StarGateWars Forums

[KMA]Avenger wrote:i say we stick all gays in the desert where there is plenty of room for them to do as they please and make their own laws as to what they can and cannot do with regards to marriage and adoption.
we then stick an electrified 200 foot fence around said desert with automated 50 cal gun emplacements.
in such an environment they can do as they please and leave us alone, they would be happy and we would be happy...

everybody is happy, but till such a thing actually happens, they live in a heterosexually dominated world and therefor abide by our laws and tolerances or lack thereof., there's always the desert if they don't like it!

LiQuiD wrote:marraige is between a man and a woman. those who swing another way can always enter into a civil partnership, which is marraige in all but name right?

gay couples shouldnt be allowed to adopt. at least not in this time.

imagine what it would be like for a child to go to their 1st day at secondary school with their two gay dads (wearing daffyd style clothes of course). that kid would get mocked back to 1984. fact.

maybe in the future where same sex parents wont draw as much notice/insults/attention it will be ok. that would need to be in a more tolerent and therefore better society. but not yet. its not fair on the child.

theres also the major importance of both a male and female role model for children.


btw i am in no way opposed to lesbians. infact i encourage people to wear comfortable shoes. but still no marraige/adoption yet. . . yet


oh and thats a good idea from mystake about being unioned.

Universe wrote:

[KMA]Avenger wrote:i say we stick all gays in the desert where there is plenty of room for them to do as they please and make their own laws as to what they can and cannot do with regards to marriage and adoption.
we then stick an electrified 200 foot fence around said desert with automated 50 cal gun emplacements.
in such an environment they can do as they please and leave us alone, they would be happy and we would be happy...

everybody is happy, but till such a thing actually happens, they live in a heterosexually dominated world and therefor abide by our laws and tolerances or lack thereof., there's always the desert if they don't like it!

Aside from the actual implementation, that sounds like an interesting idea.
You do realise that adoption is highly unlikely inside such a non-reproductive facility?

Point of interest for those so violently against this idea: after one generation, *all* will have passed away but those adapted to the actual society instead of their own subculture. It's only a good thing. Those who have adapted can then go for real rights, instead of the twisted form they now crave so violently.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:i already stated that the reasons (i feel) are to strong for these boards and besides, they are VERY personal and not something i want to publish to the whole world, i don't mind sharing my reasons with those that have posted in this topic, i just don't want it all over the web in the open.

so if you want to know, just ask me either over msn or via PM and i'll be happy to explain why...

and may i be the first to welcome you to the second least used part of the forum...ascended being the least i would imagine

Thriller wrote:The communities dumb arguments against gay marriage astound me. Your talking out of fear and not with your heads. "OH noes if the gayzz get mariued our soceiceitty wull fall apparts." Please... you have no evidence to support and your reasoning is severely flawed. THis is a legal issue, has nothing to do with warping and regressing societal values. You child turns out to be gay, It will have nothing to do with gay marriage. YOu really think not getting married is a deterrent to being gay. It isn't even in the ballpark. Their are legal advantages to being married, but I'm talking about the church idea marriage. Gays should be allowed to be common law spouses and their relationships should be recognized for what they are are not demonized by what they obviously are not. They should be entitled to the same rights under law as any heterosexual couple.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:i already stated that the reasons (i feel) are to strong for these boards and besides, they are VERY personal and not something i want to publish to the whole world, i don't mind sharing my reasons with those that have posted in this topic, i just don't want it all over the web in the open.

so if you want to know, just ask me either over msn or via PM and i'll be happy to explain why...

and may i be the first to welcome you to the second least used part of the forum...ascended being the least i would imagine

LiQuiD wrote:marraige is between a man and a woman. those who swing another way can always enter into a civil partnership, which is marraige in all but name right?

gay couples shouldnt be allowed to adopt. at least not in this time.

imagine what it would be like for a child to go to their 1st day at secondary school with their two gay dads (wearing daffyd style clothes of course). that kid would get mocked back to 1984. fact.

maybe in the future where same sex parents wont draw as much notice/insults/attention it will be ok. that would need to be in a more tolerent and therefore better society. but not yet. its not fair on the child.

theres also the major importance of both a male and female role model for children.


btw i am in no way opposed to lesbians. infact i encourage people to wear comfortable shoes. but still no marraige/adoption yet. . . yet


oh and thats a good idea from mystake about being unioned.

Semper wrote:

Thriller wrote:The communities dumb arguments against gay marriage astound me. Your talking out of fear and not with your heads. "OH noes if the gayzz get mariued our soceiceitty wull fall apparts." Please... you have no evidence to support and your reasoning is severely flawed. THis is a legal issue, has nothing to do with warping and regressing societal values. You child turns out to be gay, It will have nothing to do with gay marriage. YOu really think not getting married is a deterrent to being gay. It isn't even in the ballpark. Their are legal advantages to being married, but I'm talking about the church idea marriage. Gays should be allowed to be common law spouses and their relationships should be recognized for what they are are not demonized by what they obviously are not. They should be entitled to the same rights under law as any heterosexual couple.

what? Who said any of that?

A child turns out gay? Has nothing to do with that. You go ahead and prove that, come on. Im going to LOVE this one.

Who said not allowing their marriage is meant to be a deterrent to actually being gay? They need a slap if they did put it so simply, but on top of that it could be, by a great length of extension just that because it is negative feedback. Humans are animals. Classical Conditioning.

It is not, within the real ideas of the church, allowed. This is one of the reasons the entire arc of faith has its haters, because it changes its colours when it should not.

Please, dont say we are posting out of fear and not with our heads. I think you have no idea, not a clue, what you were talking about in at least a third of what you just spewed into the topic.