Ny votes against......

[The Silver Thong]

Are you claiming that a person's sexual behavior is equivalent to their race? Sorry I do not buy that at all. It makes no sense.

Racists have always been known to try to equate certain types of behavior to race through stereo-types but I do not believe that there is any correlation at all between race and behavior.

See your ignorance is the same as the racists you just dissed LOL hypocrite ! your discriminating so your no better than a racist man.

Why do you even care? answer that.

Edited December 5, 2009 by The Silver Thong

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

I thought the law was for everyone including the minority hmmm maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so

You should respect everyone until given a reason not to and being gay is not a good reason.

Why do obsess about "there" behavior? This is like when I was a kid and if you touched a girl you got girl germs ewwwwwww LOL Hope your not a peeping tom looking through gay people windows and pointing ewww gross. I say what ever turns your crank as an adult is all good as long as long as both parties are cool with it. Some Americans sleep with there guns, now thats freaky

Hey Paranormalcy, good post back there man.

I am the one that is claiming that the law is for everyone. We should ALL have EQUAL REPRESENTATON under the LAW.

You are claiming that we should not. Why are you obsessed with denying people their right to representation on this issue? You think that people should be forced to treat homosexuality as being equal to heterosexuality? That may be your opinion but you should not try to force it on others without at least giving them an equal right to be represented on the issue.

It is you who are disrespecting people. Just as you condemned our parents, grand-parents, great-grand-parents, etc... in an earlier post. You are bigoted against certain people and want to deny them their right to representation on this issue.

Edited December 5, 2009 by TRUEYOUTRUEME

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

See your ignorance is the same as the racists you just dissed LOL hypocrite ! your discriminating so your no better than a racist man.

Why do you even care? answer that.

Answer what? I have no idea what it is that your talking about. Your post makes no real point at all.

[The Silver Thong]

I am the one is claiming that the law is for everyone. We shoud ALL have EQUAL REPRESENTATON under the LAW.

You are claiming that we should not. Why are you obsessed with denying people their right to representation on this issue? You think that people should be forced to treat homosexuality as being equal to heterosexuality? That may be your opinion but you should not try to force it on others without at last giving them an equal right to be represented on the issue.

It is you who are disrespecting people. Just as you condemned our parents, grand-parents, great-grand-parents, etc... in an earlier post. You are bigoted against certain people and want to deny them their right to representation on this issue.

Man your so far behind you think your first. Who am I "bigoted" against? the bigots maybe but nothing else LOL You fail man, post more it's a riot. It's your bigoted up bringing that has taught you the values you now preach. I use to be a gay basher big time, then I grew up. Your what in your 40's damn maybe it's to late for you but please don;t teach your kids this crap ok.

[The Silver Thong]

Answer what? I have no idea what it is that your talking about. Your post makes no real point at all.

I'll type slower for ya buddy

Why do you care if gay couples can marry or not? How does it effect you? Why is it an issue with you? What harm can it possibly cause to allow 2 people who love each other to marry one another. Simple answer, it does not effect you one single bit. So again why do you care?

I know why you care and I have stated so, but I would like to hear your answer.

Edited December 5, 2009 by The Silver Thong

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

I'll type slower for ya buddy

Why do you care if gay couples can marry or not? How does it effect you? Why is it an issue with you? What harm can it possibly cause to allow 2 people who love each other to marry one another. Simple answer, it does not effect you one single bit. So again why do you care?

I know why you care and I have stated so, but I would like to hear your answer.

I really do not care what people do when kept to themselves. So most of your questions and statements are based upon the false premise that I do.

I do care though when the left-wing try to use the law to strip people of their right to representation and to try and force others to accept their behavior.

[ninjadude]

I do care though when the left-wing try to use the law to strip people of their right to representation and to try and force others to accept their behavior.

Then you'll have to explain how gay marriage does that.

[The Silver Thong]

Then you'll have to explain how gay marriage does that.

and he will have to explain why a right wing republican congressmen was trying to pick up men in an airport bathroom LOL. Or why the RCC advocates child molestation.

Damn it if you don't know what the hell your talking about might as well blame the left and push the skeletons further back in the closet LOL.

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

Then you'll have to explain how gay marriage does that.

Gay Marraige does what? That?

I said that the left-wing was trying to strip the people of their right to representation. I didn't say that a type of behavior was.

[danielost]

It amazes me how those who support left-wing ideology always express some sort of hatred for our parents, grand parents, great-grandparents, etc.... It is a pathetic and bigoted mindset.

it's supposed to be. how else can they get us to change our minds but to make sure that we believe that we are agianst them. by the way that is the tactics that hitler and stalin used or any other dictator, including the dems in the usa. it is the poor against the evil rich.

[Paranormalcy]

Are you claiming that a person's sexual behavior is equivalent to their race? Sorry I do not buy that at all. It makes no sense.

Uhhhh.... no.... how did you possibly draw that conclusion from my post? Not THEIR behavior. But is sexual behavior in general equitable to race? I believe so, yes; although there are probably some exceptions that are based in environment or experiences, homosexuals are genetically predisposed, just like race or where you're born - you have no control over it, you're just born that way, and you have to make the best of it.

It is unconscionable to me, to support denying rights to someone purely because of the way they're born - that violates not just law or societal civility but the more universal right of people to be treated fairly despite their genetic makeup or background.

We can't all be successful black men that get to mutate into white women like the late Michael Jackson, I'd say 99% of us are stuck with the race we are born, physical attractiveness and any other inherent feature you'd care to mention - I don't see anybody discriminating against people with red hair, blue eyes or big feet - this is absolutely identical, I'm not sure why this is so difficult for people to grasp.

I do care though when the left-wing try to use the law to strip people of their right to representation and to try and force others to accept their behavior.

From the way this is worded, I can only conclude you're saying that the so-called "left wing" is using the law to strip people of their rights, by forcing them to accept gay marriage? If that is what you're saying then my answer is hell yes. This is like saying you're being forced to accept blacks or women as equal human beings, and if you think you are NOT perpetrating that same nasty prejudice, then you need to reexamine your viewpoint .

I'm sure the KKK or Nazis might also sympathize with the stripping of rights and being forced to accept people that are different than themselves. "Oh woe is me, I am being forced to not treat homosexuals as second class citizens who don't deserve the same rights and protection under the law as us straights". What a tragedy.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Paranormalcy

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

Uhhhh.... no.... how did you possibly draw that conclusion from my post? Not THEIR behavior. But is sexual behavior in general equitable to race? I believe so, yes; although there are probably some exceptions that are based in environment or experiences, homosexuals are genetically predisposed, just like race or where you're born - you have no control over it, you're just born that way, and you have to make the best of it.

It is unconscionable to me, to support denying rights to someone purely because of the way they're born - that violates not just law or societal civility but the more universal right of people to be treated fairly despite their genetic makeup or background.

We can't all be successful black men that get to mutate into white women like the late Michael Jackson, I'd say 99% of us are stuck with the race we are born, physical attractiveness and any other inherent feature you'd care to mention - I don't see anybody discriminating against people with red hair, blue eyes or big feet - this is absolutely identical, I'm not sure why this is so difficult for people to grasp.

From the way this is worded, I can only conclude you're saying that the so-called "left wing" is using the law to strip people of their rights, by forcing them to accept gay marriage? If that is what you're saying then my answer is hell yes. This is like saying you're being forced to accept blacks or women as equal human beings, and if you think you are NOT perpetrating that same nasty prejudice, then you need to reexamine your viewpoint .

I'm sure the KKK or Nazis might also sympathize with the stripping of rights and being forced to accept people that are different than themselves. "Oh woe is me, I am being forced to not treat homosexuals as second class citizens who don't deserve the same rights and protection under the law as us straights". What a tragedy.

While any human beings race could be determined at their birth there is no doctor or scientist at all who could proclaim and determine a child's future sexual behavior at birth. That is a fact.

You can have any opinion you want about how you feel that race and sexual behavior are equivalant. I do not buy it. I find it to be a misguided viewpoint that is corruptive to our rights as people.

You need to come up with a better excuse then that in order to try and strip people of their right to representation. NY , Califonia, etc... opposed this and this thread is explaining why. It is an oppresive movement to take away people's rights.

[Paranormalcy]

It is a right to free speech. It is not a right to deny others legally guaranteed equal rights. You are apparently misinformed on the difference between a right and a discrimination.

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

It is a right to free speech. It is not a right to deny others legally guaranteed equal rights. You are apparently misinformed on the difference between a right and a discrimination.

I 100% support free speech on this issue. I believe that ALL people have equal free speech rights and an equal right to representation as well.

I am not trying to suppress the free speech rights of those who want homosexuality to be forcefully enforced by government as being equal to heterosexuality without the people having any representation on the issue at all.

I want us all to have EQUAL representation on this issue. You only seem to want your point of view to rule and to deny anyone who disagrees any rights.

[Paranormalcy]

I want equality for all persons under the law to rule, for certain groups to not be discriminated against just because they're different or disagreeable to some - anyone's personal opinion is not the point; it is doing what is right for people who are being discriminated against. I couldn't care less if any particular person disagrees with or is against a certain behavior, but that does not give those people the "right" to deny these people the same liberties everyone else has - that isn't how it works. Either everyone has the right to marry, or no one does. Either it's called a civil union for everybody, or it isn't. Our country has been through "separate-but-equal" and segregation, but even though it was proven once already to have been undeniably wrong, apparently people learned nothing from it.

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

I want equality for all persons under the law to rule, for certain groups to not be discriminated against just because they're different or disagreeable to some - anyone's personal opinion is not the point; it is doing what is right for people who are being discriminated against. I couldn't care less if any particular person disagrees with or is against a certain behavior, but that does not give those people the "right" to deny these people the same liberties everyone else has - that isn't how it works. Either everyone has the right to marry, or no one does. Either it's called a civil union for everybody, or it isn't. Our country has been through "separate-but-equal" and segregation, but even though it was proven once already to have been undeniably wrong, apparently people learned nothing from it.

In my opinion your vision of equality is not equality at all but instead is depriving people of the right to representation under the law.

NAMBLA is a certain group (based on behavior) should they be discriminated against? Why should the majority opinion matter?

Nudists are a certain group (based on behavior) also - should they be discriminated against? Why should the maority opnion matter?

Why Don't We Do It In the Road?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yae3P1qoOa4

Since you feel that sexual behavior should not be discriminated against should we then eliminate all laws that oppress these other certain groups too? Just do it in the road?

[questionmark]

Thank goodness this mindset was not prevalent for women and blacks. Too bad it is now.

[Kimi81]

Wow if it can't pass in Cali or NY can't really see it passing anywhere down there. Maybe another 50 yrs of growing up will help.

Ain't that the truth, you would think NY and CA would be progresive enough to pass this We as Americans still have a long way to go. This is sad to me

[+HerNibs]

In my opinion your vision of equality is not equality at all but instead is depriving people of the right to representation under the law.

NAMBLA is a certain group (based on behavior) should they be discriminated against? Why should the majority opinion matter?

NAMBLA preys on children. NOT other consenting adults.

Nudists are a certain group (based on behavior) also - should they be discriminated against? Why should the maority opnion matter?

Ooooh, sneaky line here. Yes, nudism is a choice. Sexuality isn't unless you can tell me the day you decided to be straight.

Why Don't We Do It In the Road?

One of my favorites!!! And now, I must find you and pinch you because it will be stuck in my head all day.

*video sadly removed to save space*

Since you feel that sexual behavior should not be discriminated against should we then eliminate all laws that oppress these other certain groups too? Just do it in the road?

Behavior is different from sexuality. If a child is born as a hermaphrodite and is labeled a male, should the child be allowed to marry a woman?

Nibs

*humming*

*edit to fix wonky quote

Edited December 5, 2009 by HerNibs

[Paranormalcy]

In my opinion your vision of equality is not equality at all but instead is depriving people of the right to representation under the law.

I don't see how you could possibly arrive at that conclusion, but that is your interpretation and I can't do anything about that.

NAMBLA is a certain group (based on behavior) should they be discriminated against? Why should the majority opinion matter?

As noted, child predation and actually bringing REAL harm to others is not on the same level as adults bumping uglies. They shouldn't be discriminated against, but they should be counseled and perhaps medicated, and care should be taken, if possible, as to if they are allowed around children, because their inclination is specifically harmful to children. Moreover, you have made my point for me - members of NAMBLA can STILL get married to other adults also in NAMBLA, unless of course they're gay. They get their tax breaks and rules of inheritance, etc. Thank goodness we're being protected from those awful gays, though.

Nudists are a certain group (based on behavior) also - should they be discriminated against? Why should the maority opnion matter?

Nudism is not a gene that makes you predisposed to it - it is simply how we come into the world. I honestly can't give you an immediate response as to whether they should be allowed to "display" in public, because I don't think they should be able to, but I am willing to admit I can't think of why, besides I don't like it, and it's not considered "decent", both of which are subjective biases developed from our society - to me, this indicates that I also have my own prejudices and probably feel threatened in some way, by nudists being able to be in public, which I think is because of being a product of my environment, both immediate, world and country culture, and media. But guess what - nudists can marry.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Paranormalcy

[danielost]

i have said this before and will say it again. when you by law guarenty one groups rights, you remove another groups rights. take for instance blacks and women. when blacks got the right to vote it removed the right of the whites to decide where this country was going. when women got the right to vote it removed the right of men to decide where this country was going. now in both of these cases this was a good thing. when you give by law gays the right to marriage, you remove the meaning of said marriage. marriage is set up so that kids will have a mother and father to take care of them until they are old enough to take care of themselves. a gay marriage is just for convience sake. as i said modify common law laws. that is a law of convience as well.

[+HerNibs]

i have said this before and will say it again. when you by law guarenty one groups rights, you remove another groups rights. take for instance blacks and women. when blacks got the right to vote it removed the right of the whites to decide where this country was going. when women got the right to vote it removed the right of men to decide where this country was going. now in both of these cases this was a good thing. when you give by law gays the right to marriage, you remove the meaning of said marriage. marriage is set up so that kids will have a mother and father to take care of them until they are old enough to take care of themselves. a gay marriage is just for convience sake. as i said modify common law laws. that is a law of convience as well.

Better yet!!! Let the word "marriage" evolve naturally. Let it naturally encompass a concept rather than forcing it to be exclusive.

All marriages are for convenience sake. To allow certain legal actions to happen.

There are millions of kids that do NOT benefit from a mother and father. Many kids who are raised by same sex or single parents are just fine.

Nibs

[danielost]

Better yet!!! Let the word "marriage" evolve naturally. Let it naturally encompass a concept rather than forcing it to be exclusive.

All marriages are for convenience sake. To allow certain legal actions to happen.

There are millions of kids that do NOT benefit from a mother and father. Many kids who are raised by same sex or single parents are just fine.

Nibs

sorry marriage has been around longer than laws have been.

yes i know that many kids are raised by single parents. but usually these parents have two sets of grandparents to fall back on if they need help like babysitting. not always i know but usually. as for single sex couples raising kids, that would be better than said kid being raised in an orphanage or on the streets.

[questionmark]

sorry marriage has been around longer than laws have been.

yes i know that many kids are raised by single parents. but usually these parents have two sets of grandparents to fall back on if they need help like babysitting. not always i know but usually. as for single sex couples raising kids, that would be better than said kid being raised in an orphanage or on the streets.

Huh? Marriage has certainly not.

In fact, there were laws around and women were passed from the property of the father to the property of the husband...which certainly does not conform our concept of marriage.

[+HerNibs]

sorry marriage has been around longer than laws have been.

yes i know that many kids are raised by single parents. but usually these parents have two sets of grandparents to fall back on if they need help like babysitting. not always i know but usually. as for single sex couples raising kids, that would be better than said kid being raised in an orphanage or on the streets.

Nope. Marriage has not been around longer than the laws. Even the most primitive societies had "laws" against killing and stealing. Marriage was brought into the mix a long time later.

You are bringing into the mix grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. Homosexual couples have the same support systems available to them as well.

What about a dad raising two girls?

Nibs