Same-Sex Marriage: Point of View

[Normandywe]

Emotions are to be discarded entirely, as they are far too departed from objectivity to be considered.

That's BS, our emotions are part of what makes us human, a HUGE part. Social species need emotions as part of our survival instincts as well.

Weber quite clearly explained that emotions are anathema to rationalism, and on that principle alone I am convinced of the failures inevitable in acting by emotion.

[Ainin]

I wouldn't give a shit if you were allowed to marry plants. Why? Because it's not my business deciding who someone else should marry with. They're obviously happy, so let them marry. Humanity's fictional stories should not have anything to do with law.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I don't watch movies, nor do I own a television.

You're a supervillain!

Holy bull testicles, Batman! We have found your true nemesis!!

[Neutraligon]

That's BS, our emotions are part of what makes us human, a HUGE part. Social species need emotions as part of our survival instincts as well.

Weber quite clearly explained that emotions are anathema to rationalism, and on that principle alone I am convinced of the failures inevitable in acting by emotion.

Do you think humans, as social creatures, can detach themselves from emotion? Also, why are you trying to reduce the gene pool?

[Desperate Measures]

That's BS, our emotions are part of what makes us human, a HUGE part. Social species need emotions as part of our survival instincts as well.

Weber quite clearly explained that emotions are anathema to rationalism, and on that principle alone I am convinced of the failures inevitable in acting by emotion.

What you are trying to say is almost an impossible waste of time and if you tried to implement it, you'd drive the world insane. It's a bad idea.

[Haydenish People]

Intolerance achieves nothing. If two people want to get married, then let them get married. I don't know what the big fuss is about. They're not hurting anyone by being married, so stop complaining!

[Yumyumsuppertime]

...Why reduce the gene poll that way. And what about people who want to have children and work at a job they enjoy. Oh and marriage forms stable social bonds that are beneficial to society.

Emotions are to be discarded entirely, as they are far too departed from objectivity to be considered.

And at this point, your already shaky argument reaches the point of total irrelevance when it comes to the human experience.

[Desperate Measures]

You're a supervillain!

Holy bull testicles, Batman! We have found your true nemesis!!

I'm Batbonobo.

[Normandywe]

It can be hoped that humans are some day replaced by hyper-intelligent androids--those humble machines alone will be keen to agree with me.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Holy bull testicles, Batman! We have found your true nemesis!!

I'm Batbonobo.

Oh, my apologies, sir Batbonobo. It's hard to keep up with who's who in this thread. Especially when we have someone calling for humans to become hubs or batteries and emotionless drones. Cuz, you know, somehow that's (*narf*) better.

Somewhere, Neo cried out in cyber pain.

[Neutraligon]

I'm Batbonobo.

Oh, my apologies, sir Batbonobo. It's hard to keep up with who's who in this thread. Especially when we have someone calling for humans to become hubs or batteries and emotionless drones. Cuz, you know, somehow that's (*narf*) better.

Somewhere, Neo cried out in cyber pain.

Actually, based on his post above, he really is calling for humans to become mindless drones.

Color me surprised.

[Zweite Alaje]

That's BS, our emotions are part of what makes us human, a HUGE part. Social species need emotions as part of our survival instincts as well.

Weber quite clearly explained that emotions are anathema to rationalism, and on that principle alone I am convinced of the failures inevitable in acting by emotion.

And Fascists despise rationalism, so what?

I don't give a shit what this Weber guy says, emotion is a vital part of human survival, it is what drives us to protect those we care about and even people we don't know sometimes!!! An emotionless humanity wouldn't survive in the long run because they literally wouldn't care if they did.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Oh, my apologies, sir Batbonobo. It's hard to keep up with who's who in this thread. Especially when we have someone calling for humans to become hubs or batteries and emotionless drones. Cuz, you know, somehow that's (*narf*) better.

Somewhere, Neo cried out in cyber pain.

Actually, based on his post above, he really is calling for humans to become mindless drones.

Color me surprised.

He needs to stop watching shitty films and reading silly scripts.

[Republic of Wreptzle]

I believe that as far as gay right is America go, we should allow states to decide how they define marriage. If there is a gay residence in a state that does not allow gay marriage, then they can move to a state that does. if there is someone who lives in a state that allows gay marriage but disagrees with that, then they can move to a state that doesn't allow it. Everyone can live in a state where they live comfortable, and their interests are respected in that state. Everyone is happy and aggression is filtered into state rivalry that will benefit them both. We did it with the Mormons and the Indians, and we can do it again too! Sounds like a good solution to me.

the "they don't like it, they can always move somewhere else" arguments never take into account how hard it is to geographically move especially between states/countries. so no, this is not a good idea just on that merit, besides homophobia, just as any type of illogical, harmful discrimination, must be combated on all fronts and not be tolerated anywhere just to preserve the delicate feelings of those who "just happen to disagree with gay marriage". gay marriage legalization must be universal, federal and not up to any vote.

Well first off, doesn't love always find a way? But on a serious note, if its not up to vote, then that just violates America's beliefs and morals. If we are forced to do something that we do not accept, then we have lost our freedom and all that we have fought and died for will be lost. The moving solution is more of a joke than an actual solution. But a state-wide vote will allow the majority of the citizens who live in a state feel like their views are represented. This cannot be done at a national level for two reasons: 1) The Federal Government's only job is to protect the nation from outside threats and manage the iterations between states, not to determine what a person can or cannot do. 2) By working at a stat level, the majority of people will be satisfied.If you believe that the Federal Government should directly control the lives of the people, then I recommend moving to somewhere like North Korea.

[Individuality-ness]

the "they don't like it, they can always move somewhere else" arguments never take into account how hard it is to geographically move especially between states/countries. so no, this is not a good idea just on that merit, besides homophobia, just as any type of illogical, harmful discrimination, must be combated on all fronts and not be tolerated anywhere just to preserve the delicate feelings of those who "just happen to disagree with gay marriage". gay marriage legalization must be universal, federal and not up to any vote.

Well first off, doesn't love always find a way? But on a serious note, if its not up to vote, then that just violates America's beliefs and morals. If we are forced to do something that we do not accept, then we have lost our freedom and all that we have fought and died for will be lost. The moving solution is more of a joke than an actual solution. But a state-wide vote will allow the majority of the citizens who live in a state feel like their views are represented. This cannot be done at a national level for two reasons: 1) The Federal Government's only job is to protect the nation from outside threats and manage the iterations between states, not to determine what a person can or cannot do. 2) By working at a stat level, the majority of people will be satisfied.If you believe that the Federal Government should directly control the lives of the people, then I recommend moving to somewhere like North Korea.

Don't like same-sex marriage? Don't get one. Problem solved.

[Normandywe]

Actually, based on his post above, he really is calling for humans to become mindless drones.

Color me surprised.

He needs to stop watching shitty films and reading silly scripts.

Once again, I don't watch films, as I don't indulge fictitious media. I support realism in its entirety, never to depart.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

He needs to stop watching shitty films and reading silly scripts.

Once again, I don't watch films, as I don't indulge fictitious media. I support realism in its entirety, never to depart.

Except your posts contradict your supposed support of realism. What with your call for humans to be emotionless and mindless drones. That is evidence of a serious detachment from reality.

Do you even read what you post?

[Neutraligon]

the "they don't like it, they can always move somewhere else" arguments never take into account how hard it is to geographically move especially between states/countries. so no, this is not a good idea just on that merit, besides homophobia, just as any type of illogical, harmful discrimination, must be combated on all fronts and not be tolerated anywhere just to preserve the delicate feelings of those who "just happen to disagree with gay marriage". gay marriage legalization must be universal, federal and not up to any vote.

Well first off, doesn't love always find a way? But on a serious note, if its not up to vote, then that just violates America's beliefs and morals. If we are forced to do something that we do not accept, then we have lost our freedom and all that we have fought and died for will be lost. The moving solution is more of a joke than an actual solution. But a state-wide vote will allow the majority of the citizens who live in a state feel like their views are represented. This cannot be done at a national level for two reasons: 1) The Federal Government's only job is to protect the nation from outside threats and manage the iterations between states, not to determine what a person can or cannot do. 2) By working at a stat level, the majority of people will be satisfied.If you believe that the Federal Government should directly control the lives of the people, then I recommend moving to somewhere like North Korea.

Funny, we managed to do this with slavery, and again with Civil Rights. You know, maybe equality before the law is more important than people's beliefs. as for number 2, the federal government already directly affects our day to day life. What do you think programs like Medicare, as well as the interstate roads, as well as the regulations on business are?

[Desperate Measures]

He needs to stop watching shitty films and reading silly scripts.

Once again, I don't watch films, as I don't indulge fictitious media. I support realism in its entirety, never to depart.

But... that's not at all what you seem to be suggesting. You seem to think it's a good idea to fully blast off away from reality and make a hard left into a black hole of bad ideas.

[Normandywe]

Once again, I don't watch films, as I don't indulge fictitious media. I support realism in its entirety, never to depart.

Except your posts contradict your supposed support of realism. What with your call for humans to be emotionless and mindless drones. That is evidence of a serious detachment from reality.

Do you even read what you post?

It is achievable and objectively best, and therefore allowed by realism.

[Neutraligon]

He needs to stop watching shitty films and reading silly scripts.

Once again, I don't watch films, as I don't indulge fictitious media. I support realism in its entirety, never to depart.

Why won't you answer my questions?

[Desperate Measures]

I'm Batbonobo.

Oh, my apologies, sir Batbonobo. It's hard to keep up with who's who in this thread. Especially when we have someone calling for humans to become hubs or batteries and emotionless drones. Cuz, you know, somehow that's (*narf*) better.

Somewhere, Neo cried out in cyber pain.

It's an easy mistake to make. We both have pointy ears and very handsome chins.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Except your posts contradict your supposed support of realism. What with your call for humans to be emotionless and mindless drones. That is evidence of a serious detachment from reality.

Do you even read what you post?

It is achievable and objectively best, and therefore allowed by realism.

Yup, detached from reality. That's what you are.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Oh, my apologies, sir Batbonobo. It's hard to keep up with who's who in this thread. Especially when we have someone calling for humans to become hubs or batteries and emotionless drones. Cuz, you know, somehow that's (*narf*) better.

Somewhere, Neo cried out in cyber pain.

It's an easy mistake to make. We both have pointy ears and very handsome chins.

Yeah, but your vocabulary consists of more than a 'whoa'.

[Republic of Wreptzle]

Well first off, doesn't love always find a way? But on a serious note, if its not up to vote, then that just violates America's beliefs and morals. If we are forced to do something that we do not accept, then we have lost our freedom and all that we have fought and died for will be lost. The moving solution is more of a joke than an actual solution. But a state-wide vote will allow the majority of the citizens who live in a state feel like their views are represented. This cannot be done at a national level for two reasons: 1) The Federal Government's only job is to protect the nation from outside threats and manage the iterations between states, not to determine what a person can or cannot do. 2) By working at a stat level, the majority of people will be satisfied.If you believe that the Federal Government should directly control the lives of the people, then I recommend moving to somewhere like North Korea.

Don't like same-sex marriage? Don't get one. Problem solved.

The problem comes when people have to put up with others who are openly gay. I believe it is best put by the nation of Frisivisia:

Elipida wrote:what's wrong with homosexuality? What have homosexuals ever do to you? If it isn't being thrown into your face, you shouldn't have to worry about other's sexual orientation, gay or straight

Frisivisia wrote:
They leave behind a trail of fabulousness. You know how hard fabulousness is to clean up?

If you can't tell, that was a joke. But nonetheless, you can't just ignore someone who is gay. You inevitably have to put up with them, and not everyone will accept that. Don't say that they should be made to accept though, otherwise its a violation of freedom, and rights, and morals, etc.