Are you against gay marriage?

[Scorps]

I do feel that children brought up by homosexual couples have a tendency and higher percentage to become homosexuals rather than those who are brought up or raised through heterosexual parents,putting that aside the child might be subjected to insult and other slurs based on the virtue that his parents are "gays or lesbians" and such things would affect the child when he or she is growing up. I do feel people should spend less time on other people life's and concentrates on theirs and try to put in effort to improve the society and make it a better place. Now the question i pose is what if in my opinions getting rid of gays is my own contribution or in my mind is my own way or part in what i can do to improve the society,take me for an example i was raised in an African manner by my parents which were straight and even more so i was raised as a catholic and in that sense i see homosexuality as one of the things that the society needs to be purged off and something which needs to be rebuked as it wasn't the way i was raised by my parents nor was it the way i was brought up in the church, it feels a little funny to me to be honest when i see on TV in America or abroad issues on gay marriages and gays asking for free rights which is funny because that is not a luxury you are afforded in my country, you being a homosexual is a crime as i have said earlier and one which warrants imprisonment so obviously gay marriages getting approved is out of the question, now it is safe to say that in the governments minds or the law makers minds rather the passing of such a law was to improve the community and the country as a whole.

At the bolded because the rest is virtually unreadable for me, sorry: where did you hear that? Who told you? a scientist? a priest? the barber on your street? the milkman?

We can all sprout preconceptions and other wrong notions about each other which have been spoon fed to us during our upbringing. However, we have the option to actually think for ourselves and decide on what is right. We have the option to better ourselves, to grow and become better members of society by evolving beyond the ancient preconceptions and hate of the generations that came before us. If we decide not to, then... well, shame on us.

Lol.

 

[ZK]

At the bolded because the rest is virtually unreadable for me, sorry: where did you hear that? Who told you? a scientist? a priest? the barber on your street? the milkman?

We can all sprout preconceptions and other wrong notions about each other which have been spoon fed to us during our upbringing. However, we have the option to actually think for ourselves and decide on what is right. We have the option to better ourselves, to grow and become better members of society by evolving beyond the ancient preconceptions and hate of the generations that came before us. If we decide not to, then... well, shame on us.

Lol.

Not only that but the argument has no relation to modern society. Exchange homosexual with 'Christian' and heterosexual with 'Muslim'.
Children are influenced by their parents, true, but the debate on whether homosexuality is a choice or not is moot in most secular nations, considering that we allow parents to raise children as they please. Honestly, if the hardcore Satanist who loves to sacrifice animals can have a kid with his punk-rock girlfriend with a sadistic streak; why shouldn't homosexuals have the same privileges?
If we set a standard for indoctrination we must do so across the line, not to the detriment of a single group.

 

[NarutoIndra]

At the bolded because the rest is virtually unreadable for me, sorry: where did you hear that? Who told you? a scientist? a priest? the barber on your street? the milkman?

We can all sprout preconceptions and other wrong notions about each other which have been spoon fed to us during our upbringing. However, we have the option to actually think for ourselves and decide on what is right. We have the option to better ourselves, to grow and become better members of society by evolving beyond the ancient preconceptions and hate of the generations that came before us. If we decide not to, then... well, shame on us.

Lol.

What?? Why wouldn't the child brought up by a homosexual couple not have a tendency to be homosexual himself? It is completely logical for him to, eyeing as how that is what he sees the for the majority of his upbringing, and that is what in his eyes, will be considered a normal and happy relationship. Saying he will still have a tendency to be heterosexual is completely fallacious, since he has little reason to.

It has nothing to do about preconceptions, children are likely to act like their parents, or at least have the same ideology as their parents. Most heterosexuals are brought up by a heterosexual couple, despite some heterosexual couple not teaching their children to look down upon homosexuals. It is simply what they see throughout their life, the biggest reason for a child brought up by a homosexual couple to opt to not being homosexual himself is if his parents have a bad relationship. A good and happy homosexual relationship will lead to a homosexual child willing the same in his life, a very logical concussion and thought process, in contrast to yours which assumes people are heterosexual because they are spoon fed opinions and teachings about homosexuals, being only a very small reason.

 

[ZK]

What?? Why wouldn't the child brought up by a homosexual couple not have a tendency to be homosexual himself? It is completely logical for him to, eyeing as how that is what he sees the for the majority of his upbringing, and that is what in his eyes, will be considered a normal and happy relationship. Saying he will still have a tendency to be heterosexual is completely fallacious, since he has little reason to.

It has nothing to do about preconceptions, children are likely to act like their parents, or at least have the same ideology as their parents. Most heterosexuals are brought up by a heterosexual couple, despite some heterosexual couple not teaching their children to look down upon homosexuals. It is simply what they see throughout their life, the biggest reason for a child brought up by a homosexual couple to opt to not being homosexual himself is if his parents have a bad relationship. A good and happy homosexual relationship will lead to a homosexual child willing the same in his life, a very logical concussion and thought process, in contrast to yours which assumes people are heterosexual because they are spoon fed opinions and teachings about homosexuals, being only a very small reason.

Let's pretend that you're absolutely correct; homosexual couples raise homosexual children. So what? We allow members of the Wesboro Baptist Church to indoctrinate their children. What makes homosexuality so vile that we should protect children from it?

 

[NarutoIndra]

Let's pretend that you're absolutely correct; homosexual couples raise homosexual children. So what? We allow members of the Wesboro Baptist Church to indoctrinate their children. What makes homosexuality so vile that we should protect children from it?

It isn't vile, it is simply contrasting how this world is meant to be. A world were people reproduce and love for the sake of wanting to fulfil a loving relationship with a family and a couple's own kids. Homosexuals cannot do most of this. Homosexual love is usually for the pleasure, and at most times, they don't get kids. And even when they do, those children aren't genetically both of their's, but rather a single parent's, arousing different emotions not only for the child, but for the parent who is completely unrelated to the child in regards to genetics and DNA. More so, the child who is usually brought into this family will likely be heavily bullied for not having a mother, but rather two homosexual parents. He will likely share the same belief and be homosexual, thus receiving abuse at school himself. I understand this is because of the common view, but this common view is likely going to remain indefinitely since homosexual activities are usually looked down upon even when having never been taught so, because it doesn't aid humanity in any particular way. Anyways, if homosexual children raise homosexual children, and these children create a cycle of either adopting or creating biological babies, then this world will soon be heavily consistent of homosexual people that are all in common to the few mothers who chose to take the path of accepting sperm donors. This is simply my opinion on it, so don't take anything I said offensively.

 

[ZK]

It isn't vile, it is simply contrasting how this world is meant to be. A world were people reproduce and love for the sake of wanting to fulfil a loving relationship with a family and a couple's own kids. Homosexuals cannot do most of this. Homosexual love is usually for the pleasure, and at most times, they don't get kids. And even when they do, those children aren't genetically both of their's, but rather a single parent's, arousing different emotions not only for the child, but for the parent who is completely unrelated to the child in regards to genetics and DNA. More so, the child who is usually brought into this family will likely be heavily bullied for not having a mother, but rather two homosexual parents. He will likely share the same belief and be homosexual, thus receiving abuse at school himself. I understand this is because of the common view, but this common view is likely going to remain indefinitely since homosexual activities are usually looked down upon even when having never been taught so, because it doesn't aid humanity in any particular way. Anyways, if homosexual children raise homosexual children, and these children create a cycle of either adopting or creating biological babies, then this world will soon be heavily consistent of homosexual people that are all in common to the few mothers who chose to take the path of accepting sperm donors. This is simply my opinion on it, so don't take anything I said offensively.

I don't think you can offend me.

Not how the world is meant to be? Says who? Says scripture? Says tricky ****. You see where I'm going, right? No one knows how the world is 'meant to be'. You might as well say 'the meaning of life isn't homosexuality'. I sincrely hope you won't stick to that argument.
That aside I really like the picture you paint of the nuclear family, two loving parents and some normal, middle-class kids with normal problems and a normal life. I don't know if you realize though; but sexual intercourse with procreation as its only aim is about as rare as a five-leaf clover. Humans of all genders enjoy ***. Homosexuals enjoy *** with those of their own gender whereas heterosexuals enjoy *** with those of the opposite gender. Love is at least partially for pleasure. Very few couples abstinate from ***.
Love is nice. You could say it's for pleasure.

...

And then there's the stuff you write about homosexual couples adopting kids/being artificially inseminated/whatever.
You know that a lot of heterosexual couples have kids who aren't 'really theirs', right? The woman might be sterile, or the man, or both. Adoption is a common thing, so I find this whole section:

And even when they do, those children aren't genetically both of their's, but rather a single parent's, arousing different emotions not only for the child, but for the parent who is completely unrelated to the child in regards to genetics and DNA

To be completely unrelated to our discussion's topic and more of a general criticism of adoption in general. Not only that, but also couples who've used sperm donors and surrage mothers to become parents.

And then you write something about bullying. I see this argument all the time and it surprises me every time.
I got bullied because of my glasses. Both my parents needed glasses so there was a pretty big risk I'd need them too, just like you theorize there's a big chance of a homosexual couple's kid turning homosexual.
Should my parents have been banned from having children because their child might be bullied? Should we ban parents with lifestyles we think their children will be bullied for from having kids?

Finally, this:

Anyways, if homosexual children raise homosexual children, and these children create a cycle of either adopting or creating biological babies, then this world will soon be heavily consistent of homosexual people that are all in common to the few mothers who chose to take the path of accepting sperm donors.

So you're not worried about the safety of the kids or the integrity of the nuclear family... you're worried about a future full of inbred homosexuals?
Dude.

EDIT: and I find it hilarious that whenever you think 'homosexual' you think boy-on-boy. Girls can't be homosexuals or something?
No, I guess that's just hot. Amirite?

 

[System001]

I'm against gays getting married in an actual 'Christian' church, by a 'Christian' priest/pastor/w.e...

 

[Scorps]

Marriage in the sense that is being brought up is real marriage; legal marriage. Not religious one. Its the marriage that is defined as a right to every citizen of a given country along with their other rights.

The argument of God into this question is mute. Why? God (christianity god at least) teaches compassion, love and that all people are equal and have the right to be happy, to love and to be loved. It teaches nothing about hate, segregation, stupidity or anything of the sort. Pope Francis has even said this himself that homosexuals are as god's children as any other and should be loved and not ostracized. So saying that the right way is to teach kids to look down on homosexuality is actually wrong in a religious sense. And anyone who says otherwise is actually distorting the words written in story texts with over 2000 years ago, mistranslated along the way by countless people that serve as the basis of many religions in the world. Which is ridiculous to say the least. Bible is simply a mishmash of random stories and accounts of multiple situations which were intended to be used as examples on how to behave or not behave correctly in the eyes of God. But it has almost no real set of guidelines and contents. Its actually a set of books designed to be interpreted by who reads them. Sadly, only a few read them and gave their interpretations to others as if it was truth. The bible doesn't say to not have *** for pleasure or that gays shouldn't be married or that *** without marriage is sin. The few guidelines it gives are the 10 commandments and a few other things in the first and oldest books. Rest are stories. The religious argument is voided because 99.9999% of those who use it don't understand it themselves. I actually studied aspects of the bible in Psychology and Philosophy and trust me, its twisted to serve the purpose of the middle ages royal families of Europe. Nothing else. And when you twist something to serve your own agenda you end up making it hypocritical. "Love thy neighbor" but "hate every single person who is different or believes in something other than what you believe"...

Most heterosexuals are brought up by a heterosexual couple, despite some heterosexual couple not teaching their children to look down upon homosexuals.

I mean, this sentence resumes the issue we live in the world. "look down", "hate", "despise", etc. I mean, you all are assuming for some god forsaken reason that a gay guy or a lesbian girl actually decide at some point that they should be homosexuals. Its as if you believe a baby is an empty canvas which can be imprinted with anything from their sexuality to their personality. Sadly, thats not the case for your own beliefs. Psychology has proven that you are born with personality traits and your own sexuality. Come on, if it was something that could be imprinted into someone don't you think that extremist couples of the white supremacy cults or extreme religious couples would actually raise homosexual kids? Well they do, despite all their brain washing mambo jambo. It has nothing to do with how you are raised or by whom. Its something you are born with. And using that point, all other reasonings become empty and voided. Its not something you can imprint in others through education, morals or religion. What can be imprinted into other people is hate, mental illness and actual social diseases like racism and xenophobe persecutions.


I'm straight, born in a homo-hating christian family like most of the people in my country in my generation. Yet, I decided on my own to actually be more than a troglodyte and pursue a view that doesn't hurt people just because they are born in a given way. I was raised to think Homosexuality is a sin yet I have come to understand it as something natural that happens in humans. Is it a deviation from the norm? Yes. But is it something that makes someone worthy of being ostracized or pursued or denied their rights? No. Its it a disease? No, not since the 1970's if memory serves me right. You can be raised to hate others but if you hate them then its your own decision and the showcase of your own shortcomings.

Also, I don't aim to insult. I just find that when we have so much bigger issues in the world to deal with that we spend so much energy and focus hating on decent, working, normal people who simply have a different sexual orientation. And we do it without knowing why or understanding our own hate or beliefs. Shouldn't we hate on assassins? On religious extremist who violate the human rights? On dictators? On drug dealers? On corrupt politicians and business men? Shouldn't we make our efforts to be to help our fellow human instead of hating? Shouldn't we try and end the senseless streaks of violence and hate that go around in the streets? In the schools? In our own homes? With our kids? Wouldn't that be a much better use of your energy and our "hate"? Than a few people who did nothing wrong but to be born different from what is considered the norm?

Again, it all seems just stupid to me.

 

[Luther]

At the bolded because the rest is virtually unreadable for me, sorry: where did you hear that? Who told you? a scientist? a priest? the barber on your street? the milkman?

We can all sprout preconceptions and other wrong notions about each other which have been spoon fed to us during our upbringing. However, we have the option to actually think for ourselves and decide on what is right. We have the option to better ourselves, to grow and become better members of society by evolving beyond the ancient preconceptions and hate of the generations that came before us. If we decide not to, then... well, shame on us.

Lol.

Well i merely taught it was common sense, if you are raised up in a home full of drug and heroine users and parents who are crackheads the child has a higher percentage than other children to become a drug user too as the influence that his parents pose is that great, the same way i see it lets say from the start your parents are gays and they tend to display their show of affection towards each-other openly, by kissing and hugging, over sometime the child would be more open to such ideas and might say well em why dont i try to kiss the other *** and see it? What im trying to prove is that however remote the influence is on the child it is still an influence which would play a role in the child choosing his sexuality. People can live their lives how they want but if another life is involved they should show caution which is why i still dont agree completely with gays adopting.

 

[Scorps]

Well i merely taught it was common sense, if you are raised up in a home full of drug and heroine users and parents who are crackheads the child has a higher percentage than other children to become a drug user too as the influence that his parents pose is that great, the same way i see it lets say from the start your parents are gays and they tend to display their show of affection towards each-other openly, by kissing and hugging, over sometime the child would be more open to such ideas and might say well em why dont i try to kiss the other *** and see it? What im trying to prove is that however remote the influence is on the child it is still an influence which would play a role in the child choosing his sexuality. People can live their lives how they want but if another life is involved they should show caution which is why i still dont agree completely with gays adopting.

All pink and fluffly if you believe that sexuality is something you can "learn" and not something you're born with. But I won't dwell on that note any more. You can believe whatever you want to believe and act accordingly. In the end, we are the product of our actions and what we decide to believe in and thats the showcase of either our success or failure as a person. Just hope you never have a Homosexual child as she or he will suffer tremendously and no one deserves that.

 

[Strawberry]

gonna be honest i want to prevent GAYS from occuring limit them, they are growing however if they choose to be that way then its their decision, iw ant to prevent them from taking it but if theve taken it it's their choice and marriage is a right, they already live together the marriage document only binds them legally so theya re some how responsible for things in each other lives.

 

[NarutoIndra]

I don't think you can offend me.

Not how the world is meant to be? Says who? Says scripture? Says tricky ****. You see where I'm going, right? No one knows how the world is 'meant to be'. You might as well say 'the meaning of life isn't homosexuality'. I sincrely hope you won't stick to that argument.
That aside I really like the picture you paint of the nuclear family, two loving parents and some normal, middle-class kids with normal problems and a normal life. I don't know if you realize though; but sexual intercourse with procreation as its only aim is about as rare as a five-leaf clover. Humans of all genders enjoy ***. Homosexuals enjoy *** with those of their own gender whereas heterosexuals enjoy *** with those of the opposite gender. Love is at least partially for pleasure. Very few couples abstinate from ***.
Love is nice. You could say it's for pleasure.

...

And then there's the stuff you write about homosexual couples adopting kids/being artificially inseminated/whatever.
You know that a lot of heterosexual couples have kids who aren't 'really theirs', right? The woman might be sterile, or the man, or both. Adoption is a common thing, so I find this whole section:

Don't see where you are join with the you can't offend me shit, don't really care, I was simply saying it to prevent anyone on this site from being effected, it wasn't directed at specifically you.. "Sincerely hope I won't stick with this argument" Lel you took my words out of context and assumed the scenario's you fabricated were the only scenario's possible, nice one.

What does this have to do with anything? A man and a women can reproduce. A man and a man or a women and a women cannot. That is enough evidence it was never meant to be, as before biological studies, having had a population of gay's means this world would be extinct of human's right now. That is all the evidence required to realise it was never meant to be, otherwise homosexuals could mate, seeing as they cannot, that should speak for itself...
What? Most heterosexuals have *** with the main reason being to reproduce and create a family, while pleasure comes along with it. Homosexuals cannot have *** for any other reason then pleasure, unless you are suggesting if two homosexuals have enough ***, they can be personally affected by evolution and receive children. I understand love is love in both types of relationships, I never doubted it. Never denied love isn't pleasure. Don't see where you were going with your argument, but it is clear we have differing views.