But thats the point. the chance of seeing two men making out in a public place or walking down the street holding hands are the same whether they are married or not. So who are you to say they cant get married? Are you or anyone else the great dictator of america. I dont even necessarily agree or condone it but who am i to say how they should life their life.
Not around here they don't. And I for one want to keep it that way. Many others don't want to see that shit either. Stay in the closet where you belong.
Sickening that people would accept this behavior but schools teach our kids tolerance.
Tolerance is one thing but not to the mentally ill homosexuals.
Sickening that people would accept this behavior but schools teach our kids tolerance.
Tolerance is one thing but not to the mentally ill homosexuals.
The levels of intolerance in this forum are unbelieveable. I don't think GeorgeJefferson really believes all that he is saying, but I think FesteringZit genuinely does. It seems the answer to why many (and by many, I mean a small percentage) of homosexuals "convert" to heterosexuality is pretty simple. The outstanding social pressures from extremely conservative groups force them to attempt to assimilate. Clearly no one wakes up one day and says "Hey, I'd like to take on the social ramifications of being homosexual today. Let me go announce to the world my change of ways." I'll go out on a limb and say that if there was a stronger voice for tolerance, and we were somehow able to quiet the religious right, homosexuals would emerge in a number many orders of magnitude above the amount that has "proclaimed the error in their ways."
The definition of natural is "that which is readily apparent in nature." We see homosexual acts in many species, including our own. We also see many acts that would be deemed unnatural that are prevalent in other species (the male praying mantis allows itself to be eaten after copulation, etc...), which shows that all species have their "unnatural" quirks. Yet these quirks are completely natural to the individual species!
A lot of the posts in this forum have shown individuals' displeasure with things that they find repulsive. I completely understand, but I don't think this an adequate basis for legislation. I am repulsed by overweight people kissing. I am repulsed when young children are taken to church before the really understand what the church stands for. But I don't want to vote on the legality of these actions!
In 50 years, I think we will see some poetic justice with the terms we use to demean people. As science takes us farther and farther away from religion, we will see the institution of religion as a negative construct (what's more unnatural than belief in the unnatural?). Terms like "that's so gay" will, hopefully, be replaced by "that's so Christian" or "get your praying ass out of our country." Although I'm mainly joking here, as the gap widens and religion becomes more and more associated with lack of education, I think many social conservatives will face the same contempt they have been spewing for decades. And face it, it is simply predicated by hatred of differences. No one spewing the crap that these uber-conservatives have can honestly say that, encompassed by the ideals of the time, they would have been outraged by Nazism in WWII Germany or morally opposed to slavery growing up in the south. And I doubt that they can locate Darfur on a map.
Well, that's all for now. Let the flaming (pun intended) begin.
The definition of natural is "that which is readily apparent in nature." We see homosexual acts in many species, including our own. We also see many acts that would be deemed unnatural that are prevalent in other species (the male praying mantis allows itself to be eaten after copulation, etc...), which shows that all species have their "unnatural" quirks. Yet these quirks are completely natural to the individual species!
A lot of the posts in this forum have shown individuals' displeasure with things that they find repulsive. I completely understand, but I don't think this an adequate basis for legislation. I am repulsed by overweight people kissing. I am repulsed when young children are taken to church before the really understand what the church stands for. But I don't want to vote on the legality of these actions!
In 50 years, I think we will see some poetic justice with the terms we use to demean people. As science takes us farther and farther away from religion, we will see the institution of religion as a negative construct (what's more unnatural than belief in the unnatural?). Terms like "that's so gay" will, hopefully, be replaced by "that's so Christian" or "get your praying ass out of our country." Although I'm mainly joking here, as the gap widens and religion becomes more and more associated with lack of education, I think many social conservatives will face the same contempt they have been spewing for decades. And face it, it is simply predicated by hatred of differences. No one spewing the crap that these uber-conservatives have can honestly say that, encompassed by the ideals of the time, they would have been outraged by Nazism in WWII Germany or morally opposed to slavery growing up in the south. And I doubt that they can locate Darfur on a map.
Well, that's all for now. Let the flaming (pun intended) begin.
Here ya go Timbo.
"The definition of natural is that which is readily apparent in nature"
In case your pseudo-intellectual mind happened to look right beyond the obvious (readily apparent in nature) while trying to prove your specious thesis, here are the obvious and natural facts.
A male was given a male part. A female was given a female part. The natural purpose of those parts is to fit together for the purpose of procreation.
Other uses of those parts are unnatural.
I think that's simple enough.
"The definition of natural is that which is readily apparent in nature"
In case your pseudo-intellectual mind happened to look right beyond the obvious (readily apparent in nature) while trying to prove your specious thesis, here are the obvious and natural facts.
A male was given a male part. A female was given a female part. The natural purpose of those parts is to fit together for the purpose of procreation.
Other uses of those parts are unnatural.
I think that's simple enough.
Ya know what, we dont need a lengthy intellectual explanation to why we should tolerate queers and their hand holding.
I have my beliefs and others have theirs. I can express mine in simple terms. Like this.
Go away faggots go away....
Youre a little teapot short and stout...keep the faggots out out out....
I have my beliefs and others have theirs. I can express mine in simple terms. Like this.
Go away faggots go away....
Youre a little teapot short and stout...keep the faggots out out out....
