Why I don't like gays & why theyre ways should not become acceptable

The term "homophobe" is thrown around rather loosely. I personally do not condone equating the legal recognition of a man and woman with a man and man or woman and woman. Marriage should be defined as that between a man and woman. However, to the point of discriminating against the homosexual in a job, or physical and verbal abuse...these I don't condone either.

I'm single, I'm not married. I have no stake in the marriage definition...but if we're going to define it legally, than legally it should be solely between a man and a woman...not a man and women or a man and a dog...or a man and a man.

I fail to see how that labels me as a homophobe because of that...I suppose that's my point.

Should a man be allowed to marry 10 women...legally...providing them the legal umbrella that marriage provides?

it's consensual, it hurts no one...it's 11 adults agreeing to be married...same argument used by homosexuals to define
a marriage in many ways different from a man and a woman.

I oppose this also...and frankly that's the slippery slope re-defining the notion of marriage will lead to.

Traditionally, and legally, a man, and a woman...get married.

Why change that.

Benefits?

What about a civil union that affords benefits to same sex couples...nope not good enough..the walls of tradition must be felled...

This is where we go our separate ways in this argument. I oppose altering the traditional definition and meaning of marriage to include same sex couples. Allow them civil unions to allow for the benefits of marriage, but no re-definition of the term..."Marriage"...

Beyond that, I maintain a very live and let live attitude towards the issue and have accepted fully their right to serve openly in the services...that was previously another difference but I've accepted that as something that was destined to change. I see no reason to re-define marriage. None.

 

Here is the definition of the term "homophobe".

Many people are homophobes; that really isn't disputable. And the reality is that there are words to describe those people.

 

You're right. I see no need to change it:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage

That's for sure.

 

Actually 5 year olds don't have much of a problem with the concept. Usually it doesn't register for a couple more years. Small children find the two adults kissing or being intimate fairly repulsive regardless of the genders- only as they age do they recognize that in our society the standard is a man and a woman.

When I was a kid, seeing an inter-racial couple seemed equally odd and disturbing.

 

Well I don't think you're a homophobe for that, but I don't understand why you object to the word 'marriage' being used. I'm sure we both agree that marriage is an important word conveying a bond that exists not just as some cold, emotionally-devoid "legal contract", that misses the point of it entirely. 'Marriage' conveys love, commitment, happiness, celebration... something that transcends a simple legal arrangement. Why should gay people have to settle for terms like "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships"? That sounds (in the words of a Republican state senator who gave an impassioned speech in support of marriage equality) like a Merry-Maid franchise or something business-related. It also conveys the idea that somehow the love that exists between two men or two women could never equal that as a experienced by a heterosexual couple.

As a gay man I do not wish to ask my partner to "civil union" me, "domestic partnership" me or anything as RIDICULOUS sounding as that... I do not want to have to sit here in my state/country while those just over the border enjoy full equality, leaving me with some cheap second-class status created just so some heterosexuals can continue to feel superior about themselves and think of the love me and my partner share as being inferior to their own. No thanks.

It should be defined as a union of two people over the age the state sets. Why should it be limited to a man and a woman? What possible ill-effects could come about by my being allowed to describe my union as a 'marriage'? You think that would mean human-dog marriage would be next on the cards??? -_-

Clarify that point would you because I didn't think you were homophobic but now I'm starting to think differently. Bad, bad example...

My proposed marriage would fit perfectly into the model that already exists. It wouldn't upset the male-to-female ratio - something that's causing all kinds of problems in India with the trafficking and rape of women, because there aren't enough women (which is also down to abortion of female fetuses but still...). Nor would it be sanctioning a practice known to have high levels of physical, mental and emotional abuse and dominance. Nor would it throw the legal system into complete chaos with divorce, custody battles and immigration status. What would stop one man marrying all of Mexico and getting them US citizenship?

Apples and oranges there.

The so-called "walls of tradition" have been "felled" throughout all of history. Marriage was essentially once about treating women as property/preserving racial purity. Tradition shouldn't be used as an argument to keep people 'down' as it were. It's a potentially ugly word that has been used to try and deny many equal rights - from blacks, to women and now gays. Pray tell, what does me describing my union as marriage do to harm anyone else's? I mean, gay couples and straight couples both get to describe themselves as couples... there's no "separate but equal" word to set us apart there. So why can't we share the word 'marriage'?

 

Im hetero sexual and find the lies your spewing to be disgusting don’t mind if people are gay either

being attracted to the same gender is a gateway to being attracted to the same gender your lies will be opposed I’m not sorry about that

 

but if you think that’s a great post and it turns out to be an obvious pack of lies doesn’t that suggest you guys are the one who are mentally (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up?

As are the other people who would torment others

 

by having parents that are there to guide and support the child I guess

- - - Updated - - -

no but they seem afraid or freaked out or hateful

 

Homophobia causes MANY to be deluded; it distorts what they think reality is.

 

Oh hi! You're back! Care to address my previous post to you? Like, as in, retracting your stance or admitting that you are a freedom-hating bigot? Meanwhile, every study done on the effects of children raised by homosexual couples, save for one famous study that was flawed in numerous serious ways, showed that kids raised in gay households do just as well as kids raised in straight households. And if they are tormented for their parents at school, it's somehow their parents' faults, rather than, oh, I dunno, the fault of the intolerant, bigoted (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s?

Easy: it just isn't. Do you want me to cite the studies, or would it not make any (*)(*)(*)(*)ing difference?

I disagree. I think that the "abnormality" of homosexuality is taught.

 

I wish to point out that I have seen no evidence, statistical or otherwise, that homosexuality leads to paedophilia. To those who would make this contention, I ask that you provide such evidence from an unbiased and reliable source.

Everything I have read suggests that homosexuality and paedophilia are unconnected. There will be homosexuals who are paedophiles,and heterosexuals who are paedophiles, but the ratios will be much the same. Very little is understood about paedophilia, but in my opinion, it has to be a mental imbalance, and its effects are to cause extensive and ongoing harm (often totally destroying lives). Whereas, IMO, homosexuality is merely a sexual orientation, where, in the case of consensual activity, no one is harmed (and it is really no one else's business).

 

yo.. repost it man.... i wasnt on for a few days and it got buried....so repost it and i'll get to it

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/gay-l...-not-become-acceptable-12.html#post1062188678

Fair warning: I get mean when I'm drunk.

 

no, i dont hate you because you are homosexual. the reason i am forced back a bit by you is because you are so pushy. and you remind me exactly of the firend that did this to me. honestly i dont see you holding back yourself, so yet that aspect of you bother me. being homosexual has little to do with it

right.... cause obviously i can make up this long story like this out of thin air

nah. mariage is mariage. man and women. no one is saying gays cant live together or be together. i just dont want it in my face, thrown at me, and for me to be forced to like it.

 

So you expect other people to deal with YOUR insecurities and rotten character traits?

 

Many people who are 'racists', 'jerks', 'bigots' or 'homophobes'... don't have the ability to see themselves.

 

So let me get this right...you don't think that gays should be able to marry because you don't like it and you don't want it forced on you?

So you would instead force your beliefs onto them...preventing them from marrying and enjoying the legal benefits of that institution?

Hey pot...meet kettle, you share a common color.

 

i dont want gays 'marrying' because they cant.... marriage is a man and women. its like calling basketball, football. its different. its not the same thing.

 

No mate, actually they're just different players but it's the same sport.

 

completely different sport. pro creation, different sexual practices (that are impossible between both different types of relationships.

what kind of game out there has a few players that can score while other that physically CANT score. and different games, like one player tackles and the other player can make no physical contact

its a completely different game, as i said.

 

No mate, same sport: lovemaking, caring for, building a future together, sharing hopes and dreams

 

pro creating? the inability to do regular sex? what sport has things certain players CANT do.

its different games from what your saying. basketball and footbal both have balls, you can score points, theyres player, your goal is to win etc. but when you get down to it, the game itself and how its played and by who is completely different. same difference between heterosexuals and gays

 

Not all straight ppl can procreate mate.
The inability to do regular sex? I thought that was more a problem straight men have.

It still is the same game but different players with different playing styles.

 

but ALL gays cant pro create and ALL gays cant have normal sex BY PRINCIPLE. its like how some players, like linebacks rarely score touch downs, sometimes they never do for their whole career. but its still possible in principle. however it is 100% impossible and impossible in principle for a basketball player to score a touch down during a basketball game.

 

Why do you care what kind sex anyone has?

The gay couple you see on the street may be having the exact kind of sex that a straight couple you see is having. You don't know.

Really- if it wasn't for your overwhelming fear that some gay gay was going to hit on you, or your revulsion for the concept of anal sex- would you care at all?

Do two women making out repulse you? As a straight man, I have to say I enjoy seeing that. I would speculate that you are repulsed by the idea of two men having sex together....not two women. Which would be a very different revulsion from a moral revulsion against any same sex pairing up.