Mod-Sanctioned LGBT Rights & Issues Thread

[The Traditional Catholic Papal States]

And? Some people unjust violence for many reasons. And I don't hate homosexuals.

Well, you clearly ain't fond of us if you consider fucking another man to be immoral.

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

[Vettrera]

You might want to pick up a history book.

Because during the 18th and 19th century, it was believed that blacks were incapable of being truly in love and therefore should not be able to marry. We were literally seen as walking, sex-crazed savages who couldn't maintain a stable family even if we tried; therefore, we would ruin the "sanctity" of marriage.

And now, people are using extremely similar arguments to refuse to give homosexuals the right to marry.

Er, you may want to pick up the Catholic Catechism (Something which I abhor because of the hypocrisy, but still.) They do not dehumanize homosexuals, but they acknowledge that they can love and are normal people to be treated with the same respect afforded to any other being. They do not approve of homosexual interaction because they believe that marriage was a ceremony only to be given to a man or a woman, going back to Adam and Eve.

I don't see how this is relevant to anything. We're arguing is there grounds for a fellow human being to limit the rights of a gay person on earth.
Whether or not they approve of it isn't really an issue. Whether they have the authority to stop it, or have a legitimate reason for it to be stopped. History is based upon fact, the Catholic teachings are based on opinion. And in a secular nation, they shouldn't be able to have any impact on the treatment of another human being. And that's coming from a Christian.

[The Scientific States]

Well, you clearly ain't fond of us if you consider fucking another man to be immoral.

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

Why not?

[Fascist Russian Empire]

Well, you clearly ain't fond of us if you consider fucking another man to be immoral.

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

Well, ain't that just fine and dandy. Nobody cares; it don't give you the right to oppress people. Seriously, theocratic bullshit ain't reason enough to tyrannically oppress people.

[Regnum Dominae]

Well, you clearly ain't fond of us if you consider fucking another man to be immoral.

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

And why should your religious views have any relevance on a civil matter?

[Thafoo]

Well, you clearly ain't fond of us if you consider fucking another man to be immoral.

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

I don't view you as a man. I think you're actually a robot here to make our lives miserable.

[Vettrera]

Well, you clearly ain't fond of us if you consider fucking another man to be immoral.

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

Well that's a logical and rivetting argument that proves your side effectively.
Whether or not you like it, you don't provide any basis for your argument that they don't deserve the same rights as another fellow man/sinner, and that you have the right to judge them for an action that harms nobody.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

I don't view you as a man. I think you're actually a robot here to make our lives miserable.

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. No, seriously.

[The Traditional Catholic Papal States]

Which country do I live in? And again, your jumping around. The tread title is "Mod-Sanctioned LGBT Rights & Issues Thread", not how "parents oppress their children"

Brazil, but ultra-sex-negative morality mores and especially sexist, patriarchal oppressive gender roles leading to parents (especially fathers) committing violence against children (especially sons) was once (not so much ago) a worldwide thing and still prevalent in much of the United States.

I asked what country do I live in, because you to know, but once again, we are talking about people that view homosexual behavior committing violence against homosexuals. I acknowledge there are such things, but to say that all people that don't view homosexual behavior as equal to heterosexual behavior are going to go commit violence against homosexuals is B.S.

[Tekania]

Just give the gays, lesbians, trans, etc, what they want already. It'll get everybody to shut up about it. I mean, I'm a Christian, and I find that what goes on in your bedroom is your private business. Nobody else's.

Civil Unions apparently aren't enough. *shrug*

Of course they're not enough. When you create a system whereby states aren't bound by full faith and credit and one sthat do not allow or recognize them anymore than marriage because the term itself was invented so as to seperate the two and ENSURE that thesame rights aren't transferred; it's no wonder it "isn't enough"... It's "not enough" because it frankly does not accomplish the goal, which is same-sex partners getting the same civil legal rights in their union as those who are "married".

The easiest and best concept is to, guess what? Do same-sex marriage.... Same laws as opposite-sex marriage, just a slight redefine in legal terms to cover same-sex partners.... IF a church doesn't want to view it as valid? Fine, they don't have to, just like they (at present) don't view opposite sex marriages as valid for what-ever reasons.

[The Traditional Catholic Papal States]

I'm not found of any "fucking" between another other than one man and one women in marriage. And no, I don't view two men and two men as a marriage, sorry.

I don't view you as a man. I think you're actually a robot here to make our lives miserable.

Ad hominem much?

[The Scientific States]

Brazil, but ultra-sex-negative morality mores and especially sexist, patriarchal oppressive gender roles leading to parents (especially fathers) committing violence against children (especially sons) was once (not so much ago) a worldwide thing and still prevalent in much of the United States.

I asked what country do I live in, because you to know, but once again, we are talking about people that view homosexual behavior committing violence against homosexuals. I acknowledge there are such things, but to say that all people that don't view homosexual behavior as equal to heterosexual behavior are going to go commit violence against homosexuals is B.S.

What?

[The Norgan Alliance]

Civil Unions apparently aren't enough. *shrug*

If you're willing to give people civil unions, why not give them marriage?

Marriage means a lot to most people, both straight and gay people alike. Nobody gets down on their knees and says "Will you Civil Union me?"

Including the religious. To us marriage isn't just a word, it is a covenant between two people, a man and a woman, that was created by God.

And if you really don't want to have to say "Will you Civil Unionize with me?" then make up your own word. Sheila perhaps? "Will you Sheila me?" "We're getting Sheilad on the 22nd." "I'm completely for Gay Sheiling." I kinda like it.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

If you're willing to give people civil unions, why not give them marriage?

Marriage means a lot to most people, both straight and gay people alike. Nobody gets down on their knees and says "Will you Civil Union me?"

Including the religious. To us marriage isn't just a word, it is a covenant between two people, a man and a woman, that was created by God.

And if you really don't want to have to say "Will you Civil Unionize with me?" then make up your own word. Sheila perhaps? "Will you Sheila me?" "We're getting Sheilad on the 22nd." "I'm completely for Gay Sheiling." I kinda like it.

Nobody cares about what your religion says. Nobody. Seriously, keep it to yourselves and in your own communities. We might not want to deal with that bullshit.

[Regnum Dominae]

If you're willing to give people civil unions, why not give them marriage?

Marriage means a lot to most people, both straight and gay people alike. Nobody gets down on their knees and says "Will you Civil Union me?"

Including the religious. To us marriage isn't just a word, it is a covenant between two people, a man and a woman, that was created by God.

And if you really don't want to have to say "Will you Civil Unionize with me?" then make up your own word. Sheila perhaps? "Will you Sheila me?" "We're getting Sheilad on the 22nd." "I'm completely for Gay Sheiling." I kinda like it.

How about "marry"? I like the sound of that.

[Thafoo]

I don't view you as a man. I think you're actually a robot here to make our lives miserable.

Ad hominem much?

No, not really.

Now, to the point- marriage is not a Christian institution- it's an institution hijacked by Christianity. It doesn't belong to Christianity.

[The Traditional Catholic Papal States]

I don't view you as a man. I think you're actually a robot here to make our lives miserable.

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. No, seriously.

Ah, yes. Since you can't convince me that homosexual behavior is equal to heterosexual behavior, I'm "not a man" and you appear to be breaking one of the rules. I'm a man and I wish that you use to correct pronouns when addressing me, thank you.

[Farnhamia]

If you're willing to give people civil unions, why not give them marriage?

Marriage means a lot to most people, both straight and gay people alike. Nobody gets down on their knees and says "Will you Civil Union me?"

Including the religious. To us marriage isn't just a word, it is a covenant between two people, a man and a woman, that was created by God.

And if you really don't want to have to say "Will you Civil Unionize with me?" then make up your own word. Sheila perhaps? "Will you Sheila me?" "We're getting Sheilad on the 22nd." "I'm completely for Gay Sheiling." I kinda like it.

Religious people do not own the word, pure and simple. Sharing is a good thing. Me and mine being married does not harm you and yours in any way whatsoever.

[Vettrera]

Ad hominem much?

I don't think youre allowed to cry "fallacy!" after a bunch of your posts.

[Thafoo]

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. No, seriously.

Ah, yes. Since you can't convince me that homosexual behavior is equal to heterosexual behavior, I'm "not a man" and you appear to be breaking one of the rules. I'm a man and I wish that you use to correct pronouns when addressing me, thank you.

It isn't against the rules to call you a robot.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. No, seriously.

Ah, yes. Since you can't convince me that homosexual behavior is equal to heterosexual behavior, I'm "not a man" and you appear to be breaking one of the rules. I'm a man and I wish that you use to correct pronouns when addressing me, thank you.

It's called sarcasm.

[Mavorpen]

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. No, seriously.

Ah, yes. Since you can't convince me that homosexual behavior is equal to heterosexual behavior, I'm "not a man" and you appear to be breaking one of the rules. I'm a man and I wish that you use to correct pronouns when addressing me, thank you.

Wait... you want us to prove that homosexual behavior is equal to heterosexual behavior? The fuck? Why?

[The Scientific States]

If you're willing to give people civil unions, why not give them marriage?

Marriage means a lot to most people, both straight and gay people alike. Nobody gets down on their knees and says "Will you Civil Union me?"

Including the religious. To us marriage isn't just a word, it is a covenant between two people, a man and a woman, that was created by God.

And if you really don't want to have to say "Will you Civil Unionize with me?" then make up your own word. Sheila perhaps? "Will you Sheila me?" "We're getting Sheilad on the 22nd." "I'm completely for Gay Sheiling." I kinda like it.

You're kidding.

Gay marriage doesn't affect you, your life is not going to end because two men or woman get married. I don't really think your God gives a shit, why would he. Why would your god waste time in caring about homosexuality, instead of dealing with more pressing issues?

Anyways, to gay people marriage isn't a word either, it means a lot to everyone, and having a simple civil union isn't enough.

[Aeken]

If you're willing to give people civil unions, why not give them marriage?

Marriage means a lot to most people, both straight and gay people alike. Nobody gets down on their knees and says "Will you Civil Union me?"

Including the religious. To us marriage isn't just a word, it is a covenant between two people, a man and a woman, that was created by God.

And if you really don't want to have to say "Will you Civil Unionize with me?" then make up your own word. Sheila perhaps? "Will you Sheila me?" "We're getting Sheilad on the 22nd." "I'm completely for Gay Sheiling." I kinda like it.

Religion doesn't determine how the state should label things. What if the state made everything a civil union?

[The Traditional Catholic Papal States]

Ah, yes. Since you can't convince me that homosexual behavior is equal to heterosexual behavior, I'm "not a man" and you appear to be breaking one of the rules. I'm a man and I wish that you use to correct pronouns when addressing me, thank you.

It isn't against the rules to call you a robot.

It is flaming, and once again, I will ask you again, I'm a man and I wish you to address me as such.