obfuscator

You've just admitted yourself that polygamous marriages should be acceptable. If I told you, 100 years ago, that one day gay people would be allowed to marry you'd laugh in my face. Today, if I tell you that humans would be able to marry animals at some point in the future, you'd laugh in my face, but what makes you so sure society would never see this as acceptable? This isn't about a slippery slope - I'm not here to debate the morality of homosexual marriages, but I'm simply curious to see what people think of other possible changes in the future(distant or no so).

Yes, polygamy could be seen as exploitation of tax, but since any marriage does this it's seen as legitimate. In terms of civil rights, I agree that often women's rights tend to be shafted by polygamous marraiges but if the women truly wanted such a union why does society have a right to stop them? Pedophilia - age of consent, again. A 60 year old man can not have a sexual relationship with a 17 year old, but is there really any difference between a 17 and 18 year old? The other two may not be as obvious - in India recently a man was allowed to marry a goat - I'll try to find the source.

Deal, but only if you can get everton to officiate!

Why though? If one man and three women legitimately want to get married, with no forced mentality, abuse or otherwise, why should we stop them? Same goes for the other three. The only thing I see that goes against that is that children can't give consent, but I'm sure someone would be able to argue that a child at or past the age of reason (7) can give something resembling consent.

Well as society stands today, homosexuality in part becomes more and more acceptable. Obviously this isn't the case world wide, but if recent events are to continue down their logical path I think it's safe to say the world is not far away from largely legalizing homosexual marriages. The purpose of this thread isn't to debate on the morality of such an issue (I think we can all agree there have been enough opportunities for that) but rather to discuss an unanswered question: What about the other sexualities? In Canada at least, one of the biggest reasons used by those not in favor of legalizing homosexual marriages was that the definition of marriage is between a man and a women. Since this definition has to be struck down wherever homosexual marriage is legalized, it leaves the door open for other sexualities to claim they have a right to marriage. What I want to know is, where is the line? What sexualities should be considered appropriate (allowed to marry) and which should not? Please post yes/no and reasons, I'll list a few main ones. Polygamy - The most obvious. This is a sexuality that allows men to take multiple wives (or vice versa, though that's rarely heard of) Zoophilia - Similar to bestiality, so I'll lump them together. Bestiality is sexual attraction to animals (non human) and zoophilia is the love (in a spousal form) of such animals. Pedophilia - Sexual relationships with minors, usually before puberty. Objectum Sexuality - Sexual attraction and relations to inanimate objects. Incest - Sexual attraction to immediate family members These are the main ones I can think of, I'm curious to hear your opinions. Ps. If you have any more sexualities you think merit discussion I'll add them to the first post. edit: I will be playing devil's advocate in this thread, fyi

Degrees of attraction are irrelevant. I may be "slightly" attracted to someone, but that's still attraction. This is the case heterosexually as well. You misunderstand my point. The example I gave (using autism) was as a serious mentally degenerative illness. If your degree of autism is mild enough you can write a blog that makes sense, you wouldn't qualify by the standards of this theory. The whole point I'm trying to make referred to those so seriously disabled that they cannot be structured according to the laws of society. I fail to see how this proves it. My point is that animals at large hump everything - thus the fact they may from time to time happen to participate in homosexual behavior hardly proves animals are naturally gay. I'll admit that the "laws of nature" are very wide and open to interpretation. That's basically a very poor summary of my view on the issue.

Seems like a good idea to me, although I'm doubtful as to the impact it would actually have.

No change. Thanks everyone for your posts. :) Cow Oh wow :o Good luck though :)

The mere fact you would say that, shows a clear ignorance of the subject. As alluded to in your other posts as well, you are bigoted, and have your mind set in the way you want, and nothing is going to change it. So in reality, you're really just trolling in this topic. And I for one, do not appreciate at all the message you are spreading. You do hate gay people, you and my mom have the same exact views, and yet you both say you don't hate gay people. But we all know you do; even if you won't admit it, as with most cases, the writing of one, gives away what one doesn't outright say. I'm glad that my simple attempt to understand the conditions in which a survey was conducted suddenly merits ignorance. I'm also glad that my attempts to be reasonable and debate my position are inferred as trolling. But most of all, I'm really overjoyed that you can say I hate gay people, because I'm sure you have the authority and knowledge to do so. I have several gay friends. I've had in depth arguments with one of them about my beliefs - we agree to disagree and remain friends to this day. But of course, you know that already, due to your in depth knowledge and understanding of my personal life. You call me ignorant? I'm not the one making assumptions.

Congrats Cowman, a very good choice :D Who's crew leader now?

So what, they asked people "how gay are you"?

Degrees of gayness? You're either attracted to the same sex or you're not. Degrees of gayness are merely how that attraction manifests itself in your personality. I disagree. May I point you to the Kinsey Scale? How was this testing done? It didn't say anywhere in the article.

Read back and tell me and yourself why you argue for that. Yes, because you posted that people don't live in places they are hated :rolleyes: Degrees of gayness? You're either attracted to the same sex or you're not. Degrees of gayness are merely how that attraction manifests itself in your personality. Point me to them. I realize this. Animals hump humans, fire hydrants, trees, etc. If you're going to argue that something with no comprehension of greater existence gives homosexual behavior legitimacy then I'm done arguing. I don't see why the "laws of nature" make me in favour of eugenics?

That's not my argument, I'm merely arguing that sometimes people live in places they are hated.

It's irrelevant. For example, a gay couple could live in an area near I live that's largely immigrant based (more conservative in general) I doubt they'd be in physical danger but they'd still be hated. The point I'm trying to make is it's unlikely a gay couple could find any location where no one whatsoever would be biased against them. But that's a problem with homophobia as it is with racism. Would you say Jews shouldn't adopt out of fear of hatred for their children? (And racism exists, by the ton.) When did I say anything like that?

It's irrelevant. For example, a gay couple could live in an area near I live that's largely immigrant based (more conservative in general) I doubt they'd be in physical danger but they'd still be hated. The point I'm trying to make is it's unlikely a gay couple could find any location where no one whatsoever would be biased against them.

:unsure: I saw that too :blink: Can't say I've heard of them... anything in particular they're known for? "Stretching" reality. I'll just leave it at that. Oh I lol'd :lol:

You live in Israel. I'm not hated inside Israel though. And I doubt there's 1 country in the world that isn't hated by some people. I'm sure a gay person won't be hated inside their own house, but outside they may be. My point is that you put up with a certain amount of hate in your general area, and homosexuals are no different. But hatred towards Israel does not affect me, Romy, as a person. Just like hatred from California to NY doesn't affect the specific individuals (as individuals) of NY. I'd say it does. I don't hate gay people. But if I did, I'd hate gay people, not the individual. I'd hate them because they are lumped into a group of "gay people" who I hate. I'm sure the terrorists lobbing missiles into Israel don't hate Romy - but Romy is Jewish, so they hate you.

You live in Israel. I'm not hated inside Israel though. And I doubt there's 1 country in the world that isn't hated by some people. I'm sure a gay person won't be hated inside their own house, but outside they may be. My point is that you put up with a certain amount of hate in your general area, and homosexuals are no different.

You live in Israel.

I can see it on the regular TIF skin. I can't. What browser are you guys using? Chrome here.

Should black parents not be allowed to adopt a white child? That could cause confusion in other students because of the difference in races. Maybe the kid could explain to others that their family is just like everyone elses. Link in the OP, http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/06/07/lesbian.children.adjustment/index.html , studies have shown that children of lesbians tend to have fewer behavioral problems. So for someone to have two mommies might even be better off than someone with heterosexual parents. Would children with no parents, stuck in the orphanage because they weren't allowed to go with the gay couple, be better off? You're literally saying that a child with no parents should continue to have no parents because you don't agree with certain lifestyles. Maybe the child can learn that having two parents of the same sex is okay, they're as good of a family as any other. I've known Caucasian / black students adopted by Asian parents throughout elementary, middle, and high school. We never treated them any different at all. In most communities today, race is no longer treated as a big issue, and in fact,, I didn't even really acknowledge people of other races were different from myself for a while. This is what I meant by current state. Let's rewind to within the year after the Civil War ended. Would I allow black parents to adopt a white child? I would strongly suggest against this too. The wounds would simply be too raw at this point, and it'll create more tension among both parties and in the life of the child. I never said that the children would be worse or better off. I'm not surprised that there's a correlation between good behavior and homosexual parents. But that doesn't change the fact that homosexual is still seen as "strange" in the eyes of many people, and thus in many kids. I've seen kids bullied for various mental or physical defections and to kids who don't understand homosexuality and who are taught differently by their parents, it would seem the children will experience a more challenging childhood. Are they better for it? Maybe. Correlation is not causation. But is it more trying? Logically, yes. And from narratives by those who grew up in those conditions, yes. It has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with their life style. It has to do with the fact that I don't think a student should have to deal with all the negative feelings surrounding homosexuals (whether or not these feelings are warranted - I don't feel they are at all, but you can't force people to think differently), and yes, I realize remaining in an orphanage is also a similarly trying lifestyle but I'm not ready to believe that being adopted with gay parents isn't worse. Especially in communities where gays are still openly rejected (such as states that still fight against gay marriage). You suggest having no parents at all is better than having gay/lesbian parents? No, he's suggesting that having no parents at all is easier from a social standpoint a lot of the time. Of course it's better from other standpoints to have parents.

That's tricky. I'd just go with the "different interests" thing unless you want to be brutally honest.

You can always go straight to the bios, a screen will come up asking you to hit delete or f12 to enter setup, or some related key.