<p>duurrrr wat hilery???? i duno wut you is be talkin bout???? maybe i oughta go tek a nap?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????</p>
<p>Once you get past the big words, there's really no underlying message except "The government owes me everything and anything bad is the fault of social injustice."</p>
<p>yeah but i think we straight people are doing a good enough job of debasing the "sacred" and "holy" privilege of marriage ourselves, considering how high the divorce rate and number of pregnancies out of wedlock are. </p>
<p>plus gay couples can always adopt a child. surely, even if you think homosexuals "have much more promiscuous and unhealthy lifestyles" (HA! what a stereotype...and so not true... i think youre talking about america in general) its better than growing up in an orphanage. i have heard countless stories of very loving and responsible gay parents. </p>
<p>why do you think homosexuals dont deserve these privileges besides the fact that they "can't reproduce" (which is clearly not a necessity for marriage), and the point above that i already rebutted? is it simply because they aren't like you?</p>
<p>also, what would you do if you had a kid some day who was gay? clearly being a hard-core republican does not prevent your own kids from being gay (its not a choice, get with it). See Dick Cheney for the most public example...</p>
<p>Bah. I was born and raised and still living in Los Angeles. I speak fluent Liberalese.</p>
<p>
[quote]
duurrrr wat hilery???? i duno wut you is be talkin bout???? maybe i oughta go tek a nap??????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????
[/quote]
</p>
<p>fabulous comeback!!</p>
<p>First off...its not yet proven that its not a choice...i dont think its a coincidence that the number of gay people seems to be increasing with the increasing social "acceptance" of it. </p>
<p>Second, its not fair to put children in gay homes. The children don't have a choice. You want them to be ridiculed in their life or grow up with a skewed perspective?</p>
<p>i believe you are right...time to go take my pills now eh hilary!!!</p>
<p>also, ElCommando, i feel sorry for you as you are clearly uneducated and the only basis you have for any of your arguements has been michael jackson. michael jackson is a psycho, no one is denying that, but there are also tons of straight men who molest children. i believe you are confusing homosexuality with pedophilia.</p>
<p>arguements (notice you speeled it rong)</p>
<p>I think i would know wat a pedophile is my dad arrested one at a baseball field is and he was my assistant coach. I think he molested this kid because he was friends with the kids parents and drove the kid around and stuff. Its really sick. </p>
<p>I understand they are not connected BUT the causes of them may be. SUch as the kid being molested by...his mother and then turning gay because he cant take a womans touch or the other way around. You are obviously a "liberal without a cause" -_- because you came off super mean with wat you thought was right. AM I still stupid now? Or are you the dumb one for misreading wat i posted. Idiot.</p>
<p>Statistically, the gay population is MUCH more promiscuous and unhealthy. Anyway you put it, it hurts your colon. Plus you have the advent of STD's. Thanks again for the AIDS Virus guys.</p>
<p>I think they should have the rights of married couples, but just without the label of a church christened marriage. I really don't see how that is so unreasonable.</p>
<p>If I had a kid who was gay (GOD FORBID), I would love him/her just as I would any of my children, but I would highly dissaprove of their lifestyle.</p>
<p>
[quote]
yeah but i think we straight people are doing a good enough job of debasing the "sacred" and "holy" privilege of marriage ourselves, considering how high the divorce rate and number of pregnancies out of wedlock are.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm all for marriage reform. Just in the other way of what you're thinking. </p>
<p>
[quote]
plus gay couples can always adopt a child. surely, even if you think homosexuals "have much more promiscuous and unhealthy lifestyles" (HA! what a stereotype...and so not true... i think youre talking about america in general) its better than growing up in an orphanage. i have heard countless stories of very loving and responsible gay parents.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, but there have been psychological case studies on both sides of the aisle; unfortunately, there are a greater number of reports, at least that I've seen, that indicate a.. well, lifestyle off normalcy (not of, off!)</p>
<p>
[quote]
why do you think homosexuals dont deserve these privileges besides the fact that they "can't reproduce" (which is clearly not a necessity for marriage), and the point above that i already rebutted? is it simply because they aren't like you?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Once again, you're not getting this fact in: it is a privilege, not a right. The Constitution guarantees the basic ** rights ** -- not privileges. And please don't use that "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" quote on me -- that was a Framer. Not the Constitution.</p>
<p>Im sure some of the "liberals" arguing on this board are gay...</p>
<p>To put it simply: gays, like every American citizen, have the right to marry (just not someone of the same sex).</p>
<p>ElCommando said it not me......
(I was thinking it though)</p>
<p>how am i a liberal without a cause? i think i'm explaining my reasons pretty thoroughly...</p>
<p>and yes, you are the stupid one because your posts made no sense.</p>
<p>also homosexuality isnt caused by someone's mom molesting them...where did you come up with that?</p>
<p>also, bigjake, you said
[quote]
You want them to be ridiculed in their life or grow up with a skewed perspective?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>um, wont you all be the people who will be ridiculing them? </p>
<p>and personally i think your perspective is skewed because you are the ones who cant accept people who are different from you. maybe someone should have taught you when you were growing up why it is wrong to discriminate.</p>
<p>"And where does it say in the Constitution that it must protect the same privilege as others?"</p>
<p>The 14th Amendment.</p>
<p>"Yes it does change a privilege for us. Marriage is sacred. Marriage is holy. Marriage is the incarnation of the love between a man and a woman and the step before the birth of a child. There is nothing on earth more holy than a man and a woman joining as one in a ceremony forever."</p>
<p>This is at best your personal opinion. I happen to think it's just an unfortunate piece of archaic, naive religious ideology. In either case, you haven't given a single way in which gay marriage would abridge the rights/privaleges of heterosexual couples. All you've done is tell us all what marriage means to you. Bravo. Do you want a cookie?</p>
<p>"They cannot reproduce and have much more promiscuous and unhealthy lifestyles that children would be raised around"</p>
<p>Reproduction and marriage are not, never have been, and never will be sinonymous. Furthermore, while statistically gays have more sexual partners, being homosexual and promiscuous are not mutually exclusive. Part of the reason for that type of lifestyle is the way they have been marginalized in society.</p>
<p>"If we allow this, then why not polygamy or anything of that nature?"</p>
<p>If we ban it, then why not ban miscegenation or anything of that nature? At some point you have to deal with each issue individually and not lump them together.</p>
<p>"When Congress makes a law allowing gay marriage, then it is perfectly fine because that decision will reflect the desires of the population. As of now, a majority of people is opposed to gay marriage. Last time i checked, we still lived in a democracy. "</p>
<p>I wouldn't dream of subverting democracy. I will not, however, sit silent until congress DOES decide to allow gay marriage. Silence doesn't bring about change.</p>
<p>"We live in a democracy. As long as a policy is not in violation of the Constitution, it is up to the people to decide social policy. Plain and simple. Sexual orientation has not been recognized as a suspect classification under the 14th Amendment, so banning gay marriage is not unconstitutional"</p>
<p>Not changing the laws to allow gay marriage and outright banning it are two veeeery different things. There former, while I oppose it, is justifiable (to a degree). The latter absolutely is not.</p>
<p>hahahahahaha.... well i gtg to bed and hilary i hope my post wasnt too CONFUSING for you</p>
<p>well no i'm not gay but whatever you want to think is fine. </p>
<p>often people who are the most homophobic are actually closeted homosexuals themselves! (ElCommando...? its okay we accept you)</p>
<p>"Reproduction and marriage are not, never have been, and never will be sinonymous." </p>
<p>Yeah they pretty much have been - FOREVER</p>
<p>Well yall all live fun immoral lives. I'm gonna hold down the moral Christian heterosexual life while yall can destroy the moral fabric of the country.</p>
<p>haha thanks ctrain! you are so right!</p>
<p>"First off...its not yet proven that its not a choice...i dont think its a coincidence that the number of gay people seems to be increasing with the increasing social "acceptance" of it. "</p>
<p>"Second, its not fair to put children in gay homes. The children don't have a choice. You want them to be ridiculed in their life or grow up with a skewed perspective?"</p>
<p>Wow, if the possibility of being ridiculed by a close-minded because of your parents lifestyle was a valid criterion for not allowing children, i doubt many of us would be here.</p>
<p>"I think they should have the rights of married couples, but just without the label of a church christened marriage. I really don't see how that is so unreasonable."</p>
<p>It's perfectly reasonable. But marriage isn't exclusively Christian thing.</p>
<p>"Im sure some of the "liberals" arguing on this board are gay"</p>
<p>I'll never be ceased to be amazed by your uncanny ability to use non-sequiturs to mask your lack of ability to intelligently discuss the issue.</p>
<p>The 14th Amendment calls for state-run privileges, not the act of marriage, which is a religious one. That's why civil unions should be legalized, but it is the right of religions to grant marriages as they wish.</p>
<p>IMHO, they should just take government out of marriage altogether. Have both Hetero and homosexual couples apply under a gender-blind civil union system, so that they can share the same benefits.</p>
<p>They aren't required to a pomp and circumstance wedding.</p>