OBAMA: GAY MARRIAGE IS COOL WITH ME

there are a lot of handsome lesbians

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:37 PM, baph said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:33 PM, ruiagnelo said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:20 PM, Superstix said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:39 PM, Apeofnaples said:

Feeling the need to chime in here. I'm a gay Irish man living in NYC with my partner of seven years (we met playing rugby with The Gotham Knights, a gay inclusive team out of Manhattan).

In response to whoever is slamming the idea of gay adoption: I am lucky enough to know a few gay couples who have either adopted children or are fostering children. What they are doing is offering their children is a safe, loving and supportive environment, something new to many foster kids. These kids are in great hands and already growing up into cool, shape and kind little individuals. The idea that I would make a bad parent because of my homosexuality - though still quite a common point of argument - is absurd and offensive and more importantly just an ignorant out dated concept that stems from the misconception that gay people = pedophiles. Fuck off.

 

I was surprised at how moved I've been over the past few days. Watching North Carolina vote against their basic human rights (both for gays and straights) in a Jim Jones mass hysteria fashion was heart breaking and bewildering, and when President Obama stepped forward and said what he said, well I cried for the first time in a long time. People move on, we need more love in the world, truly. It's hard enough to put your best foot forward everyday and keep your heart open without this prejudiced bullshit. There is nothing that boils my blood more than when somebody tries to tell me Gay is a choice, I have come to the understanding that most people who truly believe this are deeply closeted, and are confusing their choice to stay in the closet with the real heart of the matter, that I am gay, I was born gay and it's actually fucking great.

 

I posted on here a lot more a year or so ago but noticed the smug manner in which words like fag/queer/geigh was thrown around, maybe not homophobia per say but when kid's are still killing themselves and parents still trying to counsel, pray or beat the gay out of their children, and when kids are still killing themselves, I don't find any of it fun.

 

As an interesting aside Christianity actually celebrated same sex marriage in the past. No that it matters as they're a bunch of sick weakeners, but it's something that nobody ever mentions:

http://anthropologis...om/1314574.html

 

One of the most sensible posts in this thread.

 

oh yes?! i bet you cry when you watch Modern family too

11 pages of discussion, and all you can say is that

 

Wait, what?

i just got temporary chills due to Superstixs lack of solid opinion

http://www.guardian....ips-gay-animals

  Quote

Bailey and Zuk are also researching the Laysan albatross, a species in which females form same-sex pairs and rear young together. "Same-sex behavior in this species may not be aberrant, but instead can arise as an alternative reproductive strategy," they said.

 

Almost a third of Laysan albatross couples are female-female pairs and they are more successful than unpaired females when it comes to rearing chicks.

"Same-sex sexual behaviors are flexibly deployed in a variety of circumstances, for example as alternative reproductive tactics, as cooperative breeding strategies, as facilitators of social bonding or as mediators of intrasexual conflict. Once this flexibility is established, it becomes in and of itself a selective force that can drive selection on other aspects of physiology, life history, social behaviour and even morphology," said Bailey.

If you ask me, homosexual human couples raising adopted children seems like a pretty straightforward, beneficial function from a social and biological perspective.

The only non-religious argument against gay adoption is basically: "but we hate teh gayz and we will make dems chilldrens lives miserable, so it's not fair to them." And if you use that argument, you're a piece of shit.

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:38 PM, ruiagnelo said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:37 PM, baph said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:33 PM, ruiagnelo said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:20 PM, Superstix said:

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:39 PM, Apeofnaples said:

Feeling the need to chime in here. I'm a gay Irish man living in NYC with my partner of seven years (we met playing rugby with The Gotham Knights, a gay inclusive team out of Manhattan).

In response to whoever is slamming the idea of gay adoption: I am lucky enough to know a few gay couples who have either adopted children or are fostering children. What they are doing is offering their children is a safe, loving and supportive environment, something new to many foster kids. These kids are in great hands and already growing up into cool, shape and kind little individuals. The idea that I would make a bad parent because of my homosexuality - though still quite a common point of argument - is absurd and offensive and more importantly just an ignorant out dated concept that stems from the misconception that gay people = pedophiles. Fuck off.

 

I was surprised at how moved I've been over the past few days. Watching North Carolina vote against their basic human rights (both for gays and straights) in a Jim Jones mass hysteria fashion was heart breaking and bewildering, and when President Obama stepped forward and said what he said, well I cried for the first time in a long time. People move on, we need more love in the world, truly. It's hard enough to put your best foot forward everyday and keep your heart open without this prejudiced bullshit. There is nothing that boils my blood more than when somebody tries to tell me Gay is a choice, I have come to the understanding that most people who truly believe this are deeply closeted, and are confusing their choice to stay in the closet with the real heart of the matter, that I am gay, I was born gay and it's actually fucking great.

 

I posted on here a lot more a year or so ago but noticed the smug manner in which words like fag/queer/geigh was thrown around, maybe not homophobia per say but when kid's are still killing themselves and parents still trying to counsel, pray or beat the gay out of their children, and when kids are still killing themselves, I don't find any of it fun.

 

As an interesting aside Christianity actually celebrated same sex marriage in the past. No that it matters as they're a bunch of sick weakeners, but it's something that nobody ever mentions:

http://anthropologis...om/1314574.html

 

One of the most sensible posts in this thread.

 

oh yes?! i bet you cry when you watch Modern family too

11 pages of discussion, and all you can say is that

 

Wait, what?

 

i just got temporary chills due to Superstixs lack of solid opinion

Sorry, I have no desire to get into a debate about this here. But if you are asking my opinion, I believe gay couples should have rights equal to those of straight couples. Wether that means making gay marriage legal or taking the Government out of our personal lives altogether (for everyone, gay or straight), we should all have access to the same benefits and security.

I just felt compelled to point out that I enjoyed/appreciated Apeofnaples honest and refreshing point of view.

  On 5/11/2012 at 7:49 PM, Superstix said:

Sorry, I have no desire to get into a debate about this here. But if you are asking my opinion, I believe gay couples should have rights equal to those of straight couples. Wether that means making gay marriage legal or taking the Government out of our personal lives altogether (for everyone, gay or straight), we should all have access to the same benefits and security.

I just felt compelled to point out that I enjoyed/appreciated Apeofnaples honest and refreshing point of view.

you don't have to say sorry, i do.

i just think it should have been better to go straight to the point

I'm all flipped out now

Threads like this are the reason why Venetian Snares won't be seen with us.

I'm surprised people are still so divisive on the topic.

Personally, I don't agree with people being gay/lesbian/transexual. That being said, I don't agree with the catholic or christian or muslim religions. I also don't agree with people that eat burger king every day.

But none of that matters, because only a REAL FUCKING DICKHEAD JUDGES ANY HUMAN BEING ON ONE FACTOR OR DIMENSION ALONE.

Simply put, gay/lesbian people are people too. That's all there is to it. One person doesn't deserve more rights under the law because they are straight or gay. How is that any different than saying a white person should have more rights than blacks?

You'd think by this day and age we would start treating people as people instead of categorically dividing them.

jesus fuck

  On 5/11/2012 at 8:03 PM, Dan C said:

Threads like this are the reason why Venetian Snares won't be seen with us.

I think it's more that Joyrex keeps telling him he sucks

  On 5/11/2012 at 8:15 PM, StephenG said:

jesus fuck

only straight people are allowed to jesus fuck

even if you assumed the "natural" aspect, balance in nature argument had some merit, it still falls flat.

Example:

Nature is known for inducing population control to cut down overpopulated groups of predators or prey. However humanity is the top predator at the chain, and scientific advancements/tools have successfully prevented any significant culling of the human population. Perhaps an increase in homosexuality is nature's attempt to self-regulate the human population.

Now I personally think that is a bit of a ridiculous argument, but it goes along the exact same "natural" lines of population balance.

Why the hell am I arguing about this anyway?

The regulation of gay marriage is a civil rights issue, hands down. Whether you agree with the moral concept is completely and utterly irrelevant.

In fact, any so-called conservative that ever supported DOMA is a huge hypocrite, and an idiot. Having a federal law that determines the rules behind a religious ceremony and attribution is a clear violation of church/state separation.

it is very strange that in 2012 people are still against sexually-active humans being attracted to sexually-active humans. that's what humans as well as all other animals do. love and sexual desire stem from (as we currently understand) processes in the basal ganglia which we have NO control over. People either just hate change or are religious idiots that think that God created a world in which certain types of individuals were basically born to burn eternally in flames after death b/c they didnt/couldn't follow certain rules OR because they never heard about the rules in the first place. Like either of those make sense right? lol.

"natural" is a moving definition Kankori. What's "natural" now may not be "natural" later as all things change. This goes for social practices as well as for this like organs. It's currently "natural" for humans to have certain organs (called Vestigial organs or processes) that have no use for us at this time (the appendix for example) that kills some people when it blows up. As time goes on this organ will be selected against as many other adaptations have in our biological past. So arguing against something because it's not "natural" is not enough, you need to produce more counter-evidence than that.

In my opinion the only acceptable way to attack gay marriage or any other progressive issues (inter-racial marriage etc) is to fund scientific findings on happiness, productivity, and adaptability, etc. Obviously we have certain limits which will not change like sexual activity with minors as, of course, this type of thing stunts their growth and seriously diminishes happiness, productivity, and adaptability. So far, there's no statistically significant differences in kids raised by gays or non-gays so that should be the end of story.

Now we just have to purge the religious idiocy out of our population and carry on with being an intelligent species.

high fives all over this thread for encey who just consistently raises the bar on intelligence in this community and to zaphod for bringing crazy wit.

  On 5/11/2012 at 9:37 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

In fact, any so-called conservative that ever supported DOMA is a huge hypocrite, and an idiot. Having a federal law that determines the rules behind a religious ceremony and attribution is a clear violation of church/state separation.

Exactly. Also, many of them have been divorced and married multiple times (Newt & Rush), but's ok because they're "mean" and not Obama and that's supposedly admirable. I've heard multiple people argue that, it's fucking hilarious. Doubletalk is all the rage now people!

ya mon encey is teh shit!

I think we have reached an important part in American society where the side opposing gay marriage innately admits to themselves that their prejudice against gays is unfair, so they knowingly hide behind an incredibly shaky defence of "tradition", a tradition that never truly existed as a majority norm, but rather was an enforced tradition via constant cultural bombardment (just look at all the sexually related ads in the 1950s and 60s for proof of this). This is the same defense used time and time again in history, and its beaten down eventually. I can only hope the ladies try to push for the ERA again.

Gay marriages are fine as long as they involve bi-sexual FEMALE sluts who want to go ass-to-mouth with my barbed cock, every full moon. If they are full on dykes I can cope with that I guess. As for gay men? Mmmm makes me feel a bit ill but as long as I don't have to hear or see the homo-fuck-fest then it's fine by me.

Apologies in advance for any offence, I haven't read this thread, but that's my honest thoughts on gay activities. As for marriage? Marry who you want. Who cares. Got more important things to worry about, thanks.

  Quote

Gay marriages are fine as long as they involve bi-sexual FEMALE sluts who want to go ass-to-mouth with my barbed cock, every full moon. If they are full on dykes I can cope with that I guess. As for gay men? Mmmm makes me feel a bit ill but as long as I don't have to hear or see the homo-fuck-fest then it's fine by me.

 

Apologies in advance for any offence, I haven't read this thread, but that's my honest thoughts on gay activities. As for marriage? Marry who you want. Who cares. Got more important things to worry about, thanks.

  Quote

Posted 10 November 1254 09:45 PM

  On 5/11/2012 at 2:01 AM, Adjective said:

I guess my issue is the government giving preferrential treatment to married folk through benefits and rights. As a non-married person, I don't see why I should be viewed less worthy of assistance, and it's just unsettling that marriage would be incentivized so. I hope someday they call legal marriages "CoupleCorps" instead, and let unFed marriage be a separate private practice. People could have their own CoupleCorp logo, with slogans like "The Segals are Legal!" or "Coupling the Wright Way." I don't know I'm sure they're cleverer in the future.

 

Anyway, I agree that it's yet another way the US is persecuting marginalized groups. It just feels like it's the government trying to keep you out of a club that really sucks. A club with promises turned to contract, and exit comes with penalty. Equal rights victories just don't have the same zazz they used to. And to be honest, even the news of the DADT repeal felt very: The Military Industrial Complex Welcomes You (ominous tuba solo)

Hah, I never actually took the thought that far regarding marriage and government benefits, i.e. a private alternative. It is very strange, for all the talk about marriage as a loving ceremony, with or without religious overtones, the fact is marriage in the 21st century is too people in a county clerk's line filing for joint taxes and legal privileges as domestic partners. And after all, marriage and family itself being anything close to what social conservatives consider "ideal" is a very new concept. I can't help but post this Penn & Teller episode to expand on that point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8mWXofb-fo

Traditional marriage - what kind? The kind with dowries? Arranged marriages in specific social classes? The kind that transfers power between royal families and tribal leaders? The kind that reinforces the notion that women should submit to men? Those are aspects of "traditional" marriages seen in history, not the 50s era nuclear family of suburban America.

Also, ditto on the repeal of DADT - while honestly I was quite happy about it, having family and friends in the military, it was a long overdue and arguably moot change. Still, at least grunts can now worry about only the vast dangers of combat instead of those dangers AND the threat of being outed by some homophobic asshole in their unit.

I'm a bit drunk (disclaimer)

But if I saw 2 birds having gay sex on my lawn I'd be quite happy. If I saw 2 gay blokes fucking each other on my lawn I'd call the police and go into a blind rage. Strange isn't it? Yet I don't consider myself homophobic, though I presume I am.

  On 5/11/2012 at 10:22 PM, beerwolf said:

I'm a bit drunk (disclaimer)

 

But if I saw 2 birds having gay sex on my lawn I'd be quite happy. If I saw 2 gay blokes fucking each other on my lawn I'd call the police and go into a blind rage. Strange isn't it? Yet I don't consider myself homophobic, though I presume I am.

Based on your last two posts I'm going to hazard a guess that you're homophobic and/or secretly yearning to take a hot bareback load up the ass. No offence.

Either that or you live in a place where people have sex on other people's lawns way too frequently.

Also, won't someone think of the lawn gnomes? Please, think of the lawn gnomes!

Christ, they're already turnin queaah

  On 5/11/2012 at 5:09 PM, Kanakori said:

- We are much more complex in our growth than an animal. A dog isn't influenced by his parents. It's pure instinct.

really? as far as i understand, 'nature vs nurture' arguments have been a mystery to science ever since they've been up for debate. What makes you think that's been proven?

edit: or wait, is this a long term trolling experiment. somebody help

  On 5/11/2012 at 10:45 PM, baph said:

Also, won't someone think of the lawn gnomes? Please, think of the lawn gnomes!

 

 

 

 

Christ, they're already turnin queaah

fierce

  On 5/11/2012 at 10:46 PM, Awepittance said:

edit: or wait, is this a long term trolling experiment. somebody help

"Any sufficiently advanced trolling is indistinguishable from idiocy"

Arthur C. Clarke, "Hazards of Prophecy: The Failure of Imagination," Profiles of the Future (1973 ed.)

I think Kanakori might be a case of Poe's law in action. A well thought out troll, or a genuinely stupid person? You decide.