I don't think he is. People seem to have this weird and irrational fear of some sort of homosexual agenda. They seem to think if we give them an equal stance in society we'll all sit down together and they'll start converting heterosexuals. And straight guys we'll just be like "Wow, that's a really good point. Can you unzip your pants? You've convinced me!"

I don't even know what to say in this thread anymore. :(

Did you guys know 97% of divorces can be traced back to gayness?

You couldn't tell? :p:

I think he was thrown off by the immediate transition from castration to seriously talking about the problem of overpopulation :rofl:

That doesn't make much sense. I'd say people in general would have more sex, heterosexuals included, for one thing because no one would be afraid of being ostracized for experimenting. And then maybe this whole ridiculously Christian idea of monogamy would hopefully go out the window and people wouldn't think they own each other just because they're in love.

amen!

Isn't that I a myth though? I am not really straight...but still? Seriously?

We can dream, can't we? :p:

Well, I'd say since gay men are so aware of the beauty of the (ideal) male physique, we tend to be more narcissistic than straight men, which I figure leads to more problems facing old age and physical decline...:\

But, I think it's pretty much the same all over. Some like 'em young, some like 'em old. And no one wants you if you're past 50, be they women or men...tis the way the cookie crumbles.

By the way, anteater, I don't feel the need to respect Prince's stupid opinion. The argument against *** marriage is incorrect on a thousand different levels, and I don't think I owe any respect to someone who bases their political or moral positions on a religious book. And don't get on my case for attacking religion - I'm not (at the moment). I'm criticizing Prince for not being able to separate his supernatural beliefs from real life issues.

Indeed, I like Prince as a musician but otherwise he needs to keep his bull**** opinion to himself.
:thumb:

I just have trouble taking the guy who wrote "Darling Nikki" seriously look down on gay marriage. The bible had way more to say about adultery than homosexuality.

And "Sister", surely the bible condemns incest... oh wait.

Maybe all this God and morality stuff can be moved to a separate thread? It's a super interesting discussion, but people coming in are expecting to find something else and keep interrupting the flow...

Anyhoo, funny video about prop 8:
"Prop 8 - The Musical" starring Jack Black, John C. Reilly, and many more... from FOD Team, Jack Black, Craig Robinson, John C Reilly, and Rashida Jones

Heh. That was great. :laughing:

If this is a rick roll your dead...

Unfortunately it's for real. Apparently it's not enough to prevent people from getting married, now they have to try and nullify already existing marriages. The ironic thing is that these people come from an organization called "Save Marriage" or something like that.

That There says it all:

"The motivation behind this mean-spirited and heart-breaking action should not be allowed to be buried in legal brief," he said. "If Proposition 8's sponsors plan to destroy lives, they should at least have the courage to admit it publicly."

The government needs to reexamine how separate the church is from the state. If an organization wants to donate millions of dollars to a political cause and intervene in state affairs, they should be forced to pay taxes.

That's sort of a myth; but that's not the point of this discussion; it's just about having common sense and decency and seeing this is mean spirited behavior that benefits no one and hurts many.

Oh but it benefits the "Save Marriage" jackasses because they'll be able to sleep well at night knowing that they saved some abstract concept of marriage by helping to destroy thousands of real, existing marriages.

I can at least dream can't I? Anyway my bigger problem here is the government getting too involved in social issues. Marriage should not be up to the federal government, nor should it be up to the state. The government should recognize all forms of civil unions as civil unions for tax breaks, benefit purposes, etc. but that is where their authority should end. What people call it should be up to them, that way the religious right can live in its world blissfully unaware of the modern world they lie in and everyone can have equal civil rights.

Yep

No problem if a church doesn't want to recognize *** marriage; the priests are more into one night kneels err stands anyway.

That's what makes me want to bang my head against the wall with this stuff. No one's saying churches have to marry same-sex couples if they don't want to so I really don't see why these people have such an issue with it.

Because they need to protect "traditional" marriage even though their idea of marrying for (heterosexual) love is very far from traditional.

When it's of religious motivation it's because they are lairs and they don't know for sure, they have doubt, so they need everyone else to believe what they believe. It's cowardly and it's dishonest.

I just don't understand social conservatives; they go on about "values" and "traditions" and restoring America to a more "righteous" and "better" time but that time never actually existed.

I just have trouble understanding why they aren't content to simply live and let. Why do they have to try to impose their shit on everybody else? I know, rational thinking has no place in trying to figure out why homophobes do what they do.

They are scared. They have put their faith in God an there not sure he's gonna answer.

If they really have faith in God, human laws shouldn't matter to them. It just goes to show what a bunch of hypocritical pricks they are.

They need to live their schizophrenic discourses with space gods to themselves though. Every argument presented is faulty or full of holes. There is no sanctity and tradition of marriage to protect, historically it was about property and wealth. Polygamy and incest are historical characteristics of marriage: not love. I don't understand the sociological argument either. If a married couple gets a divorce because of homosexual marriage then they probably wouldn't have weathered anything couples go through anyway. No stable relationship is going to be threatened by this. The argument that it will harm the children's psyche isn't true either. Anti-homosexual agendas are not based in morals and values at all and the propaganda they pushed was absurd. Heterosexuality and homosexuality are not taught in schools. I'd actually say the prop 8 brigade is doing social damage to children. By demonizing homosexuality they're inflicting more harms on impressionable children because they're teaching them to be bigoted and that people aren't different.

The problem is your trying to use logic and think it through rationally and when you do that the bible and religious morals become complete BS. As you might imagine the conservative religious right doesn't go down that path too often.

Shit like this makes me hate American culture. I can't escape religious fanaticism that seems to drive so many people or worse the religious pacifism that so many people in our society feel which leads to complacency and acceptance; not acceptance in the real and honest sense of the word but acceptance of the hideous and hateful things these institutions support and force on everyone. Religion is probably the most evil organization on the planet as far as killing people goes and I'd love to be rid of it but unless I live in a shack somewhere in the mountains its going to dictate the way everything in this society moves; not just in society and our leaders but in the abstract sense of the ideologies we promote and countries we support or destroy.

Well whoopty goddamndy doo!!! Cmon Ethan and Co., quit overgeneralizing this and realize that religion is not the root of all evil in this day and age. Idiots will always be idiots regardless of the source they cling to in place of their mental faculties, whether it be religion, the words of others, the media, etc. Also, there are plenty of folks here on the lower rungs of the societal ladder who are perfectly content to live in peace with oneanother despite our differences in theologic perception. Or are you saying that logical thought and a desire for harmony is beyond a Non-Denominational Christian like myself?

People need to be less concerned about society at large and instead work on rectifying their own behaviors. Only then will change (hopefully for the better) arrive in due course.

Really? So you think by taking away rights from a minority they're promoting harmony? I really can't even begin to understand how religion isn't in the wrong here. Perhaps you could explain this to me.

I'm also curious to see how you can justify that religion teaches logical thought; seeing as faith is a very irrational thing and the bible has been proven time and time again to be historically inaccurate.

I would say I am a very religious person yet I am politically active for a moral government in which the morals are grounded in reality. Basically an Objectivist government. Now I would debate, but I have school work to do. I am also a pacifist, but that is based on my religion so I don't force my government to turn that way.

You missed my point entirelly. I didn't say I supported the Bible or that the tome promoted logical thought now did I? I'm simply saying that people will discriminate and do awful things to one-another even if it isn't fueled by some kind of theistic/polytheistic dogma.

Second, I was also making a point that many people who profess to the Christian faith DO wish to live in peace with other people around them, and that from what I've been reading you appear to be generalizing that just because the Bible seems to encourage racism, sexism, ect in certain passages it entails that all Christians in the world RIGHT NOW follow those passages to the letter, which is not true at all.