I can't imagine why it would need to be legal in the first place? Just marry a girl

 

 

 

Haha i swear i read somewhere that this dude goes to an Ivy League Uni, standards must be slipping if its true.

I don't think this is right. Being gay is wrong. It's blasphemy. It's genocide.

 

 

 

I don't believe they were born that way, but rather their life experiences changed them. It makes me cringe whenever a gay person uses that excuse.

 

 

 

You can go back to being normal if you want. You can stop going against The Lord if you please. If you can change one way, who's to say you can't change back?

 

 

 

Go on, flame me.

 

It actually makes me feel a bit sick when I see people posting stuff like this. I'm straight myself but I'm very close friends with a large number of homosexuals, both male and female, as well as having gay family members. All but one of them say they have never had feelings towards the opposite sex, that they were born that way. So they can't go "back" to being "normal" as they weren't straight in the first place. They didn't "change" that way, they've always been like it without being able to help it. I also resent your usage of the word "normal" there. Who are you to say what's normal? Homosexuality is more "normal" than religion in my opinion, I'll show you what I mean.

 

 

 

Let me turn this around - I think religion is terrifying, it scares me how so many people like you have allowed themselves to be brainwashed by a book. You definitely weren't born that way; had you never heard of the Bible you might still believe in there being a sort of higher being or whatever but you wouldn't believe all these stories about a man getting two of each species on a boat and getting it to float for forty days (seriously, it's phenomenal how many species there are, consider the amount of insects and then the fact that there's more than just one species of pig, monkey, horse etc, plus he'd have to get fungi, bacteria and plants on board too seeing as they're living organisms, most of which would die underwater - it's obviously an impossible task), and women being made out of ribs (LOL).

 

 

 

The point I'm making is you were definitely not born believing in Jesus, your life experiences changed you. You can go back to being "normal" (atheist) if you want. You can stop going against common sense if you please. If you can change one way, who's to say you can't change back? Go on, flame me.

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with every single thing you said there. Myself, I am not gay, yet I have no right to criticise another beings lifestyle. I do not like dissing religion, however, the comment you referred to was asking for it. Your argument was flawless to be honest. Why can a homosexual change who they are, yet a religious follower cannot then make a judgement on what he/she has experienced and become athiest?

 

 

 

Hipocrisy there hedgehog.

I don't think this is right. Being gay is wrong. It's blasphemy. It's genocide.

 

 

 

Genocide is the logical conclusion of the fear of a stranger. Here's a mirror; take a look in it because your indifference and attitude is what perpetuates the systems that result in genocide.

 

 

 

 

Dolt.

It's blasphemy.

 

 

 

Is it even possible to anger god? If anything, he should be angry at himself since he caused you to commit "blasphemy". I also wonder this about why people make such a big deal about not believing. If it really angers him that you don't believe him, even though he led you to not believe him, then is it a god worth worshiping? My beliefs should be of my own account - not because I'm scared into them.

In other news, tourist attraction has boomed 300%.

 

 

 

It's good to see places like that actully share an open mind.

I just wish that we could define the rules of marriage (and what it's purpose is, exactly) universally and be done with it, since it's a social construct in the end. If two men or women can be married, why isn't it allowed to have three or more people in a marriage of any combination of genders? Can animals be married? Can inanimate objects be married to people or animals? Heck, can inanimate objects be married to other inanimate objects?

 

 

 

At first glance they're increasingly silly questions, but the fact is unwritten/vague rules don't work in a world where common sense doesn't work in the legal system. Let's just have a system that says what the terms and conditions are and be done with it.

 

 

 

I personally don't care whether gay marriage is allowed, just that we stop squabbling over something we invented ourselves.

I quite agree with the person who you are quoting. May I ask you, Robert, what does set us apart?

 

Our ability to communicate on a level far superior to that of any other animal.

 

Our ability to create what we imagine. This is what makes us such great civilization-builders.

 

Our ability to use logic and reasoning to solve problems.

I quite agree with the person who you are quoting. May I ask you, Robert, what does set us apart?

 

Our ability to communicate on a level far superior to that of any other animal.

 

Our ability to create what we imagine. This is what makes us such great civilization-builders.

 

Our ability to use logic and reasoning to solve problems.

 

Animals can communicate with each other. We just can't get cross species communication.

 

We imagine spaceships and flying cars that run completely on electricity, and have for a long time, still waitin' on them.

 

We made up the problems, of course we know how to solve them.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

 

 

 

Well we do know who wrote it, and where they supposedly got their information. But I agree, superstition has no place in government. Also, religion has no place to interfere with people's rights.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

 

 

 

Well we do know who wrote it, and where they supposedly got their information. But I agree, superstition has no place in government. Also, religion has no place to interfere with people's rights.

 

 

 

I'm glad you see the basic picture of it.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

 

 

 

Well we do know who wrote it, and where they supposedly got their information. But I agree, superstition has no place in government. Also, religion has no place to interfere with people's rights.

 

 

 

It doesn't matter who wrote it, but who edited it.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

 

 

 

Well we do know who wrote it, and where they supposedly got their information. But I agree, superstition has no place in government. Also, religion has no place to interfere with people's rights.

 

 

 

It doesn't matter who wrote it, but who edited it.

 

 

 

Agreed.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

 

 

 

Well we do know who wrote it, and where they supposedly got their information. But I agree, superstition has no place in government. Also, religion has no place to interfere with people's rights.

 

 

 

It doesn't matter who wrote it, but who edited it.

 

Who knows what kind of information was "lost" during translations?

 

 

 

And yeah, religion should not interfere with human rights.

I quite agree with the person who you are quoting. May I ask you, Robert, what does set us apart?

 

Our ability to communicate on a level far superior to that of any other animal.

 

Our ability to create what we imagine. This is what makes us such great civilization-builders.

 

Our ability to use logic and reasoning to solve problems.

May I inquire how you know that we can communicate at a superior level to that of animals? Our ability to create what we imagine, hmm. Does that really set us apart? Animals can create what they can imagine given the tools the need. Sure they're not going to manipulate things to a degree that we can, but that's not a difference, only a variance in skill. Other creatures use logic all the time. Sometimes they make mistakes because of their ignorance. Are you implying that we do not?

 

 

 

In regards to my statement, I was not speaking in a literal sense. Of course we are "mapped" differently, if only by accident. But does that not give us a common ancestry: a series of accidents? You could point out many differences with simply five letters, A, U, T, C, and G.

My mom thinks they should be able to form "unions", with all the benefits of a marriage, but not called "marriage".

 

 

 

I told her that only the Bible says that. Now, I'm not bashing anyone's religion here, as I respect it, but we had a good conversation about how we shouldn't base everything off the Bible, because we don't know who wrote it, we don't know if all the stuff in it is true at all. So why should we go off a book that tells us marriage is between a man and a woman if we don't even know the source of this information?

 

 

 

I hope that made some sense.

 

Thing is, I'm not even sure the Bible directly says man+woman, back then polygamy was accepted, if I'm not wrong.

Intelligence should be based on the species's ability to live in harmony with our environment. Compared to every animal I know, we're the least intelligent.

Some animals are pretty intelligent, elephants are, so are dolphins, and some primates. But, I don't think we're superior to animals, we just happen to be at the top of the food chain. We have truly dominated the planet for no more than a few thousand years, though I imagine we are the first species of animal to control the entire planet, do to our ability to adapt to different environments. Grass also dominates the entire world, but it's not an animal.

 

 

 

On the topic, I'm glad my state has already legalized it, and am glad to know others are following us and those who legalized it before us.

Yeah. I hear my state (NJ) is in the process.. I think? I'll have to look it up.

May I inquire how you know that we can communicate at a superior level to that of animals?

 

 

 

We can create enduring documents (books) and communicate even through outer space. The most an animal can do is leave behind indistinct marks which implies nothing more than "I was here" and they can use sonar to communicate at distances but it doesn't travel nearly as far or fast as our internet or radio. We are quite clearly superior when it comes to communication.

 

 

 

Our ability to create what we imagine, hmm. Does that really set us apart? Animals can create what they can imagine given the tools the need.

 

 

 

I agree - that was a bad example. Animals can visualize things such as dams and build them. However, our imaginations are far more complex than an animal's. We can think of traveling through time (although we can't physically do it) which is far more complex than thinking of a dam.

 

 

 

Sure they're not going to manipulate things to a degree that we can, but that's not a difference, only a variance in skill.

 

 

 

That's a contradiction. Either they are different or they are the same.

 

 

 

Other creatures use logic all the time. Sometimes they make mistakes because of their ignorance. Are you implying that we do not?

 

 

 

Not logic on our level. You're trying to convince us with your intellectuality that humans are no different than animals. Doesn't that alone say something about our differences? An animal can't try to convince other animals anything like that.

New Hampshire just became cool :thumbup:

Some animals are pretty intelligent, elephants are, so are dolphins, and some primates. But, I don't think we're superior to animals, we just happen to be at the top of the food chain. We have truly dominated the planet for no more than a few thousand years, though I imagine we are the first species of animal to control the entire planet, do to our ability to adapt to different environments. Grass also dominates the entire world, but it's not an animal.

 

 

 

On the topic, I'm glad my state has already legalized it, and am glad to know others are following us and those who legalized it before us.

 

Dont forget Eskimos. [/simpsons joke]

I'm happy people are getting what they need to live their way in life, that doesn't harm other people in a serious way - even if this is just in America, in a few states though.

 

 

 

Too bad America has so many states unlike Canada, where it would be just 13. :P

I can run a a five minute mile while you're trailing behind me by at least two minutes. You can run, can't you?

I'm happy people are getting what they need to live their way in life, that doesn't harm other people in a serious way - even if this is just in America, in a few states though.

 

 

 

Too bad America has so many states unlike Canada, where it would be just 13. :P

 

 

 

We started with 13, we just kept owning the other guys so much we had to make 50.