To what extent should LGBT people have rights?

[German Deutsche]

You are confusing me with someone else, I am not 14.

Again, source?

You do not need a source, there is no reason to believe I am 14, especially when I tell you I am not, neither is it relevant to the discussion nor does it deny the fact that democracy is a failure and homosexuality is a mental disease.

[Faolinn]

Can someone explain how they would have no problems with civil unions but still would not want same sex marriage legalized?

[The Rich Port]

Yeah, you probably are.

And if you're not, you have the mental age of one.

Well no, I am not.

I do not care if you think I am operating under an inferior mental capacity, it is irrelevant.

Yes it does.

You're a lying uneducated fascist, that's for sure.

You also seem incapable of understanding that we don't buy a second of you being succesful.

If you're so succesful, then what the fuck are you doing on NationStates?

[Neutraligon]

Again, source?

You do not need a source, there is no reason to believe I am 14, especially when I tell you I am not, neither is it relevant to the discussion nor does it deny the fact that democracy is a failure and homosexuality is a mental disease.

Democracy still seems to be working and source on thee second.

[Ensiferum]

Again, source?

You do not need a source, there is no reason to believe I am 14, especially when I tell you I am not, neither is it relevant to the discussion nor does it deny the fact that democracy is a failure and homosexuality is a mental disease.

So Fredick the Great of Prussia may have been stricken with a mental disease? How dehabilitating! He sure didn't succeed in much now did he? Even your arguments are that of a 14 year old.

[Neutraligon]

Can someone explain how they would have no problems with civil unions but still would not want same sex marriage legalized?

People have an issue with the word marriage.

[Immoren]

Again, source?

You do not need a source, there is no reason to believe I am 14, especially when I tell you I am not, neither is it relevant to the discussion nor does it deny the fact that democracy is a failure and homosexuality is a mental disease.

Source, source source, darling.

[Ensiferum]

Can someone explain how they would have no problems with civil unions but still would not want same sex marriage legalized?

Many are under the false assumption that the only difference between the two is the title and therefore there is no harm in having it that way. At least that was how I thought a few years ago, different name but same thing and then I looked it up and it's not.

[German Deutsche]

You do not need a source, there is no reason to believe I am 14, especially when I tell you I am not, neither is it relevant to the discussion nor does it deny the fact that democracy is a failure and homosexuality is a mental disease.

Democracy still seems to be working and source on thee second.

The source is the evident fact that homosexuals are only seeking attention. Their personalities are those of people that are self-loathing, selfish, and are clearly lacking in proper morals.

[Land of Tob]

Well, in the law obviously marriage is that.
But for me and maaaany others marriage is a bond with God, too. Same-sex marriage is coming into more and more countries, obviously you can't stop it. I also don't try to, I don't protest or anything like that. It's just my opinion. (No hate!)

I thought that marriage before god was called holy matrimony.

Well, Holy Matrimony is kind of the same thing, isn't it? English isn't my mother tongue, but I looked it up and it's pretty much describing what I mean just a bit differently.

[Jormengand]

Again, source?

You do not need a source, there is no reason to believe I am 14, especially when I tell you I am not, neither is it relevant to the discussion nor does it deny the fact that democracy is a failure and homosexuality is a mental disease.

To your eternal cosmic credit, this is actually correct. If others state you are 14, they must prove it. Also, I am only a year older than you even if they are correct, and I am participating in this discussion with limited depth yet adequate sobriety.

[Ensiferum]

Democracy still seems to be working and source on thee second.

The source is the evident fact that homosexuals are only seeking attention. Their personalities are those of people that are self-loathing, selfish, and are clearly lacking in proper morals.

So you want the German Empire's structure, yet Fredick the Great was self-loathing(most likely true), selfish(at times, but usually false), and clearly lacking proper morals(yet you'd follow him?). Interesting.

[German Deutsche]

Well no, I am not.

I do not care if you think I am operating under an inferior mental capacity, it is irrelevant.

Yes it does.

You're a lying uneducated fascist, that's for sure.

You also seem incapable of understanding that we don't buy a second of you being succesful.

If you're so succesful, then what the fuck are you doing on NationStates?

I have not lied, I am not uneducated, I am a fascist, It does not matter to me whether you believe me or not, and I am here because this is a politically inclined website.

[Immoren]

Democracy still seems to be working and source on thee second.

The source is the evident fact that homosexuals are only seeking attention. Their personalities are those of people that are self-loathing, selfish, and are clearly lacking in proper morals.

I've yet to see YOU show proper morals.

[Neutraligon]

Democracy still seems to be working and source on thee second.

The source is the evident fact that homosexuals are only seeking attention. Their personalities are those of people that are self-loathing, selfish, and are clearly lacking in proper morals.

Really, I thought homosexuals were seeking equal rights. Source on both by the way since you failed to provide one.

[The Rich Port]

Can someone explain how they would have no problems with civil unions but still would not want same sex marriage legalized?

People have an issue with the word marriage.

Well, no, they don't.

Your joke against anti-marriage people is rather weak... Or is it even a joke?

The majority of people in the world have some weird idealization of heterosexual marriage, as if it has always been the standard.

That's probably because most people don't study world history, at all, and most don't even want to.

Humans have a tendency to be willfully ignorant of the truth. For example, look at German Deusche.

He's under the delusion that being a fascist somehow makes you better than everybody else. All the "fascists" I knew growing up were dumb-as-rocks criminals who are all probably dead by now due to drugs or booze.

[German Deutsche]

The source is the evident fact that homosexuals are only seeking attention. Their personalities are those of people that are self-loathing, selfish, and are clearly lacking in proper morals.

So you want the German Empire's structure, yet Fredick the Great was self-loathing(most likely true), selfish(at times, but usually false), and clearly lacking proper morals(yet you'd follow him?). Interesting.

I would not follow him, Fredreich the Great was not a political system.

The German Empire is something I would want, or a fascist single-party dictatorship.

[German Deutsche]

The source is the evident fact that homosexuals are only seeking attention. Their personalities are those of people that are self-loathing, selfish, and are clearly lacking in proper morals.

I've yet to see YOU show proper morals.

I wouldn't expect a liberal to recognize proper morals.

[Neutraligon]

I thought that marriage before god was called holy matrimony.

Well, Holy Matrimony is kind of the same thing, isn't it? English isn't my mother tongue, but I looked it up and it's pretty much describing what I mean just a bit differently.

Holy matrimony is the ceremony before god. Normally this is mistaken with marriage which is the legal aspect of what many call marriage.

[Land of Tob]

Well, Holy Matrimony is kind of the same thing, isn't it? English isn't my mother tongue, but I looked it up and it's pretty much describing what I mean just a bit differently.

Holy matrimony is the ceremony before god. Normally this is mistaken with marriage which is the legal aspect of what many call marriage.

The ceremony doesn't matter whatsoever. If you are married, you are also going into a bond with God.

[European Socialist Republic]

Why are we even feeding the fascist troll?

[Neutraligon]

People have an issue with the word marriage.

Well, no, they don't.

Your joke against anti-marriage people is rather weak... Or is it even a joke?

The majority of people in the world have some weird idealization of heterosexual marriage, as if it has always been the standard.

That's probably because most people don't study world history, at all, and most don't even want to.

Humans have a tendency to be willfully ignorant of the truth. For example, look at German Deusche.

He's under the delusion that being a fascist somehow makes you better than everybody else. All the "fascists" I knew growing up were dumb-as-rocks criminals who are all probably dead by now due to drugs or booze.

I was saying in the specific context of why people would support one without the other for homosexual couples. I did not mean they have an issue with the word overall. Just that they don't like it applying to homosexual couples.

[Christian Democrats]

So marriage ought to be defined by what people think?

As opposed to what?

Possibly some objective criterion. For you to say that civil marriage ought to be defined by what people think, you must hold that it is proper, for instance, for the people of Texas not to recognize same-sex unions and for the people of New York to recognize same-sex unions in accordance with the beliefs of the populations of those states. If you do think that civil marriage ought to be defined by what people think, then you have no grounds on which to argue against my view that society ought to put its stamp of approval only on relationships between persons capable of engaging in coitus.

But since marriage is about coitus "to be specific" I guess that means that we have to annul all marriages that don't involve coitus, or in which coitus is not an option.

At its foundation, marriage is about coitus; and, if a person is completely unable to engage in coitus, that, unfortunately, creates an impediment to marrying that cannot be overcome. I do not suggest that sexless marriages ought to be annulled; instead, a couple cannot marry if they are unable to consummate the relationship. If, at any time, the marriage has been consummated, it retains validity.

[The Rich Port]

Yes it does.

You're a lying uneducated fascist, that's for sure.

You also seem incapable of understanding that we don't buy a second of you being succesful.

If you're so succesful, then what the fuck are you doing on NationStates?

I have not lied, I am not uneducated, I am a fascist, It does not matter to me whether you believe me or not, and I am here because this is a politically inclined website.

Yes, you have, and yes you are.

You pretend to know about psychology, but you don't. If you did, you would know that the majority of professional psychological organizations in the world no longer note homosexuality as a mental illness, and to believe so without any evidence is willfully ignorant.

Or, in other words, stupid.

[German Deutsche]

I have not lied, I am not uneducated, I am a fascist, It does not matter to me whether you believe me or not, and I am here because this is a politically inclined website.

Yes, you have, and yes you are.

You pretend to know about psychology, but you don't. If you did, you would know that the majority of professional psychological organizations in the world no longer note homosexuality as a mental illness, and to believe so without any evidence is willfully ignorant.

Or, in other words, stupid.

Because in a liberal world, to be realistic means to forfeit a profession.