Gay people deserve no rights because they're no different than anyone else. Just because they want to have sex with those of the same sex doesn't mean they should receive anything special. They should get married because they are just normal people. If gays are considered any kind of social group then someone with a perverse fetish should get special rights. Those middle easterners who masturbate by sticking a metal rod in their pee holes deserve as much respect as a gay person because they are not special, the only difference is they have sex with people of the same gender.
They should allow "gay" marriage to make way for heterosexual marriage, so, for example, two male roomates can share the tax benefits.
Fags sure are annoying though.
I agree. Sexual preference ought to be the least interesting and important detail of a person. There's nothing significant about it that warrants different rights than anyone else.
On that note, gays with no personalities bother me to no end.
Who's to say it's not a fetish?
Do you know how stupid your post is? The only right Gays ask for is the right to marry like anyone else.
I think you missed the point, man. :(
Wow, I was gonna post here and talk about the topic, but Hyperactive Poster already did it for me.
Darn it.
this is the best thread
yes, just because it was made by foppy d
Straight couples can marry any person that matches their preference, provided both parties agree. Gays cannot, based solely on their sexual orientation. First person to explain logically and reasonably why this is NOT discrimination wins the prize.
And dont give me the "gays can marry any person of the opposite gender argument; its niave and misses the point entirely. Also invalid is the argument that homosexuality is the same as beastiality/pedophilia etc. Homosexual acts are consensual acts between two of age, nonimpared adults. Thats all thats being considered here, and it fails to draw parallels to anything else commonly mentioned as a detraction.
Comprehension get. Preferably of the "reading" variety.
[quote=Hyperactive Poster;839220]Do you know how stupid your post is? The only right Gays ask for is the right to marry like anyone else.
Gays: MOAR COCK I WANT TO BANG EVERY GUY EVER! COMMUNISM BECAUSE IT BRINGS THE COCK TOGETHER
Straight: Moar tits I love a hawt woman, after I bang her I think I'll help out the American Economy
Well, the way I'm interpreting it and knowing Foppy's posting style, he's saying they don't "deserve" anything because whatever they "deserve" they should already have, right? Marriage isn't a religious thing anymore!
I'm sure Foppy knows about the inequality bit, too.
How do they have it? Civil unions are not the same as Marriage. Besides not having kinship, and parental rites, the term marriage itself means a lot, and there is no reason that they should not be able to attain said title.
And also, the post was not even comprehendable, it looks like he was going in one direction, and changed it completely. It was the first part I was attacking because it had no validity.
[quote=Fate;839364][COLOR=skyblue]he's saying they don't "deserve" anything because whatever they "deserve" they should already have, right?[/COLOR]
[quote=Fate;839364][COLOR=skyblue]because whatever they "deserve" they should already have[/COLOR]
[quote=Fate;839364][COLOR=skyblue]should[/COLOR]
The post made sense, it's just not particularly blunt. Besides, I'm sure you understood the following posts and what everyone feels.
[quote=Lord of Spam;839309]Straight couples can marry any person that matches their preference, provided both parties agree. Gays cannot, based solely on their sexual orientation. First person to explain logically and reasonably why this is NOT discrimination wins the prize.
Marriage is an invention by women specifically to trap men into relationships. It has no utility for homosexual couples.
GIVE ME MY PRIZE.
anybody who responded seriously to this thread is an absolute moron, and is proving that vgc takes jokes too seriously
To anyone who posted here, this thread is a honeypot, or a "moron trap". whichever term you perfer.
gay marriage is cool in canada and we havent self imploded because of it! :o
Fags eat poop
EDIT: Spam, Mis0: way to not get the point of Foppy's post. Sorry I can't give you anything though. I gave all my gold stars to the other retarded kids.
[quote=Hyperactive Poster;839504]How do they have it? Civil unions are not the same as Marriage. Besides not having kinship, and parental rites, the term marriage itself means a lot, and there is no reason that they should not be able to attain said title.
Create for them a new style of marriage because the style I believe you guys are talking about is the good old Christian way right, the churches condemn homosexuality ( they contradict themselves if you watch the video bohemian grove on youtube ).
One argument I heard against gay's being allowed to marry involved same genders being unable to produce children, which is what the tax breaks were intended for. How about hetero couples without kids? hmmm, maybe the current marital status is a little too presumptious?
[quote=TimeSkipz;839855]Create for them a new style of marriage because the style I believe you guys are talking about is the good old Christian way right, the churches condemn homosexuality ( they contradict themselves if you watch the video bohemian grove on youtube ).
shut up.
Marriage may be a Christian creation, but to have it acknowledged by the state means that it must be protected under the constitution.
Marriage (or at least an equivalent) was around before Christianity, methinks. **** them.
"Style" of marriage? You guys act like religious marriage is sanctimonious or something. This thread sucks.
[quote=miso]There is a pretty big implication in his badly-worded post, and that is that homosexual currently have equal rights. But guess what? They don't. I understand and actually agree with his stupid point, that no one is going to argue with anyway, which is that homosexuals don't deserve any additional rights.
Whether he thinks homosexuals currently have equal rights or not doesn't matter; if he can't type up is thoughts coherently, that's his problem. And you're the moron for overlooking a huge assertion on his part, which when compared with the facts, can be shown to be untrue. Looks like you earned yourself a gold star, buddy.
Since when does the word "should" mean "can"? That's what I'd like to know.
That statement implies nothing other than that they should have equal rights.
If he had said "should be able to", I'd agree with you. "Should" in that context can mean "they have said right to do so, therefore they should."
This is why I think his post is badly written.
Nope. In that context it means "should be able to."
You're seriously dishonoring the image of Mia Fey here.
I argee with Miso, that Foppy's post is confusing.
"Gay people deserve no rights because they're no different than anyone else."
Ok, I've heard George Carlin's reasoning for why noone has rights, but I'm not sure if Foppy is referring to the same reasoning or not.
"Just because they want to have sex with those of the same sex doesn't mean they should receive anything special. They should get married because they are just normal people."
I see the usage of the word normal implying gays have equal rights. Normal people = same rights according to Foppy, which with what Miso is saying really isn't the case.
"They should allow "gay" marriage to make way for heterosexual marriage, so, for example, two male roomates can share the tax benefits."
Now, this is confusing. At first, the message was Gays should just get married with equal rights like everyone else, later becoming gay marriage is something entierly different than normal marriage. This is only a divide I've seen made by those arguing against gay marriages. Maybe if gays were allowed to marry in the first place, his argument would actually make sense, but they can't. Then again, maybe it's my fault for not knowing who Fobby is before reading his post, and he's saying the opposite of how he really feels. Either way, there's still an inconsistency. It's almost as bad as most of my posts...
[quote]"Just because they want to have sex with those of the same sex doesn't mean they should receive anything special. They should get married because they are just normal people."
I see the usage of the word normal implying gays have equal rights. Normal people = same rights according to Foppy, which with what Miso is saying really isn't the case.
I see the usage of the word normal implying not that gays have equal rights, but that just because they have a different sexual preference doesn't mean that things should be so different for them and that they're still just people.G iven the next part of the paragraph, this makes sense.
Psst, Foppy was being ironic. You're all wrong.
We're not arguing his meaning anymore. Just the wording. Hush up.
What's significant about the wording if you know the meaning?
ex: Shade has nice hair
Some one who knows me or your hair can understand the sarcasm behind it, but debating 'THE WAY SHE WORDED IT IMPLIED THAT I HAVE NICE HAIR' is pointless if you already know what I meant.
This dumb argument's obscuring the real focus here, guys, that gays should be mutilated and hanged.
[quote=Iris;839949]shut up.
Marriage may be a Christian creation, but to have it acknowledged by the state means that it must be protected under the constitution.
Thats why I said create a new way for them to get married.
There is a new way, it's called civil unions, and they aren't as good.
How old are you?
HOLD UP HOLD UP
Are you saying I have bad hair?
...some one had to muster up the courage to tell you! Sorry. :(
It's alright, I understand... :(
My barber on the other hand... man, he's ****ed.
[quote=Iris;840123]There is a new way, it's called civil unions, and they aren't as good.
How old are you?
Heh I mean a real marriage
Yeah my post didn't make a lot of sense.
I was just saying that gays should be able to get married because gays aren't a race. They're not a gender. They're nothing special. They are just people who want to smash other of the same sex. Same reason metal-pole-masturbators deserve to get married.
But now that I think more about it, I don't know if it's such a great idea because heterosexual same-sex marriage could get abused.
I also find it funny how you all (mis0) can argue with each other not about the topic of my post, but on what I meant by my post as if I'm some kind of ambiguous storyteller.
P.S. smash means f***
I thought those were the ones with no personalities...
There are cool gay dudes, and then there are the gay dudes who want you to refer to them as "Queen Bitch."
Yeah, there is. The first column of letters forms the word forms YIPBIK. Look it up you DBs
what if you have a robot fetish
If Adam and Eve said "F@k off Satan!" then they would understand our Father's true experience of eternal love, and that having your own children and watching them grow up as young adults who would never age over 30 years old. Adam and Eve would still be alive today to see that this pleasure of eternal love is watching all these families grow up with very intelligent minds and athletic bodies. Supernatural technology (Father's magic of creation) would make human technology look like a kindergarten. We would still be one non-evil super race of people. I don't think the holy spirit of Jesus is powerful enough to change all gays to become straight overnight knowing that Satan is secretly using his evil power to deceive everyone. :mad: :eek:
[quote=misogenie;842971]If Adam and Eve said "F@k off Satan!" then they would understand our Father's true experience of eternal love, and that having your own children and watching them grow up as young adults who would never age over 30 years old. Adam and Eve would still be alive today to see that this pleasure of eternal love is watching all these families grow up with very intelligent minds and athletic bodies. Supernatural technology (Father's magic of creation) would make human technology look like a kindergarten. We would still be one non-evil super race of people. I don't think the holy spirit of Jesus is powerful enough to change all gays to become straight overnight knowing that Satan is secretly using his evil power to deceive everyone. :mad: :eek:
:insane:
[SIZE=+2]"All I Ever Really Needed to Know[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+2]I Learned in Kindergarten"[/SIZE]
~~Robert Fulgham
Adam and Eve could say ****?
If "gay marriage" becomes nationally legal, then what's stopping two heterosexual male or female friends or roomates benefitting from the tax breaks and security pluses?
What's stopping two friends of the opposite sex in pulling off such a tax scheme?
Christians know there is a spiritual warfare between Creator versus Satan. It seems Satan's gay body-switching technique has imprisoned female souls in men's bodies and male souls in female bodies. I think our Creator did not stop this body-switching technique to see if Christians forgive and respect them. I find this body-switching technique could help heterosexual couples really understand each other's sexual exploratory feelings. :cool: ;)
Enter Billards: Says something really republican and conservative. Billards Leaves. Good day!
Finally got my cable up so I have been watching a lot of MTV latelly because I hear there is a lot of garbage, and there is.... Thank you....
No really I was watching a show on MTV and I don't remember what its called but it goes like this: the parents hate there son/daughters boyfriend/girlfriend and they both enterview a bunch of guys/girls so that they them choose two of them to go on a date for their son/daughter, and well I have never seen a show where gay/lesbians got to go on dates with other gays/lesbians.
I was surprised because I had never seen that before but then it was just like watching the rest of their episodes. I have a lesbian friend and I don't really see her as lesbian its like she's straight, but occasionally she will surprise me when she sees a pretty girl and trys to holler. Idk just thought I'd share that.
I'm cool with gay people in the open, its what they do behind the scenes that gets me, but then again what straight people do behind the scenes is gross too. So everyones equally disgusting.
You'd think with our country being built on tolerance and understanding of our fellow man/woman, that we would stop being such *******s and just realize people are different and yet were all the same.
I think our country was more so built on the concept we didn't need Britain's king anymore, and that taxes made enemies.
Society changes. Conservative elements in society, nearly be definition, resist that. In societies where the conservative traditional values win, stagnation generally leads to decline. In those that value innovation and are open to new ideas, things tend to progress naturally.
Its pretty obvious what will happen. The only question is how long will it take.
Rich people from Europe wanted to run things without the old aristocrats *****ing "We're nobles, we rule". Wasn't that basically what happened, aside from all the "taxes without representation", which stemmed from the denied citizenship to British parliment stuff? I hope I'm in the ball park about that. Money gains power...that's what America (if not all countries) are built from.
hahaha, military.
if two men can get married then what's stopping me from marrying a dog or my couch or another inanimate object?
Wow, Foppy, if you're not offended that hardly anyone remembers your biting sarcasm, I am FOR you. :/
why would I be offended?
How dare you MFers not fully comprehend my aberrant sense of humor!
I'm not liking you because of other people since I'm highly impressionable. It's just like HS.
If I remember him you should remember him.
I only remember people who had pretty distinct personalities. This Floppy guy? Not so much.
I just remember it because I was like 14 at the time. So saying "lol more like FLOOPPY D AMIRITE" was the height of humor it seemed
JS had a crush on him and he lived near me. S'all i remember
Yeah see, I wasn't making a comment implying that everyone should know me or something. It was more of a sarcastic remark referring to how not very many people at all understand what I would make a joke about on here.
Kind of the same reason I didn't really come here for about a year or so...
You don't deserve any rights because you should already have them. Nobody knows how to read between lines anymore, jeez.
That makes no fucking sense, Fate!
It makes perfect sense. Think of it like this... A black man shouldn't go around saying he deserves the same rights as a white man because he should already have them. The concept of "deserve" really has to be paid attention to, because that black man didn't do anything to be worthy of "deserving" the same rights; the only difference between him and the white man would be his skin color. In my personal opinion and my knowing of Foppy's vagaries in posts, that's pretty much what he meant.
Christ, I don't even know anything of Foppy's "vagaries" and I gathered that much.
As in he has them inherently and doesn't need to go about deserving them.
Let me explain it:
gays shouldn't say they deserve the same "exact" rights as streight people because what they are asking for is to be able to marry the opposite gender, something inwhich they can already do.
...Or atleast that's Fate's thinking of what Foppy was getting at....or my thinking of what Fate was thinking of what Foppy was getting at...ah **** this thread.
No, it's that they should inherently have the ability to marry since marriage became part of the legal system, a right that everybody [that is American, at least, since other countries already beat us to the punch] should have full access to. When you "deserve" something, you actually have to do something other than just be black, gay, a woman, etc. Whether it be negative or positive, the concept of "deserve" is being completely overlooked here. It's not rocket science, just semantics.
Foppy is an intelligent individual who likes to play with people and their ability to read between lines to fully comprehend his cryptic speech.
In other words, what Shade said.
Perhaps if "deserve" only meant merit, then I'd be comprehendable. The law system has put a set of qualifications to marriage; qualifications that may go against the persuit of happiness for certain people inwhich our laws are suppose to prevent. Since the Declaration of Independence points out what men are entitled to, people are deserving of what they want that makes them happy, and if the law goes against what they "deserve" they have the right to seperate. If laws are preventing a group of people from achieving happiness, they ARE being denied something that was promised to them to be unalienable, denying something they "qualify" for, something they deserve.
Foppy's attempt at pointing out some kind of misusage of verps isn't witty if it's NOT being misused.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/endowed
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/endowed
"to provide something freely or naturally"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deserve
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reward%5B2%5D
therefore, people are not ENDOWED for something which they DESERVE. "...That all men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
To endow is more like to bless, or bestow upon someone. It's something given as a gift, that isn't earned. Stop arguing.
I would be inclined to say, IK, that the word you are looking for is "entitled" to. You can't "deserve" something just by existing.
Thanks, Bj, I'm glad I can depend on someone to understand.
I had no idea Foppy was capable of such things (no offense dude).
Marriage is a religious institution, so gays shouldn't be able to get married unless they can find a priest willing to perform the ceremony and church willing to accommodate them.
My opinion.
Then comes the separation of church and state argument over federal acknowledgment of marriage in any form.
That's a farce. Separation of church and state would mean that marriage could only be a religious institution, since the state couldn't meddle with the sacraments.
as long as the government gives tax breaks/incentives and banks give loan preferences to married couples, it will always be a religious and federal matter
I say that once a religious ceremony becomes part of the federal government, the right becomes inherent to all members of the country it takes place in. If gay people want to get married, then they should have full rights to by law. However, I do respect religious institutions, so if gays want to get married I would hope that they respect their own religion's views and not fight a church to get married in it. If all were as it should be, society would only allow straight marriages with no federal involvement like tax breaks and the like, or everyone would have the option to get married regardless of gender and reap the full benefits of tax breaks.
Since the intention of the tax breaks was for raising children, congress should change all the fiscal laws from "married spouses" to just civil union's with minors. If Religious institutions really want to have a claim over the term "marriage", then by all means, let's remove it from having any place in our fiscal laws and use definitions that don't care whether or not the person is sining with their ***.
well I'm sure there's more to it than we're giving credit. A 2 parent household is a better environment to raise a child than 1 parent, given normal circumstances. Additionally there's more stability in a 2 parent household, and with that comes more revenue and taxes. I'm sure it helps with crime rates and local economic economy as well (people being tied down to one area tend to spend money in that area). So there ARE many state and federal incentives to encourage people to get married and have children. This has "worked" somewhat for millennia, but this whole "gay" thing does sort of throw a wrench into the works, hah. I can see the validity of arguments from both sides, frankly.
Note I am validating the reason for encouraging "marriage", not specifying whether or not the parents are of the same sex. I can see these arguments promoting same-sex marriage as well. The problem is whether or not religions will adhere to that ideal, which I think they should not be forced in any way.
Undoubtedly they shouldn't be forced to or pressured to. I would hope that the gays that do want to get married respect the views of their own religious establishments. Marriage on paper is different from married by church.
Agree with a lot of what has been already been said, and this is perhaps a small bit of a rehash but...
As long as marriage carries with it government created and maintained benefits, it's a secularized institution that ought not be denied to people on the basis of religious objection. A marriage carried out in a courthouse by a judge doesn't have any value over one held in a church by a priest other than the spiritual, so to say that marriage at least in its current form is a purely religious institution is a bit hard for me to swallow.
On thoughts of creating a separate but equal non-religious form of marriage for homosexuals, we already see that civil unions fail in quite a few fields compared to a marriage and that even if they were beefed up there's no reason for there to be a separate institution for homosexuals. We learned back in the 1950s with the African-American Civil Rights movement that Separate but Equal does not work because things don't end up being equal.
Further than that I'm not very interested in arguing it because I hope that enough people will cooperate to make the right a reality in the next 10 years, and an argument on a video game forum isn't likely to speed that process up. I also respect the fact that many people who are opposed to homosexual marriages will still be opposed at the end of the day no matter what I may say to them, so I will leave those with firm opinions without direct harassment of how I disagree.
I think you all are really gay
go check on your kid...jerk.
Yeah, I'm sure the Japanese would love to hear that response from a compliment. jerk :p
I'm American; I'll say what I want to, especially in jest and sarcasm.
No need to get bawlsy. I was just hinting to you that I knew what you said.
im gay. i hate homos. i really do. im a fudegepacker, and i hate cockloving queermos.
boin em all
after im done sucking cocks at my local gaybar, i usuually get one of the flaming assbandits to come outside with the promise of a cave adventure. i take that ball licking faggot and tie him to the back of my hybrid and drag him all over downtown. i hate gays.