NATION

PASSWORD

What is your opinion on LGBT+ marriage?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Lgbt marriage: good or bad?

Yes, love is love.
408
58%
No, it's a sin.
86
12%
No, love is for reproducing.
50
7%
No, civil unions are better.
23
3%
Maybe
13
2%
Praise David Hasselhoff (Requested by Some random cat dude)
88
13%
No opinion/neutral
30
4%
 
Total votes : 698

User avatar
Totaler Krieg Division
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: May 20, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Totaler Krieg Division » Tue May 21, 2019 1:38 pm

Cekoviu wrote:
Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.

Lmao, you are talking complete nonsense here in literally every way.


Not really, no. Practically nobody before the mid 2010's was pushing for trans rights or even knew it was a thing, even among the most ardent supporters of gay rights and marriage. Most of those who did know of the T reacted negatively to being associated with them. This is all rather well documented, even liberal outlets during the Bush presidency warned that trying to push for trans rights could sink the whole ship.

User avatar
The Grims
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1274
Founded: Antiquity
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby The Grims » Tue May 21, 2019 1:38 pm

Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
Highever wrote:How? Why?


It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.


Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

User avatar
Highever
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1862
Founded: Dec 21, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Highever » Tue May 21, 2019 1:40 pm

Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:Lmao, you are talking complete nonsense here in literally every way.


Not really, no. Practically nobody before the mid 2010's was pushing for trans rights or even knew it was a thing, even among the most ardent supporters of gay rights and marriage. Most of those who did know of the T reacted negatively to being associated with them. This is all rather well documented, even liberal outlets during the Bush presidency warned that trying to push for trans rights could sink the whole ship.

None of this was a thing. What the hell are you talking about?

Even if it were true, you're basically mad that gay marriage opened the door for advocation of other rights?
ΦΣK
⚦ Through the souls of your brothers and sisters I take My place amongst the Three; through their pleasure I ascend my Throne. Pleasure, for Pleasure's sake! ⚦
Remember Bloody Sunday
A wise man once said, ("We all dead, fuck it")
There's something in the water
Jolthig wrote:Use Soresu and not Juyo.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 32376
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Tue May 21, 2019 1:41 pm

The Grims wrote:
Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.


Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

Sadly one of the incidents that essentially kicked off the lg rights stuff, the stonewall riots, where pushed for originally by trans individuals, who where then shot from behind by lgb people.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Cekoviu
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11330
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Cekoviu » Tue May 21, 2019 1:42 pm

Highever wrote:
Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
Not really, no. Practically nobody before the mid 2010's was pushing for trans rights or even knew it was a thing, even among the most ardent supporters of gay rights and marriage. Most of those who did know of the T reacted negatively to being associated with them. This is all rather well documented, even liberal outlets during the Bush presidency warned that trying to push for trans rights could sink the whole ship.

None of this was a thing. What the hell are you talking about?

Even if it were true, you're basically mad that gay marriage opened the door for advocation of other rights?

Obviously, trans rights are a threat to cis people. :roll:
Fun fact: the total insect biomass is estimated to decrease by 2.5% each year. If left unresolved, this could have catastrophic effects on ecosystems around the world.
Torrocca wrote:"Your honor, it was not mein fault! I didn't order the systematic genocide of millions of people, it was the twenty kilograms of pure-cut Bavarian cocaine that did it!"
Liriena wrote:anyone to the left of Pinochet: *exists*

right-wingers: wat about vuvuzelaaa lmao gottem

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35674
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Tue May 21, 2019 1:54 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
The Grims wrote:
Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?

Sadly one of the incidents that essentially kicked off the lg rights stuff, the stonewall riots, where pushed for originally by trans individuals, who where then shot from behind by lgb people.


I think it's safe to say, considering that nobody calls it the LGB movement anymore, and it has been that way since before the Gay Marriage court decision, that that's a pretty stupid post either way.

While that doesn't mean that there aren't trans-excluding movements, that doesn't apply to the entirety of the LGBT movement.

It isn't the LGBT movement pushing for bathroom bills, nor are they advocating for bills forcibly defining gender and/or biological sex along religious lines.
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 32376
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Tue May 21, 2019 1:57 pm

The Rich Port wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:Sadly one of the incidents that essentially kicked off the lg rights stuff, the stonewall riots, where pushed for originally by trans individuals, who where then shot from behind by lgb people.


I think it's safe to say, considering that nobody calls it the LGB movement anymore, and it has been that way since before the Gay Marriage court decision, that that's a pretty stupid post either way.

While that doesn't mean that there aren't trans-excluding movements, that doesn't apply to the entirety of the LGBT movement.

It isn't the LGBT movement pushing for bathroom bills, nor are they advocating for bills forcibly defining gender and/or biological sex along religious lines.

True, but at least in history there are examples of this happening.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35674
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Tue May 21, 2019 2:00 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
The Rich Port wrote:
I think it's safe to say, considering that nobody calls it the LGB movement anymore, and it has been that way since before the Gay Marriage court decision, that that's a pretty stupid post either way.

While that doesn't mean that there aren't trans-excluding movements, that doesn't apply to the entirety of the LGBT movement.

It isn't the LGBT movement pushing for bathroom bills, nor are they advocating for bills forcibly defining gender and/or biological sex along religious lines.

True, but at least in history there are examples of this happening.


Sure, and that's a pretty ignorant way of approaching it, considering that the trans-gendered are usually lumped in with the LGB part, along with pedophiles and sex offenders in general by people who disagree with them.

As a genderfluid person, we're stuck with the trans-gendered. They're adult human beings too, after all.
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
Totaler Krieg Division
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: May 20, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Totaler Krieg Division » Tue May 21, 2019 2:02 pm

The Grims wrote:
Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society. I'm also old enough to remember how gay marriage advocates in the early-mid 2000's insisted all they wanted was gay marriage and how they would never go further than that and how they would proudly exclaim "No! I'll never support those trannies and how dare you think I would!" if you brought up the prospect of it not ending there. If only more of us had the foresight to shut down the slippery slope before it started.


Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?


Once I have a bit more time (at work right now) to sit down and scroll through a bunch of stuff from a decade or two back I will post some stuff yes. In the meantime however I do have this link which talks about how the T part of LGBT has oftentimes just been included as token representation and until recently was largely forgotten or actively disliked by the rest of the movement.

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 32376
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Tue May 21, 2019 2:02 pm

The Rich Port wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:True, but at least in history there are examples of this happening.


Sure, and that's a pretty ignorant way of approaching it, considering that the trans-gendered are usually lumped in with the LGB part, along with pedophiles and sex offenders in general by people who disagree with them.

As a genderfluid person, we're stuck with the trans-gendered. They're adult human beings too, after all.

I am not disagreeing that the post was pretty terrible, only that there is some minor truth to it in that trans people have been excluded in the past by LGB people. It is great that this is basically not the case now.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35674
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Tue May 21, 2019 2:05 pm

Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
The Grims wrote:
Oddly enough I am also old enough and never heard those words. Do you have an example speech from back then ?


Once I have a bit more time (at work right now) to sit down and scroll through a bunch of stuff from a decade or two back I will post some stuff yes. In the meantime however I do have this link which talks about how the T part of LGBT has oftentimes just been included as token representation and until recently was largely forgotten or actively disliked by the rest of the movement.


Yeah hey thanks, well fucking aware.

How nice to get told something we already know via you making an ignorant post about marriage being somehow only for people of their natural genders and that being a sign of "declining morality".
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
Othelos
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12707
Founded: Feb 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Othelos » Tue May 21, 2019 2:31 pm

Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
Highever wrote:How? Why?


It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society.

Nope. Banning marriage for certain groups doesn't get rid of people who want to be together, whether they're the same gender or different races.
Last edited by Othelos on Tue May 21, 2019 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pro: Human rights, classical liberalism, equality, LGBT rights, the EU, capitalism, property rights, innovation, green politics, public transportation
Anti: Autocratic regimes, the Chinese government, leftist "progressivism", identity politics, die Linke/SPD, populism, organized religion, Erdogan, intellectual property theft, assault weapon ownership
Free Tibet and Hong Kong
How China exploits developing countries and undermines democratic institutions worldwide
How chinese espionage and information theft is becoming more sophisticated
How the chinese government encourages espionage among chinese students and expats in Europe

User avatar
New Legland
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 396
Founded: Apr 21, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby New Legland » Tue May 21, 2019 2:51 pm

Califghanistan wrote:
-MAFDET- wrote:Because he is homophobic.


That's a lie. Homophobia is the fear of homosexuals and homosexuality. Rather,

Why are my nation and religion strictly against homosexuality? To quote a book*

In the West today, homosexuality and lesbianism have come to be seen as an alternative lifestyle subject to personal preference. It is no longer considered an abnormality that requires restraint and treatment and is being actively promoted by its adherents and their sympathizers as a legitimate way of life. Arguments in favor of tolerance toward same-sex relationships are based on the assumption that homosexual behavior is biologically based and not merely learned from society.

Islam considers homosexuality to be the result of human choice. Human beings are not robots that do only what they are programmed to do. They choose how to behave, and God holds them responsible for their choices. It is inconceivable that God would have made some people homosexuals then declared it a punishable crime(God has created everything in due proportion. He established the means for populating the earth and maintaining life by the creation of male and female, not only in man but among almost all living things. Islam considers deliberate efforts to change this nature as a rebellion against the creator). To accept such a proposition is to suggest that God is unjust.

Inclinations can exist within humans toward a variety of natural acts and unnatural ones such as rape, pedophilia, or bestiality. These inclinations may arise from media influence or direct contact, but it does not mean that free reign should be given to them. Muslims(and everyone) are under obligation to control such inclinations in obedience to God.

It should be noted that Islam did not introduce anti-gay legislature to the world. The texts of the Torah are replete with a clear condemnation of such practices. But among the things foretold by the Prophet of Islam is this: "Immorality will not appear among a people to the extent that they publicize it but that painful diseases will spread among them which were not known to their predecessors(Narrated by Ibn Majah and al-Hakim)."

Sexually transmitted diseases are steeply on the rise in permissive societies-in particular, HIV/AIDS, which causes loss of acquired immunity and usually leads to death. The early spread of AIDS was first observed among homosexual communities. Later, it entered the heterosexual community through so-called bisexuals as well as blood transfusions and intravenous drug usage, and now it continues to spread among promiscuous heterosexuals. AIDS remains incurable, and infections continue to increase in gay and bisexual men, who accounted for more than half of HIV infections in 2006.

*ISLAM: Top 50 Questions Answered, by Saheeh International

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuID-GS--k0


Oh my god, I can't say I've seen anything quite like this before. I am in utter disbelief that people with the same "thought" process as you exist. So many people have tried to get through to you, but the apparent indoctrination that baffles me so has proven too thick for even that to have any effect.

You make the claim that homosexuality is a choice, even though countless studies have shown that to be untrue. In fact, two studies were linked in this very fucking thread just a few comments before this one, but I guess you were either too lazy to read them or thought that your fallacious book written by the ignorant minds of old was a much better source for medical knowledge. And homosexuality is a choice because we have free will? Why don't you go outside, eat a worm and enjoy it? After all, your taste is a choice—we have free will!

As for your AIDS argument, you acknowledge that it can be transmitted through blood transfusions and needles, yet you still believe that every single person infected with AIDS has been either a homosexual or an adulterer. It's insane. And that genius of yours, Dr. Naik? I looked him up. He doesn't have a Ph.D, he has bachelor's degrees in medicine and surgery and denies evolution. He is by no means a genius and he definitely does not know what the hell he's talking about.

I'd love to know how homosexuality, or anything for that matter, is automatically immoral because animals exhibit it? Heterosexuality, compassion, etc. etc. etc., are all seen in animals. You then go on to say that homosexuality and necrophilia are similar because they are animalistic, which implies that they are both more common among animals than they are in humans. Uhh, no, they fucking aren't. It's called Google search.

Your statement that Saudi Arabia was the most progressive nation in terms of homosexuality policy actually hurt me. It actually disgusts me how damn wet you get over gay people being bludgeoned to death, and I'm repulsed even further when you start spewing out that "hate the sin, love the sinner" spiel.
Califghanistan wrote:It is a fact that God made clear that execution is what shall happen to all who make love to one of the same gender.

Califghanistan wrote:Remember that the punishment for murder, warranted by God, is to give the victim's family a choice on how to deal with the murderer.

1. Have him executed
2. Have him forgiven
3. Have him pay blood money

And know that homosexuality is a crime and it does affect other people, but none more so than the one who does it.

I am very sorry that the gay "friend" you have even has a relationship with someone who thinks a backwards country with a plethora of backwards policies including the brutal killing of people who were born the way he was is doing the right thing.

Holy shit, you didn't just say that "the Qur'an agrees with science in every aspect," did you? I'd ask for your source for that claim, but I am 110% sure you'd give me the terrifying response, "the Qur'an." The studies linked in this very thread alone are enough to prove that this couldn't be further from the truth, let alone the hundreds of scientific inaccuracies that ancient book contains. Your constant reiteration of this statement and those of Dr. Naik being a genius and Islam being "perfecrt [sic] and without flaw" (even though common sense alone will tell you otherwise) really lead me to believe that the exact same thing was done to you in your impressionable youth.

You may (very fortunately) be in the extreme minority, but the fact that you will make, believe, and repeat these outrageous and easily falsifiable claims without any evidence at all is extremely unsettling to me.

(Yes, I know I'm just a b i i i t late, but this was shocking)
Last edited by New Legland on Wed May 22, 2019 3:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17043
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Tue May 21, 2019 7:47 pm

Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
Highever wrote:How? Why?


It furthered a long running moralistic decline in western society


You are confusing homosexuality with christians who stopped focusing on the "do not judge" and "there is nothing wrong with making a mistake and being honest about it". That is what is causing the decline.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
Nakena
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5632
Founded: May 06, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Nakena » Tue May 21, 2019 7:55 pm

The Rich Port wrote:
Totaler Krieg Division wrote:
Once I have a bit more time (at work right now) to sit down and scroll through a bunch of stuff from a decade or two back I will post some stuff yes. In the meantime however I do have this link which talks about how the T part of LGBT has oftentimes just been included as token representation and until recently was largely forgotten or actively disliked by the rest of the movement.


Yeah hey thanks, well fucking aware.

How nice to get told something we already know via you making an ignorant post about marriage being somehow only for people of their natural genders and that being a sign of "declining morality".


To be fair, the LGBT topic didn appeared in a political context until the late 2000s, early 2010s. At least in Europe.

And the term itself, I haven't seen in old publications. In fact I looked some up myself, and there was much talk about the gay community, but the LGBT term was absent or not yet widespread introduced.
【Your friendly neighbourhood barista and genderqueer degenerate bohemian】
【Female or they/them pronoun preferred but not required】

₴Ø₦₳₭ Ø₴

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17043
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Tue May 21, 2019 8:15 pm

Nakena wrote:
The Rich Port wrote:
Yeah hey thanks, well fucking aware.

How nice to get told something we already know via you making an ignorant post about marriage being somehow only for people of their natural genders and that being a sign of "declining morality".


To be fair, the LGBT topic didn appeared in a political context until the late 2000s, early 2010s. At least in Europe.

And the term itself, I haven't seen in old publications. In fact I looked some up myself, and there was much talk about the gay community, but the LGBT term was absent or not yet widespread introduced.

This is true. There was a lot of talk about gays; but only gays.
Of course, as someone said, that only means that gay marriage opened up the door to more liberty. Like interracial marriage did earlier. Huzzah.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
Nakena
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5632
Founded: May 06, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Nakena » Tue May 21, 2019 8:21 pm

The Alma Mater wrote:
Nakena wrote:
To be fair, the LGBT topic didn appeared in a political context until the late 2000s, early 2010s. At least in Europe.

And the term itself, I haven't seen in old publications. In fact I looked some up myself, and there was much talk about the gay community, but the LGBT term was absent or not yet widespread introduced.

This is true. There was a lot of talk about gays; but only gays.
Of course, as someone said, that only means that gay marriage opened up the door to more liberty. Like interracial marriage did earlier. Huzzah.


I still believe the, by now extreme, politicization of LGBT is endangering, as the whole matter becomes something to be aggressively pushed around on the political landscape, and utilized by political forces for their agenda in one way or another.

Right into the most heavily contested battlefields of the ongoing metapolitical culture wars inside the west.

This is not a good place to be.
Last edited by Nakena on Tue May 21, 2019 8:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
【Your friendly neighbourhood barista and genderqueer degenerate bohemian】
【Female or they/them pronoun preferred but not required】

₴Ø₦₳₭ Ø₴

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35674
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Tue May 21, 2019 8:23 pm

Nakena wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:This is true. There was a lot of talk about gays; but only gays.
Of course, as someone said, that only means that gay marriage opened up the door to more liberty. Like interracial marriage did earlier. Huzzah.


I still believe the, by now extreme, politicization of LGBT is endangering, as the whole matter becomes something to be aggressively pushed around on the political landscape, and utilized by political forces for their agenda in one way or another.

Right into the most heavily contested battlefields of the ongoing metapolitical culture wars inside the west. This is not a good place to be.


That's kind of inevitable... And one would even argue that the LGBT movement has always been a political movement, especially if we're talking about 50 or 60 years ago.
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
Nakena
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5632
Founded: May 06, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Nakena » Tue May 21, 2019 8:28 pm

The Rich Port wrote:That's kind of inevitable...


I am cautious about inevitable development. I should add however that the first time the issue came to my attention was when it was brought up by elements of the right-wing. Specifically the debate around french same-sex marriage, and then this incident.

And until much later I kept considering it a non-issue.

The Rich Port wrote:And one would even argue that the LGBT movement has always been a political movement, especially if we're talking about 50 or 60 years ago.


At least in Europe it wasnt really. I always considered it to be more a private matter and lifestyle (I've have some personal experiences as well...), perhaps something like a subculture. But political? Never. Then again, we didn had Stonewall riots or so.
Last edited by Nakena on Tue May 21, 2019 8:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
【Your friendly neighbourhood barista and genderqueer degenerate bohemian】
【Female or they/them pronoun preferred but not required】

₴Ø₦₳₭ Ø₴

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63264
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Tue May 21, 2019 9:05 pm

The same as hetero marriage, let people do it if they want.
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

Proud denouncer of the Taliban.

User avatar
The Black Forrest
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35552
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Black Forrest » Tue May 21, 2019 9:11 pm

Genivaria wrote:The same as hetero marriage, let people do it if they want.


Indeed. How are people hurt by it?
*I am a master proofreader after I click Submit.
* There is actually a War on Christmas. But Christmas started it, with it's unparalleled aggression against the Thanksgiving Holiday, and now Christmas has seized much Lebensraum in November, and are pushing into October. The rest of us seek to repel these invaders, and push them back to the status quo ante bellum Black Friday border. -Trotskylvania
* Silence Is Golden But Duct Tape Is Silver.
* I felt like Ayn Rand cornered me at a party, and three minutes in I found my first objection to what she was saying, but she kept talking without interruption for ten more days. - Max Barry talking about Atlas Shrugged

User avatar
Elwher
Senator
 
Posts: 3780
Founded: May 24, 2012
Corporate Bordello

Postby Elwher » Tue May 21, 2019 9:30 pm

The Black Forrest wrote:
Genivaria wrote:The same as hetero marriage, let people do it if they want.


Indeed. How are people hurt by it?


No one is hurt by it, which is why I support the right of any two or more consenting adults to marry. Where the harm comes into place is when private citizens who find it morally offensive are forced, by legislation and judicial fiat, to participate in the ceremonies.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Kowani
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16583
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Tue May 21, 2019 9:31 pm

Elwher wrote:
The Black Forrest wrote:
Indeed. How are people hurt by it?


No one is hurt by it, which is why I support the right of any two or more consenting adults to marry. Where the harm comes into place is when private citizens who find it morally offensive are forced, by legislation and judicial fiat, to participate in the ceremonies.

And this happens…where?
Narcissistic (Hedonistic) Nihilist. Yes, I am edgy. I know.
Atheist and still proud of it. Spanish Expat.
Post-Capitalist, Post-Nationalist.
Rights are functionally just privileges society has deemed important.
Prydania wrote:
As a Canadian? I find Americans and their deep, deep distrust of the government to be fundamentally, critically, laughably flawed. I find some aspects of your country completely absurd. The distrust of anything remotely resembling authority is one. The gun problem that stems from that is another.

Seangoli wrote:You are spouting nonsensical drivel with no coherent thought, little logic, and at the end of it all just angry opining at the clouds based on a truly astonishly low level of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter.

0% Capitalism

User avatar
Elwher
Senator
 
Posts: 3780
Founded: May 24, 2012
Corporate Bordello

Postby Elwher » Tue May 21, 2019 9:33 pm

Kowani wrote:
Elwher wrote:
No one is hurt by it, which is why I support the right of any two or more consenting adults to marry. Where the harm comes into place is when private citizens who find it morally offensive are forced, by legislation and judicial fiat, to participate in the ceremonies.

And this happens…where?


When those who find it offensive to their personal morality are enjoined to create cakes, arrange flowers, or artistically photograph said ceremonies.
Last edited by Elwher on Tue May 21, 2019 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Kowani
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16583
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Tue May 21, 2019 9:36 pm

Elwher wrote:
Kowani wrote:And this happens…where?


When those who find it offensive to their personal morality are enjoined to create cakes, arrange flowers, or artistically photograph said ceremonies.

The baker won his case, and I’m gonna need citations for the other two.
Narcissistic (Hedonistic) Nihilist. Yes, I am edgy. I know.
Atheist and still proud of it. Spanish Expat.
Post-Capitalist, Post-Nationalist.
Rights are functionally just privileges society has deemed important.
Prydania wrote:
As a Canadian? I find Americans and their deep, deep distrust of the government to be fundamentally, critically, laughably flawed. I find some aspects of your country completely absurd. The distrust of anything remotely resembling authority is one. The gun problem that stems from that is another.

Seangoli wrote:You are spouting nonsensical drivel with no coherent thought, little logic, and at the end of it all just angry opining at the clouds based on a truly astonishly low level of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter.

0% Capitalism

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: An Alan Smithee Nation, Cannot think of a name, Cekoviu, Definitely Not Trumptonium, Dumb Ideologies, Evil Dictators Happyland, Free Arabian Nation, Galloism, Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States, Hurdergaryp, Ifreann, Infected Mushroom, J o J, Miami Shores, Satuga, Shamhnan Insir, Shrillland, Tarsonis, The Order of the Holy Inquisitors, Veceria, Venkara, Xemnarius, Zurkerx

Advertisement

Remove ads