Homosexual marriage - do you agree?

If someone had too many chromozones, they wouldn't automatically turn gay, it's a little thing called "Down's Syndrome," look it up.
Homosexuality, Murder, Religion etc, are ALL life choices.
 
The genetic code of a person determines everything. What constructs a person's emotions? Genetics. What determines a person's physical/mental attributes? Genetics. A murderer is determined by the coding of their body, likewise with homosexual males and females.


Calling such a thing "stupid" is stupid in itself. Refrain from such comments. :rolleyes:
 
OverFjell said:
If someone had too many chromozones, they wouldn't automatically turn gay, it's a little thing called "Down's Syndrome," look it up.
Homosexuality, Murder, Religion etc, are ALL life choices.
Click to expand...

Yes you are right, maybe we should start a thread about 'Down Syndrome Marriage - Agree or Disagree'.

The human race is fueled by feelings and insticts based what we are made of, anger is a chemical reaction just like the thoughts in your head which is cause by electrons, not life choices. Marriage is just a human right these days and is over rated.
 
If homosexuality was a genetic problem, it'd be one of THE most controversial genetic problems there is.

And for the record, I shan't refrain from "such comments" when I feel they are necessary.

Saying homosexuality is up to a faulty gene is absolutely disgusting.
 
I had stated previously that I said the term "loosely," for lack of a more applicable term. It's fitting, in a non-offensive/phobic perspective.

And if I want you to not call an opinion stupid, I expect that of you, as with anyone else.
 
Fact or opinion, you should not say it. If you want to take that further, then use the PM system.
 
Your entitled to your opinions but you can say what's on your mind without being insulting, right? I mean whether or not Saix agrees with you is a moot point. The major point is that we have to stand up for all the members on the forum, straight or otherwise. So as much as I'm willing to toss those terms around, you have to understand where Saix is coming from and just be civil. Please.
 
Before I continue, they're called CHROMOSOMES :P

Hayate said:
Now, I do agree that some gay/lesbian couples push their beliefs on their child
Click to expand...
Not anymore than a straight couple would. If anything, the homosexual couple would be more inclined to let the child choose his own path of belief and pursuit - it would be hypocritical not to, right?

EdenSeed said:
Gay isn't a belief and you can't encourage someone to be gay. Its genetics.
Click to expand...
You see, I disagree. This has been brought up in the early pages, too. I think that it's a choice, made by the individual, for one reason or another. Regardless of the reason, I don't believe, in every sense of the word, that a Gay Gene has been discovered. You CHOOSE to be gay. You CHOOSE to kill someone. You CHOOSE to have a child. Unless, of course, you're going to bring the Tapestry of Fate, or some other Myth/Legend to the discussion.

dimmufan said:
Then why is it that all the homosexuals that I know are the only homos in their family? Mom and Dad weren't gay. Grandparents not gay either. Why does little Johnny prefer the company of other men? Maybe he had an experience and liked it. He wasn't born that way.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Genes don't work directly like that. I'm sure you'll learn about it in Biology at school, possibly in a topic called Inheritance. Genes are passed down into children, but the gene, for arguments sake, the Gay Gene, might not necessarily be the dominant gene. Given that there is a higher population of people in the heterosexual group, if there IS a gay gene, then I'd say it's recessive, explaining why there is a significantly smaller number of homosexuals than heterosexuals. However, I'm just playing devils advocate here :P

Mortanius said:
Also, stay on topic guys. This is about marriage. :monster:
Click to expand...
Tell that to the last 490 replies ;) I think we can safely say I was too vague with the title of the thread.
 
Riku said:
Before I continue, they're called CHROMOSOMES :P


Not anymore than a straight couple would. If anything, the homosexual couple would be more inclined to let the child choose his own path of belief and pursuit - it would be hypocritical not to, right?
Click to expand...

Only as hypocritical as a straight person pushing their beliefs on a child.

After all, being straight is a life choice.
 
EdenSeed said:
Devil's Advocate yes. But its just such an interesting subject, don't you agree :)

Just remind me again, which one is the 'straight' gene? :P
Click to expand...
The Dominant gene :]

OverFjell said:
Only as hypocritical as a straight person pushing their beliefs on a child.

After all, being straight is a life choice.
Click to expand...
Absolutely :] But my point was that, given the likely drama the homosexuals would have to endure from some end of their lives or relatives, they'd be more inclined to listen to choices like that and support it. Heterosexuals tend to be more close-minded on homosexuality than homosexuals themselves :P
 
I fully support gay marriage. Like the saying goes: "If you don't like gay marriage, then don't have one." Honestly, I really don't like when people use the Bible as an argument against gay people. Yes, the Bible says that homosexuality is against God. So is masturbation, if we're living our lives according to the Bible. If you're going to use the Bible to live your life, don't pick and choose. Then you're a hypocrite :)

I think that being gay is both genetic and environmental. I don't really think it's a choice. "A number of sections of the brain have been reported to be sexually dimorphic; that is, they vary between men and women. There have also been reports of variations in brain structure corresponding to sexual orientation." No one wakes up in the morning and says to themselves, "I think I'll be gay today!" Oftentimes, being homosexual is difficult because of society's mores or just because of parents/friends/acquaintances who are homophobic. No one would CHOOSE to make their life more difficult. That makes absolutely no sense. You think kids who have parents that are homophobic CHOOSE to be gay and thus be completely shunned and ostracized by their family? I don't really think so.
 
I'm back

Oh boy this thread hasn’t grow that much since the last time I posted anything here lol, well is 5 posts early but I’m making my comeback anyway, beware this is going long.

When someone asks “Do you agree with same-sex marriage?” you know is because there is somebody who will answer “No... fucking... way” and why would anyone be against that? Why would anyone be against the “individual rights of people” Why?

Well let me do a little analysis of the reasons for why anyone would disagree with gay marriage, and whenever that reasoning would be justifiable or not.

It seems that the most common reason to be against it is religion, the believe that “homosexuality” is a sin and that “marriage” is and should always remain as a religious institution. (If you are an atheist or simply don’t care about the religion argument I suggest you to skip to the next point)

PART ONE, “DOES GOD HATES GAY PEOPLE?”
​

Being Christian Catholic, I can only speak for Christians, so… In our religion God created man and women (Adam and Eve) one for each other and told then to reproduce and fill the world with their offspring, one common argument I hear is “God didn’t created Adam and Steve” so he didn’t wanted two men (or two women) to be doing things that should only have been done by two of different gender.

There are also many writing in the Bible that support that homosexuality is a sin, (some of those text are buried in this thread, I really don’t feel like looking for them)

Now what you will notice here is that all that text comes from the Old Testament, see the problem with the O.T. is that many of the visions displayed there are no longer applicable to a modern religion such as Christianity, I know that may sounds like something stupid or blasphemy but I’ve been studying The Bible (nothing pro just a few especial classes), see before Jesus there was not a notion of a loving and forgiving God, instead the God described in the O.T. is ruthless and evil (but know how this sounds but please keep reading).

When I say “evil” I mean not entirely good, as we teach he is today, To illustrate some examples of why God was “evil” in the O.T. remember the story of when Hebrew people escaped from slavery in Egypt to go to their promised land, to free them God unleashes many plagues over Egypt the last one of these kill every firstborn of the Egypt people (God killed innocent children) after that when the Hebrew are leaving the Bible reads in Exodus 14: 3-4

3 For Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in. 4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD. And they did so.
Click to expand...
OMG God forced the Pharaoh to pursuit he Hebrew people!, the Egyptians catch up the Hebrews but God put a wall of fire to prevent them from advancing, then he open the sea let the Hebrew pass but not before taking down the wall of fire so that the Egyptians would follow them so he could drowned them by closing the waters, now that’s mean!!!

There are some other examples in the Bible that I could give you but that would be going offtopic too much (if anyone is interested in discussing it you can always make a new thread), Now here comes the good part…Jesus Christ!

If YOU know anything at all about Jesus, then you know he was the nicest guy ever, he is the guy who said “love your neighbour like yourself” and “turn the other cheek”, we are talking about the guy who introduced the concept of “God is love” I recommend the interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus clearly judges the previous religious law and introduces his own.

In Jesus view of the perfect world no one is to be discriminated or hated, and I also forgot to mention that after Jesus the definition of “sin” changed. You see before Jesus a sin was something gained by condition, if you were poor or ill was because you were a sinner and where being punished by that, but since Jesus a sin is now something you do against God, not a living condition.

Now if you really are a Christian think about this: What would Jesus say if you hated someone for something they are, even if they chose to be that way?

PART TWO – MARRIAGE IS A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION
​

It is true; marriage is a religious institution. That of using a church to marry people isn’t just some new era fashion stuff. The true purpose of marriage was to unite people so they would create families, also to create bonds between their families or settling agreements or whatever they used to do 20 centuries ago.

But marriage has evolved and now is so much more than just a religious ritual, there are some legal benefits from it and stuff like that, the more important one being the ability to adopt children.

Anyway since Marriage itself was something done to unite a man and a women (ever since Adam and Eve) it could be argue that anything outside that is a disrespect to the “Real Marriage”, this is not just same-sex marriage but also things like polygamy etc.

I have absolutely no proof about it, but I think gay people want to get marriage just so they can have some bragging rights, saying something like “look we can get marry too, we are just as good a heterosexual people”.

Forgetting about the religious argument, let’s move on to another of the main reasons of why people disagree with not just homosexual marriage but homosexuality itself:
Homosexuality is something NOT natural, ergo disgusting ergo wrong blah, blah

I’m not aware of any definitive consensus of whenever homosexuality is Nature or Nurture (as in one is born gay vs one becomes gay) now there are a lot of theories in both sides, too many like to say one is right and the other is wrong, if you know anything about this debate that I don’t, please enlighten me.
So I can only talk for myself here, (so if you disagree at least explain why) in my opinion this whole homosexuality thing is a total and complete choice of the individual, I don’t believe that there are genes that say “hey you are gay”, I do believe however that, like always in nature, there could be some cases when by some mutation or error in the genetic code a person could end up not liking what they should like, but a “gay gene” come on.

This said I believe that when people is in a fragile state of their live (adolescence) they can get confuse and end up doing or believing in things that they should not, and the fact that nowadays society tell us that “being gay is ok” many people end up thinking that they may be gay and that it is useless to resist to it. One thing drives to the next and before you know it you are having sex with other guys.

The “IF HETEROSEXUALITY IS NATURAL THEN HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT” argument
​

Sometimes countered with this argument “Homosexuality is just a natural as heterosexuality” <<< I don’t know how that sounds to you, but it made me laugh the first time I heard it (no offence).

Ok so what is natural anyway? Something that happens in nature you may say, but then what about Siamese brothers, they are the result of a mistake of their develop in their mother’s matrix, yet these cases happen a lot in nature, so are Siamese twins a natural occurrence? Technically yes, because it happens, but not by my standards.

See I just said “by my” so it may sound that I’m being egocentric here, but this is they way I see it, if something should not happen, then is not natural regardless of if it happens or not, in the example of the Siamese twins, what should had happen was the two bodies would separate and create two different individuals (twins).

For me, <<< there is that egocentric thing again >>> the phenomenon of homosexuality is just like the phenomenon of Siamese brothers. I realise that somehow that analysis could have offended some people, I assure you that that wasn’t the intention.

FINAL THOUGHTS CONCLUSION​

Whenever I like it or not Marriage is not the serious and noble institution that it used to be, it has been degraded a lot by society, given less and less importance, I believe that same-sex marriage is a slap in the face to the traditional view of marriage.

Note that I am not fully aware of all the legal benefits from being able to marry someone, I mean if it was just for love free union should be enough. Most of the people that argue in favour of gay couples claim they should have the same rights as everyone else, they do, they can still get married to people jus not anyone, like anyone else.

So no, I do not agree with homosexual marriage. If we just allow anyone to marry anyone then this institution will lose the few meaning it got left.
 
So I can only talk for myself here, (so if you disagree at least explain why) in my opinion this whole homosexuality thing is a total and complete choice of the individual, I don’t believe that there are genes that say “hey you are gay”, I do believe however that, like always in nature, there could be some cases when by some mutation or error in the genetic code a person could end up not liking what they should like, but a “gay gene” come on.
Click to expand...
Actually, some animals are gay and have engaged in same sex activity. Mostly birds, mammals and apes. "Homosexual behavior has been documented in 450 species."

In early February 2004 the New York Times reported a male pair of chinstrap penguins in the Central Park Zoo in New York City were partnered and even successfully hatched a female chick from an egg. Other penguins in New York have also been reported to be forming same-sex pairs.
Click to expand...

Also:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html
 
I'm fine with gay marriage. Personally, i think gays just want to get married so they can get the legal benefits, but either way i dont care. Let them live their lives, they're not hurting anyone.

Alot of Christians say it destroys the "sanctity" of marriage. So what marriage is that, the Christian marriage? Well i'm pretty sure marriage was different before Christianity came about. Read the Old Testament sometime, people had multiple wives and even concubines all over the place. Granted, that was to help populate the relatively new human race, but my point is that it is not the Christian/Roman Catholic Church's version of marriage.

If we were to go by the Christian marriage, not only would it prohibit gay marriage, but it would void other cultures' marriages. Marriage is not just a religious practice, it's a legal status. One marriage is just as valid as the next.

And if you dont believe that people cant be born gay, watch this: http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/68/gay_or_straight?comment_offset=1971
 
Personally I dont care if homosexuals get married or not, as long as they dont bother me and between consenting adults they can do what they want.
 
I think if it makes people happy then yes I agree, I don't like to be judgemental to things I don't personally understand. But I don't think it's right for them to be "married" in a church, a civil service.
If you think that homosexuality used to be illegal and how far its come, its only a matter of time before people RARELY really blink an eyelid.
 
Johnny Mo said:
Personally I dont care if homosexuals get married or not, as long as they dont bother me and between consenting adults they can do what they want.
Click to expand...

That's the best post in this thread, it's up to the two people in question, whether they wish to or not. Not the Government's, if they can't get married in their home country, chances are they'd move to a place they could.
I'm all for it personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top