DCEmulation
dreamcast development • homebrew software • hardware hacking • indie games • emulators • and more!
If it were a choice, do you honestly think that anybody would choose to be a punk in a country full of intolerant Top 40 Listeners?OneThirty8 wrote:If it were a choice, do you honestly think that anybody would choose to be gay in a country full of intolerant redneck hillbillies?
Perceived deviation is not a very compelling reason for people to follow the norm.
I wasn't talking about perceived deviation. I was essentially asking why anyone would choose to be gay in a country were gay people aren't just laughed at, but they're often beaten or murdered for simply being who they are. Nobody has ever beaten or attempted to kill me for listening to punk, and such a think is not likely to ever happen.impetus wrote:heh - I stay out of these arguments, because they go nowhere. However...If it were a choice, do you honestly think that anybody would choose to be a punk in a country full of intolerant Top 40 Listeners?OneThirty8 wrote:If it were a choice, do you honestly think that anybody would choose to be gay in a country full of intolerant redneck hillbillies?
I wrote to my representatives in Washington and in Albany months ago. Can you please explain to me how allowing gay people to get married could in any way impact the rest of us negatively? I can't think of any case where we'd be worse off. Also, I still stand by my statement that the will of the majority is irrelevant in personal matters such as who marries who. That shouldn't be left up to the states. It should be left up to the individuals concerned.farrell2k wrote:A lot of things shouldn't be, but whether you accept it or not, the will of the majority matters. Contrary to your *opinion*, most people feel that gay marriage is harmful to society, and believe that a ban on gay marriage is helpful to society.OneThirty8 wrote:You miss my point entirely. I know how it currently works. It's just that I see a major flaw in it - the current laws that we have in place do nothing but discriminate. They do nobody any good, and are in fact harmful. It does not make sense to have such a thing 'governed' at all. If two people love each other and want to get married, that's all that should matter. They should be able to go and fill out the paperwork regardless of the gender of either party involved. The will of the majority is fine when it comes to regulating things that have a bearing on the general public, but not somebody's personal life. It's not that I think the majority has no say - they obviously do have their way under the current system. It's that they shouldn't have a say.farrell2k wrote:You really thik the will of the majority has no say when it comes to the decision of 2 people getting married? Seriously?! Marriage is handled by the states. The states decide who can marry based on laws governing the act. The laws are written and voted upon by state representatives, who are elected by and represent the majority of people in any given state. - The will of the majority matters, even if it is unfair, and that's exactly why gays cannot marry. Accept it or not, but that is reality. It's the last thing I'll say about it.
If you do not agree, do someting constructive. Write your state representatives for change... or sit around on internet message boards campaining for gay marriage all day.
FETUS, please tell me one thing in your life that would be made different if we were to allow gay people to get married. I laid out a perfectly valid method for ensuring that all concerned parties are represented. Please explain how following the plan I laid out would be 'blindly following,' or not representing all parties concerned in the matter.FETUS wrote:Allowing gay marriage will be a major change in the system, there are two sides one believes there should be gay marriage and one that believes there shouldn't. Both sides have valid points and should be represented equaly, if gay marriage is put to a vote I think it would pass, but I wanna make sure both sides are represented properly instead of just a blind following.
Ex-Cyber wrote:Using a commercially dead console to play games for other commercially dead consoles is certainly quite abnormal, so I don't think most of us are in a position to speak ill of "abnormal behavior".They are sick, it's abnormal behavior.
You referred to that "cheapening of marriage" thing *again* yet nothing specific to how it affects you! And considerring divorce rates these days, marriage doesn't mean a hell of a lot to many people. But I still fail to see how it cheapens it, or even how it affects you personally!FETUS, please tell me one thing in your life that would be made different if we were to allow gay people to get married
Say it is sick, or that it is abnormal. It is a completely benign, so what difference does it make? Why do you care about it at all?They are sick, it's abnormal behavior.
Why is it false love? Even if it is the result of a mental illness, why would that make said love any less genuine than that of "normal" people?However I do think less of a gay couple because just like me with voices it's a false love and nothing more
Nope, I can't, and proving something something negative was never my intention in the first place.OneThirty8 wrote:I wrote to my representatives in Washington and in Albany months ago. Can you please explain to me how allowing gay people to get married could in any way impact the rest of us negatively? I can't think of any case where we'd be worse off.farrell2k wrote:A lot of things shouldn't be, but whether you accept it or not, the will of the majority matters. Contrary to your *opinion*, most people feel that gay marriage is harmful to society, and believe that a ban on gay marriage is helpful to society.OneThirty8 wrote:You miss my point entirely. I know how it currently works. It's just that I see a major flaw in it - the current laws that we have in place do nothing but discriminate. They do nobody any good, and are in fact harmful. It does not make sense to have such a thing 'governed' at all. If two people love each other and want to get married, that's all that should matter. They should be able to go and fill out the paperwork regardless of the gender of either party involved. The will of the majority is fine when it comes to regulating things that have a bearing on the general public, but not somebody's personal life. It's not that I think the majority has no say - they obviously do have their way under the current system. It's that they shouldn't have a say.farrell2k wrote:You really thik the will of the majority has no say when it comes to the decision of 2 people getting married? Seriously?! Marriage is handled by the states. The states decide who can marry based on laws governing the act. The laws are written and voted upon by state representatives, who are elected by and represent the majority of people in any given state. - The will of the majority matters, even if it is unfair, and that's exactly why gays cannot marry. Accept it or not, but that is reality. It's the last thing I'll say about it.
If you do not agree, do someting constructive. Write your state representatives for change... or sit around on internet message boards campaining for gay marriage all day.
it doesn't effect me personaly but it does others and those are the ones I worry about. I personaly don't give a shit about gay marriage let em fuck up there own lives, but I do give a shit for the other side and they should be heard.FETUS, please tell me one thing in your life that would be made different if we were to allow gay people to get married
you just answered your own question.Why is it false love? Even if it is the result of a mental illness, why would that make said love any less genuine than that of "normal" people?
It doesn't affect them. What affects them is their preocupation with trying to regulate the lives of complete strangers.FETUS wrote:There are parties that believe gay marriage would cheapen the value of marriage, not there own but just marriage in general and allowing it would effect them.
And not accepting gays as our equals is not blindly following a predetermined opinion? It seems that it's folks like the President that want us to blindly follow him down the road to a world where it's alright to write discrimination into the Constitution. Those who are opposed to gay marriage are the blind followers. Those of us who say 'live and let live' aren't following anything. We're just saying, 'hey, do what's right for you. It's none of my business.'FETUS wrote: and blindly following is not allowing people to form an opinion besides the pre-determined opinion.
Perhaps if you weren't a bigot, people wouldn't call you one.FETUS wrote:How many times have I been called a bigot for my opinion and beliefs on homosexuality?
You might not think that you do anything to hurt gay people, but hearing somebody say that their love isn't real must feel like a kick to the gut. Calling you a bigot isn't implying anything other than the truth.FETUS wrote:Being called a bigot implies a lot worse then I am. I don't look down on anybody for being gay I don't attempt to hurt them for being gay and I don't insult them for being gay.
How do you know that their love isn't real? Did one of the voices in your head tell you that? That was a cheap shot, I know, but you left yourself wide open and it isn't like you don't deserve it.FETUS wrote:However I do think less of a gay couple because just like me with voices it's a false love and nothing more.
OneThirty8 wrote:Perhaps if you weren't a bigot, people wouldn't call you one.FETUS wrote:How many times have I been called a bigot for my opinion and beliefs on homosexuality?You might not think that you do anything to hurt gay people, but hearing somebody say that their love isn't real must feel like a kick to the gut. Calling you a bigot isn't implying anything other than the truth.FETUS wrote:Being called a bigot implies a lot worse then I am. I don't look down on anybody for being gay I don't attempt to hurt them for being gay and I don't insult them for being gay.How do you know that their love isn't real? Did one of the voices in your head tell you that? That was a cheap shot, I know, but you left yourself wide open and it isn't like you don't deserve it.FETUS wrote:However I do think less of a gay couple because just like me with voices it's a false love and nothing more.
Because it's braught on by a mental condition.How do you know that their love isn't real? Did one of the voices in your head tell you that? That was a cheap shot, I know, but you left yourself wide open and it isn't like you don't deserve it.
Truth hurts. For both sides I guess.You might not think that you do anything to hurt gay people, but hearing somebody say that their love isn't real must feel like a kick to the gut. Calling you a bigot isn't implying anything other than the truth.
We've covered this ground before, and I'm sick of beating you with the same point over and over again. It's clear to me that you just won't understand it that way, so let's take a look at your logic for a second and approach this from another angle. You claim that their love is brought on by a mental condition. It's not a mental disorder, but we'll just use your logic for the time being. How can you be certain that any love you may claim to feel isn't a manifestation of your mental disorder? You've said yourself that you have a mental illness.FETUS wrote:Because it's braught on by a mental condition.How do you know that their love isn't real? Did one of the voices in your head tell you that? That was a cheap shot, I know, but you left yourself wide open and it isn't like you don't deserve it.
Yeah, except you're not speaking from an understanding of the truth. You're speaking from prejudice.FETUS wrote:Truth hurts. For both sides I guess.You might not think that you do anything to hurt gay people, but hearing somebody say that their love isn't real must feel like a kick to the gut. Calling you a bigot isn't implying anything other than the truth.
They are simply asking for the right to be treated as equals. By striking the word 'marriage' from any legal union between a couple, we can afford all people eqality in the eyes of the law regardless of gender or sexual orientation while getting the homophobes in certain 'religious' groups to shut the hell up about the 'sanctity of marriage.'MystiK wrote:gay people should chill the fudge out with civil unions. asking for ''the right to be married'' is just ridiculous.
You really need to invest in a dictionary. While the above statement does indeed indicate prejudice, so does just about everything else you have to say about homosexuals or homosexuality.FETUS wrote:Speaking from prejudice would be saying "God damn queers always wearing shiny shoes".Yeah, except you're not speaking from an understanding of the truth. You're speaking from prejudice.
If you notice, I put 'religious' in quotation marks to imply that people aren't what they pretend to be. I myself am not a religious person, but in general my attitude on religion is simply to let people do what's right for them. I'm not intolerant of religion, but I don't tolerate the kind of hypocrisy that is typical of the Bush Administration and others. In the Bible, Jesus told people to love one another. There are many who get the idea that hatred and intolerance are somehow justified by what they read in that very same book.FETUS wrote:Why are you so intolerant of religion?certain 'religious' groups
theres also some stuff in there about homosexuality being wrong, maybe you should pick it up some day and see what your critisizing.In the Bible, Jesus told people to love one another. There are many who get the idea that hatred and intolerance are somehow justified by what they read in that very same book.
If you notice, I have no problems with homosexuals just homosexuality.You really need to invest in a dictionary. While the above statement does indeed indicate prejudice, so does just about everything else you have to say about homosexuals or homosexuality.
I will look up the passage you're most likely referring to because I do have a point to make, but I'd rather make it when I have the actual text to point to.FETUS wrote:theres also some stuff in there about homosexuality being wrong, maybe you should pick it up some day and see what your critisizing.In the Bible, Jesus told people to love one another. There are many who get the idea that hatred and intolerance are somehow justified by what they read in that very same book.
In other words, you have no problem with gay people, but your problem is with what makes them who they are. That's interesting.FETUS wrote:If you notice, I have no problems with homosexuals just homosexuality.You really need to invest in a dictionary. While the above statement does indeed indicate prejudice, so does just about everything else you have to say about homosexuals or homosexuality.
