2014: the year Ellen Page made scores of neckbeards cry out in psychic anguish

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:30 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:14 PM, Rpeg said:

Well, no, I'm not saying those two things are equivalent at all. Are you saying that the cultural heritage specific to your lineage is intrinsic to being human? Because we both know it's pretty simple to denounce your first-gen immigrant parents and move into the city at age 18, and never look back.

 

How easy would you think it is to betray your current sexual orientation, in favor of the other? Do you think you would coerce yourself into falling in love with someone of the same/opposite gender, and build a life together? The idea is absurd to me, personally, but I think this is what you are suggesting.

Cultural heritage can have as much or a little to do with identity as chance/choice can cause. My sister-in-law is adopted from China, so I speak from experience.

 

I think you're side-stepping the more difficult question. In a hypothetical situation, do you think it's easier (or even possible) for a 30-year-old to eschew the heritage of their parents, or to eschew their sexual orientation?

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:15 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:11 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:24 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:14 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:06 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:58 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:51 PM, sheatheman said:

 

 

 

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:21 PM, xox said:

AdieuErsatzEnnui, how are your parents? Are they live and well?

 

They are fine as far as I know. Yes, they are still living.

 

 

as far as you know? so you had to move away? they didnt show understanding?

 

 

I've not spoken to my father recently, and my mother I haven't spoken to in a week or so. So, as far as I know. I'm not sure what you are getting at. Understanding of what?

 

okokok im not gonna...

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:08 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 2:00 AM, A/D said:

Well xox, it sounds like all you're going to do is prove you're an asshole! That wouldn't really help your case.

 

well it was a long day and i just responded to his 'asshole' calling that i certainly didnt deserved, as others confirmed

he's not someone one can talk about objectively and others can see that too

 

also, i push nothing, no case here, just stating some facts and i even defended gays and their rights.

 

so, a marriage is NOT a BASIC human right according to highest legal experts of EU, who i'm i to talk against them? aslo, marriage law is inherently discriminative, anyone can read it and see that. it's discriminative to protect specific relations which are based on specific laws of natural and which are like they are and we cant change them. another q of yours was why gay parents are not good/ideal. to what id say that all we know from our several thousands of yrs old history and from all psychology or child development that father + mother is ideal for children's development (and children have rights to this and we're obligated to deliver the best what we can). im not gonna go deeper in this cause tons of books is written about this as we know. a gay couple could be better then some real but bad parents i know but that's just an exception of the rule. real parents are good per se (do i really have to prove something like this?), something derived from nature so we should protect that basic nucleus of our culture's past, present and future. if anything is marriage, nothing is marriage, as those legal experts say...and that's just the beginning of legal problems, cause all the other more complex marriage combinations are gonna unnecessary enter the reality. unnecessary, cause they could be regulated on different level (like is gay partnership regulated in croatia). their words!

 

am i really subjective in anything here or ignorant? i'm really trying not to be.

 

im not some random homophobe (what a funny little word) cause i have whys i and whats behind my points of view (which one could dislike them, i approve), which are changeable, of course (i hope)

 

really nothing else necessary to add about the subject

 

As if all those in opposition were supplying an objective argument to begin with.

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:08 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:34 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

If you believe that biology is not destiny then why would it even be relevant for someone to prove biologically that being homosexual is determined by genes?

 

Your interpretation of his points on identity by associating identity with biology, more specifically sexual identity, you imply you believe the two are directly related. If you believe this and you are also a Christian, then you are all at once denying your own religious beliefs, because you are negating the influence of the soul, while trying to prove another point of your religion that homosexuality is wrong.

 

I believe that people are more than our current understanding of biology and environment.

I'm not trying to prove or disprove gay genes. What? I'm having trouble understanding you.

 

Why do you believe people are more than cells and impulses? What do you base that on? If you allow yourself to have unfounded beliefs, how can you attack others for doing the same?

 

Maybe believe was the wrong word. I suspect that our understanding of what makes people what they are is not fully formed at this point in time. My suspecting these things is not entirely unfounded. There is research leading in that direction. I mean a very basic understanding of science could lead one down this path.

If you cannot see the difference between my thinking and following the teachings of a book written thousands of years ago when we had little to no understanding of anything then I can't really help you understand regardless of my efforts.

I don't base my argument around unfounded beliefs. The opposition does. The opposition denies very obvious realities in support of their illogical personal beliefs.

this thread makes me want to vomit

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:20 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:15 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:11 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:24 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:14 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:06 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:58 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:51 PM, sheatheman said:

 

 

 

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:21 PM, xox said:

AdieuErsatzEnnui, how are your parents? Are they live and well?

 

They are fine as far as I know. Yes, they are still living.

 

 

as far as you know? so you had to move away? they didnt show understanding?

 

 

I've not spoken to my father recently, and my mother I haven't spoken to in a week or so. So, as far as I know. I'm not sure what you are getting at. Understanding of what?

 

 

okokok im not gonna...

 

Gonna what? Do you think I'm a homosexual? You think if I am a homosexual that is somehow relevant to my position?

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:25 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:20 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:15 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:11 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:24 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:14 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:06 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:58 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:51 PM, sheatheman said:

 

 

 

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:21 PM, xox said:

AdieuErsatzEnnui, how are your parents? Are they live and well?

 

They are fine as far as I know. Yes, they are still living.

 

 

as far as you know? so you had to move away? they didnt show understanding?

 

 

I've not spoken to my father recently, and my mother I haven't spoken to in a week or so. So, as far as I know. I'm not sure what you are getting at. Understanding of what?

 

 

okokok im not gonna...

 

 

Gonna what? Do you think I'm a homosexual? You think if I am a homosexual that is somehow relevant to my position?

 

to what position are you referring to?

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:08 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 2:00 AM, A/D said:

Well xox, it sounds like all you're going to do is prove you're an asshole! That wouldn't really help your case.

 

well it was a long day and i just responded to his 'asshole' calling that i certainly didnt deserved, as others confirmed

he's not someone one can talk about objectively and others can see that too

 

also, i push nothing, no case here, just stating some facts and i even defended gays and their rights.

 

so, a marriage is NOT a BASIC human right according to highest legal experts of EU, who i'm i to talk against them? aslo, marriage law is inherently discriminative, anyone can read it and see that. it's discriminative to protect specific relations which are based on specific laws of natural and which are like they are and we cant change them. another q of yours was why gay parents are not good/ideal. to what id say that all we know from our several thousands of yrs old history and from all psychology or child development that father + mother is ideal for children's development (and children have rights to this and we're obligated to deliver the best what we can). im not gonna go deeper in this cause tons of books is written about this as we know. a gay couple could be better then some real but bad parents i know but that's just an exception of the rule. real parents are good per se (do i really have to prove something like this?), something derived from nature so we should protect that basic nucleus of our culture's past, present and future. if anything is marriage, nothing is marriage, as those legal experts say...and that's just the beginning of legal problems, cause all the other more complex marriage combinations are gonna unnecessary enter the reality. unnecessary, cause they could be regulated on different level (like is gay partnership regulated in croatia). their words!

 

am i really subjective in anything here or ignorant? i'm really trying not to be.

 

im not some random homophobe (what a funny little word) cause i have whys i and whats behind my points of view (which one could dislike them, i approve), which are changeable, of course (i hope)

 

really nothing else necessary to add about the subject

 

yes, none of your argument makes sense. It can all be picked apart quite easily. But most of it has already been gone over in this thread multiple times.

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:27 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:25 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:20 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:15 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:11 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:24 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:14 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:06 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:58 PM, Rpeg said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 9:51 PM, sheatheman said:

 

 

 

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 10:21 PM, xox said:

AdieuErsatzEnnui, how are your parents? Are they live and well?

 

They are fine as far as I know. Yes, they are still living.

 

 

as far as you know? so you had to move away? they didnt show understanding?

 

 

I've not spoken to my father recently, and my mother I haven't spoken to in a week or so. So, as far as I know. I'm not sure what you are getting at. Understanding of what?

 

 

okokok im not gonna...

 

 

Gonna what? Do you think I'm a homosexual? You think if I am a homosexual that is somehow relevant to my position?

 

 

do what position are you referring to?

 

Wtf are you talking about seriously? Make a statement or ask a relevant question.

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:16 PM, Rpeg said:

I think you're side-stepping the more difficult question. In a hypothetical situation, do you think it's easier (or even possible) for a 30-year-old to eschew the heritage of their parents, or to eschew their sexual orientation?

Sexuality is harder to eschew. No doubt. The why is another matter.

I would only say it is possible because there are plenty of cases where it has happened.

Adieu, you need to trim down those posts or I'm going to have to warn you.

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:24 PM, autopilot said:

this thread makes me want to vomit

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

out of my dick

 

plz do it

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:30 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:16 PM, Rpeg said:

I think you're side-stepping the more difficult question. In a hypothetical situation, do you think it's easier (or even possible) for a 30-year-old to eschew the heritage of their parents, or to eschew their sexual orientation?

 

Sexuality is harder to eschew. No doubt. The why is another matter.

 

I would only say it is possible because there are plenty of cases where it has happened.

 

Adieu, you need to trim down those posts or I'm going to have to warn you.

 

Please provide proof for these claims.

And...No.

This is what I'm going to do...

Because xox, sheatheman, and brian cannot put together reasonable arguments, and generally do not contribute to a successful conversation in doing so. I've decided you have little to no value in being heard. So, I'm blocking all three of you and leaving the thread. The thread speaks for itself. Enjoy being dogmatic bigots. You are indeed on the wrong side of history, and you are part of the problem. Good day.

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:34 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:24 PM, autopilot said:

this thread makes me want to vomit

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

out of my dick

 

 

plz do it

 

sry ur not my type

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:39 PM, autopilot said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:34 PM, xox said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:24 PM, autopilot said:

this thread makes me want to vomit

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

out of my dick

 

plz do it

sry ur not my type

nice move

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:39 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

This is what I'm going to do...

 

Because xox, sheatheman, and brian cannot put together reasonable arguments, and generally do not contribute to a successful conversation in doing so. I've decided you have little to no value in being heard. So, I'm blocking all three of you and leaving the thread. The thread speaks for itself. Enjoy being dogmatic bigots. You are indeed on the wrong side of history, and you are part of the problem. Good day.

lol @ "dogmatic bigots"

i stated reasonable arguments. what are yours? nothing but selfish fantasies and calling ppl names. this blocking shit tops everything

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:39 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

This is what I'm going to do...

 

Because xox, sheatheman, and brian cannot put together reasonable arguments, and generally do not contribute to a successful conversation in doing so. I've decided you have little to no value in being heard. So, I'm blocking all three of you and leaving the thread. The thread speaks for itself. Enjoy being dogmatic bigots. You are indeed on the wrong side of history, and you are part of the problem. Good day.

:)

Bigoted - Having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.

I guess we're bigot buddies!

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:30 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:16 PM, Rpeg said:

I think you're side-stepping the more difficult question. In a hypothetical situation, do you think it's easier (or even possible) for a 30-year-old to eschew the heritage of their parents, or to eschew their sexual orientation?

 

Sexuality is harder to eschew. No doubt. The why is another matter.

 

I would only say it is possible because there are plenty of cases where it has happened.

You believe people can change their sexual orientation at will. Do you believe they should? I'm curious in what you consider moral.

im still loling at the idea that eating rice is the chinamans biology

oh my god

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:48 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:39 PM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

This is what I'm going to do...

Because xox, sheatheman, and brian cannot put together reasonable arguments, and generally do not contribute to a successful conversation in doing so. I've decided you have little to no value in being heard. So, I'm blocking all three of you and leaving the thread. The thread speaks for itself. Enjoy being dogmatic bigots. You are indeed on the wrong side of history, and you are part of the problem. Good day.

:)

Bigoted - Having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.

I guess we're bigot buddies!

 

so >bigot< actually isnt an insulting word? are homophobes bigotable so they can be like the normal ppl from uranus?

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:55 PM, luke viia said:

im still loling at the idea that eating rice is the chinamans biology

you mister are a semi-bigot :p

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:55 PM, luke viia said:

im still loling at the idea that eating rice is the chinamans biology

Who said that?

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:54 PM, Rpeg said:

You believe people can change their sexual orientation at will. Do you believe they should? I'm curious in what you consider moral.

I'm just saying there are many cases of people changing. I'm saying that many people seem to think it is possible based on their own experiences. I'm describing, not prescribing.

  On 2/19/2014 at 8:25 PM, DerWaschbar said:

Brian what does the traditional institution of marriage represent to you exactly? Why is it so important to maintain?

  On 2/20/2014 at 12:04 AM, hoggy said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 8:25 PM, DerWaschbar said:

Brian what does the traditional institution of marriage represent to you exactly? Why is it so important to maintain?

 

wow really guys? no importance whatsoever?

[interests:Music, Art, Philosophy]

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:08 PM, xox said:

another q of yours was why gay parents are not good/ideal. to what id say that all we know from our several thousands of yrs old history and from all psychology or child development that father + mother is ideal for children's development (and children have rights to this and we're obligated to deliver the best what we can). im not gonna go deeper in this cause tons of books is written about this as we know. a gay couple could be better then some real but bad parents i know but that's just an exception of the rule. real parents are good per se (do i really have to prove something like this?), something derived from nature so we should protect that basic nucleus of our culture's past, present and future.

 

this is so fucking stupid it's even entertaining on some level.

  On 2/20/2014 at 12:09 AM, xox said:

wow really guys? no importance whatsoever?

 

[interests:Music, Art, Philosophy]

it's a question

  On 2/20/2014 at 12:11 AM, eugene said:

 

  On 2/19/2014 at 11:08 PM, xox said:

another q of yours was why gay parents are not good/ideal. to what id say that all we know from our several thousands of yrs old history and from all psychology or child development that father + mother is ideal for children's development (and children have rights to this and we're obligated to deliver the best what we can). im not gonna go deeper in this cause tons of books is written about this as we know. a gay couple could be better then some real but bad parents i know but that's just an exception of the rule. real parents are good per se (do i really have to prove something like this?), something derived from nature so we should protect that basic nucleus of our culture's past, present and future.

 

this is so fucking stupid it's even entertaining on some level.

 

step out your bubble for a minute and write the clever version then. to what would you back your words up? i have tones of books of todays to back my words

  On 2/20/2014 at 12:15 AM, hoggy said:

 

  On 2/20/2014 at 12:09 AM, xox said:

wow really guys? no importance whatsoever?

 

[interests:Music, Art, Philosophy]

it's a question

 

question cause you have no answers? no clue?