be allowed, society claims people have free will to do what they want, i can get a tattoo of a nazi symbol pasted across my forehead. I can join the communist politcal party. If i was either way inclined. (doing both could cause confusion!) so why should one not be able to marry whoever they want. It doesnt affect you so why care?

Gay adoption is the only thing i have an issue with. It would cause me great concern if a child had 2 fathers or 2 mothers, the psycological impact that could have on a child would be greatly damangeing when they get to an age whereby they could understand what was going on. Lacking in a mother or father figure would also be a problem. That however, is a different debate, but i'l put that out there.

To proclaim there is a cure to gayness is probally the most obscene thing i have ever heard in my life! Cure? Its not a disease its a way of life. You dont try and cure punk rockers for being punk rockers, you dont try and cure arabs for being arabian! Because its not a disease!

[agapooka]

Pookie says that as long as a homosexuals don't try to marry him, he doesn't care enough to argue endlessly about such sillinesses, although he always thought that the north end of a magnet always wanted the south end of any other magnet it met and has never seen magnets demonstrate for the right to be attracted to the same polarisation that they have. Of course, magnets don't have genitals and Pookie isn't sure if genitals would inherently affect the orientation of their polarisation.

Then again, Pookie might think that everyone is crazy for even being attracted to one another in the first place. Attachment will being unnecessary pain, said the great Gouda, once. Or was it Buddha? Hmm.

[Demeisen]

dude the British empire was the most successful empire ever. think of its size, influence, military power and the length of time it lasted. twas epic


seems some ppl are thinking humans are not natural. you could argue anything man-made is natural because man is a part of nature. as i said it all comes down to different definitions and differing opinions.

humans are not physically designed to allow homosexuals to reproduce or have intercourse. to me that makes homosexuality unnatural. but it is also natural because humans are of nature. circular reasoning there

[agapooka]

The distinction between "natural" and "man-made" is simply that man is the irrational component of nature. Therefore, I believe that the expression "man-made" essentially serves as a warning to all.

Ironically, man's irrational rationale has it* believe that it is rational! Haha! Man's rationale grants it the ability for circular reasoning. The other creatures are spared from having to have a "developed" frontal cortex, as are blonde humans. Bless them.

*it, as in irrelevant of gender. In the same context as one refers to a dog as "it" when its gender is irrelevant to the discussion.

[Thade]

If a man cloned a sheep would that sheep be "natural" or "man-made"?

[agapooka]

Man-made IS natural, as we've already proven with amazing circular thinking. It just means "WARNING: This natural thing was manipulated by humans. Beware, because humans are stupid."

[Lord Yojimbo]

the definition of natural is the developement and evolution of processes which do not require the intervention of man in the bio process of reproduction or evolution so - this can be seen as a clone as deviation from the natural process which makes the resultant creature man made - not natural due to mans intervention

alas i remember the days of my biotech and med chem lectures

In regards to homosexuality - i belive it does come to perception - it can be seen as an illness from the pure neurochemical aspect or the personal developemental element can see it as a part trait that was outlined as a small characteristic which possibly reflects the slight difference in their gene pool - thus making it natual due to non human interference - or inter social factor could have determined the developement of the physie to the stage where it is attracted to the same sex

With all these factors - there are elements of truth but then perception comes into it.....so i think since its a chemical imbalance, but one that has no detramental effect then it can be seen the result of as a slight deviation in human genetics and no more which then leads to a slightly different human trait (we all have these deviations which cause different traits to surface as our personality developes)....so I see nothing wrong with it

[Lord Yojimbo]

The "God" argument is a bit of a silly one. There may indeed be parts of the bible which can be read as inherently homophobic, but the same time there are numerous passages which advocate tolerance, understanding and acceptance of diversity. There are just as many passages in the bible which can be used to justify gay marriage as can be used to denounce it. As is the case with everything in the bible; it's open to user interpretation.

Provide the evidence of stating that homosexual marriages are ethically "right".



First of all, let me state that being a homosexual is evolutionary wrong.... Why? Because we are not A-sexual beings. And simply we were made to be attracted to the other sex. For one main reason, unity. That is the evolutionary side of it.


On the ethics side of it, most religions denounce gay marriages. Why, simply because of the evolutionary train and also homosexual acts are a desecration to the body.


What does this have to do with disallowing gay marriage? ~ Well, mainly giving them a legal right to be married is directly or indirectly stating being homosexual is alright by the views of society. And, who wants our kids growing up in a world the influences of homosexual ideals is allowed. Its like allowing teachers to imposing their worldly views unto young impressionable minds. Its just saying, oh being a nazi is fully acceptable and we promote that way of life...... And Thats Wrong.


Not to say there isn't anything wrong with homosexuals, I know quite a few and get along with them, but ultimately homosexual acts serve no real purpose.



In context with that will thing.... you can make your own will...

Altho Im not gay - I know a couple of very decent sound people who are and what i think of your comments are:

But the fact of the matter is that its against evolution is not correct - it is undoubtly a byproduct or/and a part of evolution due to the fact that it is seen to be quite prevelent in the gene pool which means that i cannot be now classified as a sheer anomoly - and we must remember that the goal of evolution is not clear to us after all - we are at a certain stage now but god only knows - we could be a sevual in 10 - 50 thousand years - already we are beginning to see the effects of inter racial marriage which is adding even more varience to the gene pool and this i believe will add to the evolutionary process - so why not sandman - evolution has no regard for present tense - the current gene pool takes care of that but the changes occuriing in the gene pool are just a small part of the evolutionary process

So the opinion of others arent allowed just as evolution is not allowed to be taught in certain states as an alternative due to the fact that i challanges the long standing ideal of God - I think not, all aspects should be allowed to be aired - proprogation of the species will always happen as long as it is necessary but to use nazism is a low trick - there is no comparison...nazism was a perception based on greed, power and mania - the worst traits found in all humans in varying degrees but homosexuality is not harmful to anyone and works on the best traits of humanity...so why should be not socially acceptable as well

Homosexual acts are the same as hertosexual acts - acts of love between two caring lovers

[semper]

I'll throw it in there actually...that Biologist's and Psychologist's have thrown around the idea of Homosexuality been a evolutionary answer to over population.

[agapooka]

In China, the government claims that the nukes did it.

[Thriller]

If a man cloned a sheep would that sheep be "natural" or "man-made"?

The manipulation of natural phenomena for our own ends.

[Apadamek]

dude the British empire was the most successful empire ever. think of its size, influence, military power and the length of time it lasted. twas epic


seems some ppl are thinking humans are not natural. you could argue anything man-made is natural because man is a part of nature. as i said it all comes down to different definitions and differing opinions.

humans are not physically designed to allow homosexuals to reproduce or have intercourse. to me that makes homosexuality unnatural. but it is also natural because humans are of nature. circular reasoning there

The British Empire was...pretty good.

Humans are not physically designed for our lifestyle of cooked meat, does that mean we should stop?

[Lord Yojimbo]

I'll throw it in there actually...that Biologist's and Psychologist's have thrown around the idea of Homosexuality been a evolutionary answer to over population.

Quite possible - things do adapt in order to prevent some disasters such as overpopulation but i doubt that we have reached an evolutionary stage where our enviroment has that much influence over our evolution -

[Osi]

Input from someone who is actually gay:

I don' believe in gay marriage. Marriage is between a man and woman and always has been. Before Christ marriage was marriage, it is not some crazed republican religious construct meant to bring me down. Its a union between a man and woman and it should not be altered by government. In the case of the united states, there should be no interference with marriage whatsoever, it may be a legal contract but the government has no right to declare what is allowed and is not allowed so long as those right do not infringe on the rights of others. A solution to this tangled web on nonsense is the legalization of full civil unions, which are essentially classified as marriages. If you get married by a ships captain, or a judge you aren't getting married it is a civil union. If the government allowed full civil unions between same sex couples and gave them equal rights to those of a heterosexual couple the issue should, and hopefully would be null and void. Then since the government has no right to infringe on the actions of the church as they are supposedly separate, at least in the U.S., churches would be allowed to decide whether or not they wish to provide homosexual unions. It should be personal choice and preference, not the whim of corrupt and worthless governance. The fact that the government is now a female pastor who refused to preform a same sex marriage is ridiculous. She has every right to maintain her opinions and if we allow the government to determine what is right and what is not and what people can and cannot do based on faith we are one step further on the path to total states.