So Gay marriage failed again...

[carlinie-the lezzy]

Herald of Lies

carlinie-the lezzy

Flabbergasted Breakdancer

Want to know the real reason?

Neither side is informed enough. You have the LGBT side who's main base is roughly only 1/4th of the nation when you add those that support them. Not to mention that allot of them also buy into the "Gay Pride" culture wich pretty much destoys half the arguments that LGBT are just like everyone else. Last time I looked around, straight people wheren't half naked in BDSM gear marching to the beat of Its raining Men or a song by Queen.

It makes those of us that don't flaunt our personal lives around the victim.

Then their is the right side. Though there are plenty of informed voters, this side is almost convinced that Jesus has to aprove of everything this country dose. Most where blissfully unaware of what these bills mean. Most think its a legalization of Gay sex, the teaching of homosexuality in schools, and somthing to do with the "gay agenda". I've met some people on the right who can give me a good reason why they feel homosexuals shouldn't have the right to marry. Though they are vastly out numbered by a huge chunk of the United states who belives everything that is told to them by thier pastors, reprsenative, etc.


In short. The majority of the population either don't care about the LGBT enough to vote for them, or think that any allowance of civil rights would mean that they pissed off Jesus.

I agree.

Too many people mix religion and politics together. Too many people are afraid of God, and they think by allowing us(LGBT PEOPLE) to get married will send them to hell. Needless to say i don't think these people should have a say in the matter, BUT they do. It's sad yes but what can we do? We are a minority and there are way too many people against us. That is what i think.

Why shouldn't people mix religion and politics together?

Because they're two very different things. No everyone is religious. Most religious people are too affraid of hell to think logically. They are too busy trying to "do right by God" to think of anyone but themselves. I think some religious people are selfidh to be honest. Now, don't get me wrong not religious people are this way, but a good amount are. I'm a chistian catholic and also a lesbian. I refuse to mix the those religion, sexuality, and politics together. This is just my opinion though,

[Overexposure]

carlinie-the lezzy

I agree.

Too many people mix religion and politics together. Too many people are afraid of God, and they think by allowing us(LGBT PEOPLE) to get married will send them to hell. Needless to say i don't think these people should have a say in the matter, BUT they do. It's sad yes but what can we do? We are a minority and there are way too many people against us. That is what i think.

So certain people should be denied their right to vote because you don't like the way they vote?

Do gulags also sound like a good idea to you?

Do Christians even HAVE a majority in this country?

What you think is based on information that is wrong. Many people are un-religious (irreligious?) and oppose homosexual marriage. Many people are also religious and SUPPORT homosexual marriage.

Instead of blanket targeting your supporters as well as your detractors, you should be more cautious with who you blame. No sense driving away people who are sympathetic to you just so you can lash out at religion.

[Herald of Lies]

carlinie-the lezzy

Herald of Lies

carlinie-the lezzy

Flabbergasted Breakdancer

Want to know the real reason?

Neither side is informed enough. You have the LGBT side who's main base is roughly only 1/4th of the nation when you add those that support them. Not to mention that allot of them also buy into the "Gay Pride" culture wich pretty much destoys half the arguments that LGBT are just like everyone else. Last time I looked around, straight people wheren't half naked in BDSM gear marching to the beat of Its raining Men or a song by Queen.

It makes those of us that don't flaunt our personal lives around the victim.

Then their is the right side. Though there are plenty of informed voters, this side is almost convinced that Jesus has to aprove of everything this country dose. Most where blissfully unaware of what these bills mean. Most think its a legalization of Gay sex, the teaching of homosexuality in schools, and somthing to do with the "gay agenda". I've met some people on the right who can give me a good reason why they feel homosexuals shouldn't have the right to marry. Though they are vastly out numbered by a huge chunk of the United states who belives everything that is told to them by thier pastors, reprsenative, etc.


In short. The majority of the population either don't care about the LGBT enough to vote for them, or think that any allowance of civil rights would mean that they pissed off Jesus.

I agree.

Too many people mix religion and politics together. Too many people are afraid of God, and they think by allowing us(LGBT PEOPLE) to get married will send them to hell. Needless to say i don't think these people should have a say in the matter, BUT they do. It's sad yes but what can we do? We are a minority and there are way too many people against us. That is what i think.

Why shouldn't people mix religion and politics together?

Because they're two very different things.

So what? One can impact the other.

Quote:

No everyone is religious.

So what?

Quote:

Most religious people are too affraid of hell to think logically. They are too busy trying to "do right by God" to think of anyone but themselves. I think some religious people are selfidh to be honest. Now, don't get me wrong not religious people are this way, but a good amount are. I'm a chistian catholic and also a lesbian. I refuse to mix the those religion, sexuality, and politics together. This is just my opinion though,

Your opinion sucks as it lacks anything but a horribly biased opinion about religious people, who you've sadly dwindled down to only Christianity. Why in the world do you think they're mostly all too afraid of Hell? I might as well say you're too sexual to think logically about gay issues.

And how is that selfish to do what is right by someone else?

[Overexposure]

carlinie-the lezzy

I'm a chistian catholic and also a lesbian. I refuse to mix the those religion, sexuality, and politics together. This is just my opinion though,

No. Politics and Religion I'd give you. But Catholicism is very, VERY, strict about sexuality. You CAN'T refuse to mix the two. It's like saying, I'm not a ********, but I ******** goats.

[M. Angel]

Hello everyone, I'm back. So did anyone find out the outcome in Washington state? I believe it had something to do with our present topic.

[pulchritudinous soup]

Overexposure

So certain people should be denied their right to vote because you don't like the way they vote?

Do gulags also sound like a good idea to you?

Do Christians even HAVE a majority in this country?

...Seriously? You're asking that?

Majority of the USA is either Protestant or Catholic.
78.4% believe in the "Christian" God.

Quote:

What you think is based on information that is wrong. Many people are un-religious (irreligious?) and oppose homosexual marriage. Many people are also religious and SUPPORT homosexual marriage.

Not according to statistics.

Quote:

Instead of blanket targeting your supporters as well as your detractors, you should be more cautious with who you blame. No sense driving away people who are sympathetic to you just so you can lash out at religion.

I'm pretty sure that you're statement, up above, is inadequate since every statistic proves that your claims are inaccurate. Try again, please.

[ZechsK]

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

Quote:

Quitters never win Gunsmith.

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.

Quote:

You should stay, if only to infuriate Octane

Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

[M. Angel]

ZechsK

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

Quote:

Quitters never win Gunsmith.

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.

Quote:

You should stay, if only to infuriate Octane

Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

Except the civil rights movement was a direct violation to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Segregation being HUGE in this regard. Having marriage is a cause that I doubt few are willing to get "militant" over. This isn't to say that they aren't passionate, but they are so fractured in what they want in terms of two people being together that, until there is some sort of unifying force, the movement'll continue to fail.

My observations over the course of the debate so far.

[Asevenex]

M. Angel

ZechsK

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

Quote:

Quitters never win Gunsmith.

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.

Quote:

You should stay, if only to infuriate Octane

Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

Except the civil rights movement was a direct violation to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Segregation being HUGE in this regard. Having marriage is a cause that I doubt few are willing to get "militant" over. This isn't to say that they aren't passionate, but they are so fractured in what they want in terms of two people being together that, until there is some sort of unifying force, the movement'll continue to fail.

My observations over the course of the debate so far.

The bold. They'll use this in their favor to allow marriage because its a violation of pursuit of happiness.

[AstroFemme]

M. Angel

ZechsK

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

Quote:

Quitters never win Gunsmith.

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.

Quote:

You should stay, if only to infuriate Octane

Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

Except the civil rights movement was a direct violation to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Segregation being HUGE in this regard. Having marriage is a cause that I doubt few are willing to get "militant" over. This isn't to say that they aren't passionate, but they are so fractured in what they want in terms of two people being together that, until there is some sort of unifying force, the movement'll continue to fail.

My observations over the course of the debate so far.

No, not necessarily. One of the main advocates for the rights of blacks, Dr. Martin Luther King, was about civil disobedience, not violent disobedience.

[Zika Justice]

This is simple...
Men have a p***s
Women have a v****a
It's the way NATURE intended it to be... Whether anyone likes it or not, that's the way it's been it's been 100,000 BILLION years ago, that's the way it's been ever since men and women came into existence, that's the way it is NOW and that's the way it'll be in ANOTHER eternity from now... Or as long as the earth doesn't explode somehow (seeing as there are rocks flying around in space and the sun might explode in a few million years... Or we could destroy ourselves cause of the massive increase of bomb production over the years)

That's probably the best way for me to describe why gay marriage fails without bringing morals and religion into it though.

[AstroFemme]

Zika Justice

This is simple...
Men have a p***s
Women have a v****a
It's the way NATURE intended it to be... Whether anyone likes it or not, that's the way it's been it's been 100,000 BILLION years ago, that's the way it's been ever since men and women came into existence, that's the way it is NOW and that's the way it'll be in ANOTHER eternity from now... Or as long as the earth doesn't explode somehow (seeing as there are rocks flying around in space and the sun might explode in a few million years... Or we could destroy ourselves cause of the massive increase of bomb production over the years)

That's probably the best way for me to describe why gay marriage fails without bringing morals and religion into it though.

Except in the case of those who have both male and female genitalia.

[M. Angel]

Asevenex

M. Angel

ZechsK

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.



Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

Except the civil rights movement was a direct violation to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Segregation being HUGE in this regard. Having marriage is a cause that I doubt few are willing to get "militant" over. This isn't to say that they aren't passionate, but they are so fractured in what they want in terms of two people being together that, until there is some sort of unifying force, the movement'll continue to fail.

My observations over the course of the debate so far.

The bold. They'll use this in their favor to allow marriage because its a violation of pursuit of happiness.

Well the question is do they need a union, called marriage, in order to find happiness. According to the gay pride culture, which has support from the LGBT, they don't need marriage. Long strings of casual sex seems to be working for them. This goes back to my fraction comment of the movement and why they probably won't be winning until they realize what it is that they as a group want.

[AstroFemme]

M. Angel

Asevenex

M. Angel

ZechsK

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.



Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

Except the civil rights movement was a direct violation to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Segregation being HUGE in this regard. Having marriage is a cause that I doubt few are willing to get "militant" over. This isn't to say that they aren't passionate, but they are so fractured in what they want in terms of two people being together that, until there is some sort of unifying force, the movement'll continue to fail.

My observations over the course of the debate so far.

The bold. They'll use this in their favor to allow marriage because its a violation of pursuit of happiness.

Well the question is do they need a union, called marriage, in order to find happiness. According to the gay pride culture, which has support from the LGBT, they don't need marriage. Long strings of casual sex seems to be working for them. This goes back to my fraction comment of the movement and why they probably won't be winning until they realize what it is that they as a group want.

Well the all the protests that I have participated in seems to indicate that they want equal rights to be married.

[M. Angel]

AstroFemme

M. Angel

ZechsK

pulchritudinous soup

GunsmithKitten

But if I already never win, there's no problem in quitting. 0-31 is not a good record.



Screw it. The populance wants to agree with him, I'm lookin for the exit. I don't believe in hanging around where I'm not wanted.

Perhaps you're doing something wrong? Are your arguments based around the same technique? If so, that's a problem. You should not expect to change opinions if you're not willing to reconsider your own arguments and make adjustments to be more logically appealing. If you can successfully twist around Octane's ideology, and continue to throw in psychological and sociological facts while he's still trying to find support for an opposition; you've basically won. If anyone tries to dodge a question that you impose, then you've clearly outsmarted them. Those who wish to continue their advocation with the opponent even if you point out how they could not answer something that you put forth with clear and respectable information, then they're not worth it.

I still do not believe that you have created arguments with solid sources that reinforce your opinion even throughout the amount of time that you put into many "gay rights' arguments".

Prove that your arguments have changed throughout time. If you cannot, then do not blame society for siding with Octane. His perspective is, generally, popular--I will not disagree. But, to give up and blame popularity only proves that he, Octane, was right from the beginning. If you're not willing to fight and go against the odds, then why are you fighting?

Actually she has made good points, and many pro-glbt people have made good points. But what is comes down to is that having a good point, or even a scientifically proven correct point doesn't mean people are going to accept it. People don't always try to justify their prejudices and don't need reason, so throwing reason at them isn't going to result in change.

To be honest the GLBT movement is where the black power movement was pre and mid - civil rights movement era. They need to get militant.

Except the civil rights movement was a direct violation to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Segregation being HUGE in this regard. Having marriage is a cause that I doubt few are willing to get "militant" over. This isn't to say that they aren't passionate, but they are so fractured in what they want in terms of two people being together that, until there is some sort of unifying force, the movement'll continue to fail.

My observations over the course of the debate so far.

No, not necessarily. One of the main advocates for the rights of blacks, Dr. Martin Luther King, was about civil disobedience, not violent disobedience.

Well I was referring more to the black power portion with that statement. Here's the thing, there isn't any civil disobedience that could be done in this instance.

Segregation: Well I'll go sit in the white section.

Gay marriage: well I'll go get married... wait...

As mentioned also, the community as a whole isn't defined on what they want. MLK was a uniting person, someone who demands attention, respect, and is willing to work, slowly, for change. There is no MLK for the gay marriage movement.