| Same-sax marriage | |
|---|---|
| Sep 7, 2007 18:11 | #11   |
 | no matter what sax it is. Everybody can love.the same sax so what? |
| Sep 8, 2007 02:59 | #12 |
| Human have a basic manual of life. We should follow the criteria. |
| Sep 8, 2007 12:43 | #13 |
| It don't affect me to know that there are sick people out there, they have been there since ever. I don't care what they do. however, if one day i see my male dog in love with another male dog, them i will understand a sick relationship of a man and a man, i don't know of a man woman, so sex twin two man is a mental disorder, just think about it. your an#$@% is just that, an AN#$@% and not a sexual organ. animal behavior is one thing, human sickness is another matter. last time i check, no homosexual individual call himself an animal. as a matter of fact they want to be call normal people. And no animal hass been call people as i know. |
| Sep 10, 2007 23:01 | #14 |
| GUEST07154 | Hi, I have no clear opinion (good or bad) on same sax (lol) wedding, but I thought I would add to your topic by adding that since over a year now, it is recognized and legal for two people of same sax to get married all accross Canada. Some celebrities from USA even came over to officialize their 'un-ordinary' union. Cheers! |
| Sep 11, 2007 10:14 | #15 |
| GUEST07154: I agree, "un-ordinary" union. We must let it be, They have been there since the beginning of man, Canada is doing just that, I don't agree with with hate and descrimination against it. homosexuality is a mental desorder, of the human race. |
| Nov 15, 2007 22:53 | #16 |
| I saw your statement. My question is: Why does that naturally follow from supporting same sex marriage? The are gay famialies in my neighborhood - the values and behaviors they support are the same as most of my neighbors. They may have had to produce their children in a slightly different way, but they love them as much as I do mine. I see them supporting their children at PTA meetings, and in local youth organizations of various kinds. To be sure, these are long standing monagamous relations, but that is also something we value. I see that by not sactioning gay marriage, we depreive those in that marriage from some societal benefits: I don't understand why accepting gay marriage should have much effect on on marriages like mine or yours - My marriage is one that my spouse and I have generated over many years of learning to live together - it is not affected by whether my neighbors have a "civil union" or a "marriage". Neither will it affect the ethuical values I live by and try to pass on to my children. Also, many more long standing and monagamous gay relationships tend to not have children than similar heterosexual relations, so if they were not a part of "nature" as we know it, it would long since have died out in the population. Perhaps you have formulated better reasons for your stance than I can think of, and I would be interested in hearing them. I am truly interested in this subject, and would like to hear your reasoning. thanks Bob Grant (pygrant) |
| Nov 16, 2007 21:03 | #17 |
| I think general society still has fear and revulsion at what gay people (esp men) do behind closed doors. The image they promote is flamboyant and overtly sexual. I went to the Toronto Gay Pride Parade (largest in North America, attracts 2 million visitors a year), and this is what I saw: Naked guys walking down the street in their chains and leather gear, Naked women sitting around with boobies hanging to their bellies, lots of free condoms flying around, atmosphere of "free sex" and business cards for gay bars, lots of transvestites, very strange looking people, some handsome, well-groomed gay guys with oiled, hard bodies, dancing on floats. It was very interesting, but it is definitely not a family event. Some family-oriented people were upset when they saw that. It's really an adult event because of it's overtly sexual content and all the naked people walking around. Bob, I understand that the gay couples in your area are decent and responsible parents. I wish that those kind of gay people would predominate and have a higher profile in my area. In Toronto, we have open minds towards gay people, and we legalized gay marriage also!! but our image of them is still highly shaped by our annual gay parade. It makes them look perverted, highly sexed, and also having mental problems. The transvestites seem confused about their identity and somehow sad too in their lifestyle. What does this have to do with gay marriage? Regular couples don't identify with this image of gay people, and believe that gay people have a "separate" culture and therefore need a unique category to fulfill their needs and rights in our society. Even some people at the gym think gay people should have their own washroom because they are a separate gender, not male, not female, a special group. And nature has created many imperfections. Most humans have flaws, some of us more than others. We only need to look at history to see how we are imperfect. There are many genetic illnesses like inherited cancer genes, chemical imbalance in the brain... Could it be that homosexuality is a kind of genetic illness? People with this illness can function very well in many ways, but... I don't see their marriage as being the same as the one in heterosexual culture... if you believe so, then you need to persuade us as to why... |
| Nov 16, 2007 21:46 | #18 |
| If I add one word to Chynagyrl’s statement, that will be a sign of arrogance on my part. Chynagyrl, thank you. jcl. |
| Nov 17, 2007 15:17 | #19 |
| Thank you very much for your thoughts - you are right, the image presented in the Toronto parade is very different from those my gay neighbors present. In fact, I think they sometimes overly restrict their behavior because they are afraid of being viewed as different and immoral and afraid also of the social effects on their children. I agree that the scientific evidence at present does seem to indicate that that homosexuality and gender roles appear to be greatly influenced by both genetics and interuterine environment (e.g. a female fetus as a triplet who is situated between the two male fetuses in utero is much more likely to display the physical activity level and "tomboyish" behavir typical of males). However, these are all points on a continuum, most tomboys grow up to be perfectly feminine and normal in their gender development. Some differerences are genetically based, but have no practical human significance (e.g. asians as a group tend to be very homogenous in certain features (hair and eye color)) and in group differences such as the number of multiple births (If my data is correct, asians have the lowest number of multiple births of any geographical group, if hormone treatments are excluded). These are differences, not necessarily illnesses. I don't equate "persuading you" as being the same thing as factual reality. Maybe I could persuade, and then we might both be incorrect. What I am saying is that many homosexuals function very well in most instances (remarkably well, considering the face and attitudes that society presents to them - society's attitudes can be internalised in a dramatically harmful fashion. For instance, there is a substantial difference in performance between African-American and Hispanic-American children on one hand, and caucasion American children on the other, in performance on so called "intelligence" tests, and particularly in certain areas of academic progress (generally mathamatics & basic sciences). There is also a very large body of evidence showing that African-American and Hispanic-American children perform much better on these tests simply by persuading or misinforming them on the nature of the test: e.g. the gap between them and their caucasian peers narrows dramatically (and in certain environments pretty much dissapears)) if the children are told that what is a math test is really a personality test to see how they approach problems, and the specific correct answers are not important. How do we know that much of the "pathological" behavior we see from gays is not the result of their social environment or of how others treat themm? |
| Nov 17, 2007 15:19 | #20 |
| This is the rest of my thoughts - I ran over 3,000 words, so had to do it this way. It reminds me of how for forty years American medical students were taught that the reason African-Americans (who as a group have about 60% African genes, 30% European genes, and 10% "other" - Asian, Native American, etc). have smaller birth weight babies was because it was genetic (meaning basically that if researchers corrected for every factor that they could think of: income, education, pre-natal care, nutrition, etc.), black Americans still had smaller babies. What put this idea to rest was a comparison of birth weights done in the Cook County area (Chicago) that showed that African born black women and caucasion women had identical infant birth rates, and that African-American babies were still significantly lighter than either. So much for it being due to genetics. Environement has dramatic effects on how genetic potentialities are played out, which is just a long way for me to say that we shouldn't assume that some of the negative behavior that a certain portion of the homosexual populations displays shoud automatically be assumed to be due to their gender preference or even the genetic or interuterine influences that may affect that preference choice. Thanks for listening, if anyone is interested I can probably find the citations for the articles I mentioned briefly above Bob Grant, (and thanks again Chynagyrl for being able to discuss this intelligently and with so little excess ego.) |
Post a Reply to: Same-sax marriage
Copyright © 1998-2024 All rights reserved.