Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Gay rights

512 replies to this topic
Burbalade
  • Burbalade

    Ebay Wizard

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2012

#481

Posted 05 September 2013 - 03:47 AM Edited by Burbalade, 05 September 2013 - 03:49 AM.

Looks like a bunch of mindless sheep using a mob mentality to get what they want, not caring how it may make others feel. Because that's ALWAYS the right way to go about things, because it's not like other people have feelings, right?

@Otter: Remembered? You never forgot. I've had the same avatar for six years and to my knowledge no one else on the forum has used it.

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#482

Posted 05 September 2013 - 03:49 AM

QUOTE (Burbalade @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 19:47)
Looks like a bunch of mindless sheep using a mob mentality to get what they want. Because that's ALWAYS the right way to go about things.

Million man march, motherf*cker. Storm the Bastille!

Seriously, do you even live on the same planet as us, or are you some elaborate chatbot designed to start flame wars?

El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil"

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#483

Posted 05 September 2013 - 03:49 AM

QUOTE (Burbalade @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 21:47)
Looks like a bunch of mindless sheep using a mob mentality to get what they want, not caring how it may make others feel. Because that's ALWAYS the right way to go about things, because it's not like other people have feelings, right?

you're an idiot.

they're human beings.

Burbalade
  • Burbalade

    Ebay Wizard

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2012

#484

Posted 05 September 2013 - 03:51 AM

No... Really?

I thought they were literally sheep.

You know? The animal?

It wouldn't matter if they were because animals still have rights too you know.

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#485

Posted 05 September 2013 - 05:19 AM

QUOTE (Otter @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 19:49)
QUOTE (Burbalade @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 19:47)
Looks like a bunch of mindless sheep using a mob mentality to get what they want. Because that's ALWAYS the right way to go about things.

Million man march, motherf*cker. Storm the Bastille!

Seriously, do you even live on the same planet as us, or are you some elaborate chatbot designed to start flame wars?

Selfie quote?

Anyhow, yeah. "Mindless sheep" get sh*t done all the time.
  • Melchior likes this

Vercetti27
  • Vercetti27

    Staunton Faction

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2009

#486

Posted 05 September 2013 - 06:43 AM

QUOTE (Otter)
@ Vercetti - seriously, once again, just so you understand: you came into a thread armed with no knowledge about the context whatsoever, and because the thread had "gay" in the title, you took it upon yourself to post (wrong) statistics about AIDs. Do you not understand what's so incredibly stupid about that?


Well actually there is nothing in this thread to discuss, to me homosexuals should get every right straight people should but if we're talking about morality there really is no debate because it's either black or white as far as I'm concerned. I came in and just posted a random AIDS reference because it was the first thing I thought of and the statistics were only posted to get you off my case. They in fact true and I have no interest in this subject. I can see you love confrontation so maybe you should just stand in front of a mirror and continue this conversation with yourself.

gtaxpert
  • gtaxpert

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#487

Posted 05 September 2013 - 06:45 AM

QUOTE (GrandMaster Smith @ Thursday, Sep 5 2013, 02:25)
Human beings are born completely blank slates. If I were to have lived through all your own personal life experiences I essentially would be you. Who we are and what we become is the product of our upbringing and free will.

no...

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013
    Best Debater 2012
    Best Debater 2011

#488

Posted 05 September 2013 - 06:56 AM

QUOTE (gtaxpert @ Thursday, Sep 5 2013, 07:45)
QUOTE (GrandMaster Smith @ Thursday, Sep 5 2013, 02:25)
Human beings are born completely blank slates. If I were to have lived through all your own personal life experiences I essentially would be you. Who we are and what we become is the product of our upbringing and free will.

no...

Quite. To claim that genetics have absolutely no role in shaping individuals is utterly lunacy.

gtaxpert
  • gtaxpert

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#489

Posted 05 September 2013 - 07:04 AM Edited by gtaxpert, 05 September 2013 - 07:48 AM.

QUOTE (Burbalade @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 22:39)
A gay man has just as much right to marry a woman as a straight man does.

hahahaha, reading through this thread is hilarious.
QUOTE (GrandMaster Smith @ Thursday, Sep 5 2013, 03:29)
Otter I just have to ask out of curiousity, are you yourself gay? I suppose it would explain a lot of your heated posts in here and why you get so easily offended if you are.

As a gay man, have you experienced oppression yourself, and if so in what ways?
Do you have a boyfriend whom you wish to marry but are refused a marriage certificate?
In what ways do you feel your rights are denied as a gay man?


I suppose the same questions could be asked towards El_Diablo since I always see him being very passionate about homosexuality and his keen knowledge of how gay people are mistreated as well.

haha, so now all people offended by bigotry towards homosexuals are suspected to be closeted homos. I guess it's hard to understand why bigotry is offensive when you are a bigot yourself.

And you have claimed homosexuality is immoral because it doesn't 'work' because they cant reproduce. So according to you someone not functioning made them immoral. Then I replied with this:

"How about a person that is supposed to bake bread for the community, but his whole family dies because he is Syrian and the United States bombed his family, so he doesn't function anymore because hes traumatized.

Is this person being immoral by not functioning just like homosexuals being immoral for not being able to reproduce?"

But you never adressed it. And LOL @ the hay rights stuff. That hay rights essay made me lol really hard. If that isn't taken from anywhere else on the internet then that's a pretty crazy effort.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013
    Best Debater 2012
    Best Debater 2011

#490

Posted 05 September 2013 - 08:03 AM

The "homosexuality is immoral because it isn't functional in reproduction" argument falls down on two grounds. One, that logic stipulates that people who are old or infertile are also immoral as they cannot reproduce, and it ignores the fact that it is possible for homosexual couples to produce children using the wonders of modern medicine. It's hilariously flawed.
  • Cilogy likes this

gtaxpert
  • gtaxpert

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#491

Posted 05 September 2013 - 08:13 AM

It's just very strange to define morality in terms of functionality. That's a new moral system that has formerly been unknown to me.

Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#492

Posted 05 September 2013 - 10:33 AM

QUOTE (GrandMaster Smith @ Thursday, Sep 5 2013, 06:14)
It's all about tax breaks and all that fun stuff, quite pathetic how marriage is being turned inside out to be revolved around money and legalities rather than harboring love itself to bring new life into this world..

Except that marriage is only good for tax breaks. Other than that it's meaningless. Couples that really trust each other don't need to get married. Marriage = fake sense of security.
  • epoxi likes this

D- Ice
  • D- Ice

    Gangsta

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2006
  • None

#493

Posted 05 September 2013 - 11:24 AM

QUOTE (Burbalade @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 22:47)
Looks like a bunch of mindless sheep using a mob mentality to get what they want, not caring how it may make others feel. Because that's ALWAYS the right way to go about things, because it's not like other people have feelings, right?

@Otter: Remembered? You never forgot. I've had the same avatar for six years and to my knowledge no one else on the forum has used it.

How does a bunch of people marching and waving flags makes you feel then?
Are you intimidated by the festival atmosphere, or the colourful flags?
I guarantee both are quite harmless.

@ sivispacem:
Very true indeed, the "non-functional" arguement is completely invalid.
Also, to reinforce your first point, most intercourse between heterosexual people isn't intended to produce kids.
  • Otter likes this

FirstLadyofGTA
  • FirstLadyofGTA

    Killer in Heels

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2013
  • None

#494

Posted 06 September 2013 - 06:48 PM Edited by FirstLadyofGTA, 06 September 2013 - 06:57 PM.

Wow didn't log in for a day and so many posts on this..!   

@Sivispacem

''wonders of modern science''...yes modern science can be wonderful however let's not pretend science is always moral...just because homosexuals can have children that way doesn't mean that people who are opposed to it are going to be brought around to your way of thinking.  Many people don't want to live in a 'Brave New World.'

 

 

BTW...I'm playing devil's advocate here....it's fun. :)


gtaxpert
  • gtaxpert

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#495

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:01 PM Edited by gtaxpert, 06 September 2013 - 07:03 PM.

''wonders of modern science''...yes modern science can be wonderful however let's not pretend science is always moral

Science is actually amoral. People are moral.

 

just because homosexuals can have children that way doesn't mean that people who are opposed to it are going to be brought around to your way of thinking.  Many people don't want to live in a 'Brave New World.'

You haven't understood his point at all. What we were discussing was wether being able to reproduce had anything to do with morality. Me and him have argued that it does not, and his comment about 'modern science' added to this that even if it did, homosexuals can reproduce because of modern science.


Cilogy
  • Cilogy

    SILLuhjee

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jul 2007
  • United-States

#496

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:13 PM

Just so we're clear, gay people can still reproduce, they aren't f*cking infertile or some sh*t.


gtaxpert
  • gtaxpert

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#497

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:17 PM

Just so we're clear, gay people can still reproduce, they aren't f*cking infertile or some sh*t.

Yeah, but I think the point is that two men or two women can have a baby because of modern science.


Raavi
  • Raavi

    Allergic to bullsh*t

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2012
  • Vatican-City
  • Winner of World Cup 2014 Prediction League
    Best Forum Ledby 2013
    Most Improved 2013

#498

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:20 PM

This thread is just a podium for bigots to spout their hatred really. I don't think homosexuality is a debatable topic. Because anyone with negative views about homosexuality is a bigot, end of discussion.

 

 

And that concludes this thread.

  • gtaxpert likes this

theonlytobyever
  • theonlytobyever

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Nov 2011
  • None

#499

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:39 PM

As long as Andrew and Ryan can take their frustrations out on eath others bums and not the innocent forum-members, then by all means give them their rights.
  • TECHN9CiAN and 018361 like this

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#500

Posted 06 September 2013 - 08:05 PM

Is Satan involved in any way, shape or form? Debate *respectfully*.

 

"Satan" and "Debate" offered up in the same sentence, and by the looks of things, seriously too. Wow.

 

I'll put it this way - is gay marriage harming anyone? And is it bettering the lives of some? I'd say no to the former, yes to the latter. So it would be fair and logical to allow it.

  • The Yokel and TECHN9CiAN like this

Mince
  • Mince

    Mnage trois

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2008
  • United-States

#501

Posted 06 September 2013 - 09:34 PM Edited by mincemate003, 06 September 2013 - 09:34 PM.

This thread is just a podium for bigots to spout their hatred really. I don't think homosexuality is a debatable topic. Because anyone with negative views about homosexuality is a bigot, end of discussion.

 Just wanted to point out that the thread is titled "Gay rights" and not "Homosexuality". Gay rights would imply political advancement for us gays, which would involve new public policy. Such public policy is indeed a debatable topic. Gay rights advocates may have different ideas than they had ten years prior, and that may hold true ten years in the future. The same applies to others as well. If something like that changes in society, to me it seems shortsighted to cancel out all discussion about it or lump in all discussion of homosexuality with the discussion about recognition and protection of same-sex couples.

 

I'm gay. I can't wait to get my hands on a dick one day. But I wouldn't want to be called a bigot or have my freedom of speech taken away from me just because I criticized some part of pro-gay legislation or had a different idea of how it should be done. That should apply to everyone, even with the prior distinction I mentioned earlier. Opinions are not as black and white as some may think. There's many shades of gray on every subject, including this one, and that can apply to people of all sexualities.

 

With that said, I can't say that I agree or disagree with any particular side or person in this topic so far (I've read most of it through). Just wanted to make that distinction.

  • TECHN9CiAN likes this

RonDutch
  • RonDutch

    Anarchy 99 Holland @SocialClub

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2013

#502

Posted 06 September 2013 - 09:43 PM Edited by RonDutch, 06 September 2013 - 09:43 PM.

Lets see what we can call "insane" shall we,  Two men who love each other and wish to spend their lives together in peace. Or a certain group who believe in a invisible man in the sky, Take every decision with a outdated fairytale book they call the "bible" and wish to force their opinions and morals unto others.

 

Tough choise...  

  • TECHN9CiAN likes this

Mince
  • Mince

    Mnage trois

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2008
  • United-States

#503

Posted 06 September 2013 - 10:07 PM

Lets see what we can call "insane" shall we,  Two men who love each other and wish to spend their lives together in peace. Or a certain group who believe in a invisible man in the sky, Take every decision with a outdated fairytale book they call the "bible" and wish to force their opinions and morals unto others.

 

Tough choise...  

You know those groups are not mutually exclusive, correct? Not everyone that is religious is straight, and not everyone that is gay/bisexual/other is irreligious. I don't buy into the existence of God at all myself, but you're putting gays down as well by denying them the freedom to decide their religious views.


Chunkyman
  • Chunkyman

    Foot Soldier

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2012

#504

Posted 06 September 2013 - 10:46 PM

As a matter of principle, the state shouldn't have any involvement in marriage whatsoever. It's perfectly capable of being a contractual arrangement between adults, that does not require some grand overseer lording over consenting individuals.

  • Mince, El Zilcho and Rudy like this

gtaxpert
  • gtaxpert

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#505

Posted 06 September 2013 - 10:58 PM Edited by gtaxpert, 06 September 2013 - 10:59 PM.

This thread is just a podium for bigots to spout their hatred really. I don't think homosexuality is a debatable topic. Because anyone with negative views about homosexuality is a bigot, end of discussion.

 

 Just wanted to point out that the thread is titled "Gay rights" and not "Homosexuality". Gay rights would imply political advancement for us gays, which would involve new public policy. Such public policy is indeed a debatable topic. Gay rights advocates may have different ideas than they had ten years prior, and that may hold true ten years in the future. The same applies to others as well. If something like that changes in society, to me it seems shortsighted to cancel out all discussion about it or lump in all discussion of homosexuality with the discussion about recognition and protection of same-sex couples.

 

I'm gay. I can't wait to get my hands on a dick one day. But I wouldn't want to be called a bigot or have my freedom of speech taken away from me just because I criticized some part of pro-gay legislation or had a different idea of how it should be done. That should apply to everyone, even with the prior distinction I mentioned earlier. Opinions are not as black and white as some may think. There's many shades of gray on every subject, including this one, and that can apply to people of all sexualities.

 

With that said, I can't say that I agree or disagree with any particular side or person in this topic so far (I've read most of it through). Just wanted to make that distinction.

Could you please elaborate on the shades of grey when it comes to equality for homosexuals? Because I think equality between gay people and straight people is a concept that is quite clear.

 

Furthermore, my opinion of it being 'non debatable' was mostly aimed at this specific internet topic. When it comes to actual political ideas that need to become reality debate is inevitable and essential. In this topic it is just a podium for bigotry though.


Mince
  • Mince

    Mnage trois

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2008
  • United-States

#506

Posted 06 September 2013 - 11:19 PM Edited by mincemate003, 06 September 2013 - 11:21 PM.

 

Could you please elaborate on the shades of grey when it comes to equality for homosexuals? Because I think equality between gay people and straight people is a concept that is quite clear.

 

Furthermore, my opinion of it being 'non debatable' was mostly aimed at this specific internet topic. When it comes to actual political ideas that need to become reality debate is inevitable and essential. In this topic it is just a podium for bigotry though.

 

See, now you're changing it up. You said "homosexuality". That includes the trait of being gay and the actions that such people will inevitably engage in. I can't think of a good reason to oppose that. I wouldn't exactly want to sit around all day hating myself, would I?

 

But "equality for homosexuals" does indicate political action. I would say that includes things such as:

 

- Updating of laws that dictate what marriages are allowed

- Language of marriage forms

- Updating protected classes in hate crime and hate speech laws

- Updating protected classes in anti-discrimination laws

- Process of adoption for same-sex couples

- Laws about surrogacy and artificial insemination for same-sex couples

- Laws banning gay conversion for minors or/and adults

 

Probably loads more as well, since I'm not on expert on the details of such laws, I just tend to follow their passage and such.

 

There are certain aspects of the above that, from a political standpoint (moral objection to anything does not matter for me really), I have questions about.

 

- How does allowing same-sex couples to get married suddenly make marriage truly equal for all? Last I checked, such laws only changed the gender requirements. They don't allow any people to go out and get a marriage. It's the same laws with different gender requirements (in some instances, tighter age requirements, as seen in Brazil). The government is still handing out its government certificates on its own terms.

 

- People who aren't married are still missing out on the benefits that married couples get. For me it's not a case of gay marriage vs. straight marriage, it's just a case of marriage vs. no marriage, and to me, legalizing same-sex marriage is expanding government control over marriage. That's not to say I'd vote against it, but again, it's largely incorrect to assume that all opposition to same-sex marriage comes from moral objections. Imagine some advocate for marriage equality saying something to the effect of "You wouldn't have a problem with any sort of straight marriage".... are you sure about that :)? I pretty much agree with Chunkyman in this regard.

 

- I fully support hate crime laws, but from my less-than-professional knowledge of hate speech laws, I'm not that convinced of the concept of "hate speech" anyway. I do not think that punishing people for their opinions (I.E. not actions that discriminate against others, just the speech) designates them being labeled hateful. I would apply this to all of the groups of crazy Christians that spend their time crusading against gays. Do I agree with them? Not at all. Do we need to make laws specifically to shut them up and designate them as hate groups? Who cares?

 

Also, regarding the idea that everyone in this topic that dared to dissent from the gay rights side of things in some way, I'm not convinced that all of them are bigots. Like I said above: who cares? Why do we need to label everyone and shut down opposing remarks?

  • gtaxpert likes this

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Unknown

#507

Posted 07 September 2013 - 12:18 AM


But that's not what this is about. So what exactly is it about?

 

A number of things: visitation rights in hospitals and prisons, the tax breaks you mentioned (not really sure why you think those should be restricted to heterosexual couples), becoming a step closer to ending the stigma surrounding same sex relationships, and of course, an objection to the idea that a social group should be separate but equal.


Rudy
  • Rudy

    Mack Pimp

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2013
  • France

#508

Posted 07 September 2013 - 02:41 AM

As a matter of principle, the state shouldn't have any involvement in marriage whatsoever. It's perfectly capable of being a contractual arrangement between adults, that does not require some grand overseer lording over consenting individuals.

My thoughts exactly on marriages.

 

It always amuses the sh*t out of me when someone gives religion as a reason why they are against gay marriage. That should also mean that anyone who isn't of their religion isn't actually married, since, well, they're not of their religion. But you don't see Christians railing against Hindus marrying, or against a justice of the peace performing the marriage ceremony, you only find them (aside from a few wackos) campaigning against Gay marriage. *SPOILER ALERT*

Spoiler


familyguy98
  • familyguy98

    Player Hater

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2013

#509

Posted 07 September 2013 - 08:50 AM

In my honest opinion gays dont deserve equal rights. They have unormal brains that dont operate correctly and should be treated as those who dont have normal brains.

F4L?
  • F4L?

    Well I'm sorry, Princess.

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2010
  • None

#510

Posted 07 September 2013 - 09:10 AM

Well Hopefully over here in Australia, if the Ruddinator wins, which I sincerely hope he does for many reasons, Gay Rights will be introduced, it's gonna be a sweet time for gay people. I am glad we are finally moving forward with this.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users