Poll: Do you support gay marriage?

[Jaeke]

No it's unnatural because animals (or anything else in nature) don't conciously make this decision. Any time you see an animal that is homoerotic its because they think they are either last of their species and must do this or are fulfilling their primal urges.

If you put a male animal in a cage with another female and another male... %100 of the time it's going to reproduce with the female, because that is what they do... reproduce.

I can't say much other than that the facts disagree with you.

But it's moving away from the point we started on. "Unnaturalness" is not an argument, when people use it they claims that homosexuality being "unnatural" equates it to being "wrong."

there really should be an "I don't care" option.

I don't care/marriage sucks option.

Well I'm not arguing homosexuality's "right" like I said, I believe gays should be able to court, so, I don't see a need for further argument.

 

[Arakasi]

I voted "no". Not because I oppose it, but because I don't care enough to support one position or the other. This society is going down the tubes, anyway. Who cares what it sanctions? We're heading for another Dark Ages. And soon.

-Facepalm-
Doomsdayers have been around for centuries. As you can see, none have been right so far.



There have been AT LEAST hundreds of complete societal collapses throughout the ages, the number is probably somewhere in the thousands. We only know about those societies who lasted long enough to develop writing and had some of their writings survive to the modern day. To seriously suggest that our current society, which has existed for less than 400 years (barely a teenager by civilization standards) is somehow special, and that it's immune so that it isn't going to happen to us is beyond absurd, especially considering the fact that we're wallowing in debt, our infrastructure is crumbling, our educational system has produced a populace that has decided that 50% productivity sounds about right, and half our country is sitting on top of a giant supervolcano (some people call it Yellowstone Park) that was due to erupt approximately 150 years ago. Next time you facepalm, try doing it harder. Also, try not being a dick.

You're not the moderator. Answering every post individually is not necessary or wanted.

1. You are talking about YOUR country, not mine. Mine happens to be doing well, thank you very much.
2. You are clearly another alamrist, calm down, worse things have happened and your society has survived them, e.g. the Great Depression.
3. In modern society, a society like yours is significnantly less likely to collapse, sure some things are problematic, but that doesn't mean they can't be fixed.
4.I'll reply to any motherfucking post I like.

 

[Stu35]

snip

Isn't there such a thing as partnership which offers the same legal status as a marriage (with regards to inheritance, etc.), but which is completely non-religious?
I know we have that in Sweden... so...

Isn't this law specifically aimed at marriage in the traditional religious sense?

I used to think the same way, in the UK we have civil partnerships, which are, for all intents and purposes, marriages. However, Gays want to be able to say they are married (for whatever a simple word is worth, to me, nothing, I've chosen my life partner and if we weren't allowed to declare ourselves 'married', it wouldn't effect(affect? unsure in this instance, I'm thinking 'effect' though) me... She feels differently, so I'm shelling out a few grand for what basically amounts to a great big piss up for two families... anyway, I digress). So, in the UK, when Gays are arguing for marriage, at this point in time, they are literally arguing for a word. One which they deserve as much as anyone else.

What they are not arguing for, as far as I understand it, is not for the right to get married in churches/mosques/whatever that don't want them, but for the right to declare what they have to be the same as what the religious get to call their legally bound partnerships... Which I have no drama with.

As soon as they try to start forcing Catholics and Muslims to marry them under their roofs, I'm all about the religious freedom (as much as I really, really don't want to, because I see religion as completely retarded... Unfortunately being retarded is not yet a crime).

 

[DanDanikov]

I'm all for governments realising that the term 'marriage' is a bit of a semantic political nightmare and the best idea is to cop out and only use the term 'civil partnership' to identify the state benefits and rights given to couples, regardless of sex/gender, and let religious and non-religious people alike define/redefine what they think marriage is.

 

[blacking512]

Blacks got rights, women got rights, gays will get their rights

 

[timelordrick]

I figure if two consenting adults love each other. Then why the hell not?

 

[RADIALTHRONE1]

*Goes out and buys 74 bullets*

Glad to know the 1,000s viewpoint on gun ownership and murder.

It just further reinforces the logic arguments I posted earlier. Lack of sense of duty to refrain from acts which will prevent the continuation of society when applied universally.

Who said anything about gun ownership and murder? I just bought 74 bullets. Never said i had a gun or that i was going to kill anybody with them.

 

[PhiMed]

I voted "no". Not because I oppose it, but because I don't care enough to support one position or the other. This society is going down the tubes, anyway. Who cares what it sanctions? We're heading for another Dark Ages. And soon.

-Facepalm-
Doomsdayers have been around for centuries. As you can see, none have been right so far.



There have been AT LEAST hundreds of complete societal collapses throughout the ages, the number is probably somewhere in the thousands. We only know about those societies who lasted long enough to develop writing and had some of their writings survive to the modern day. To seriously suggest that our current society, which has existed for less than 400 years (barely a teenager by civilization standards) is somehow special, and that it's immune so that it isn't going to happen to us is beyond absurd, especially considering the fact that we're wallowing in debt, our infrastructure is crumbling, our educational system has produced a populace that has decided that 50% productivity sounds about right, and half our country is sitting on top of a giant supervolcano (some people call it Yellowstone Park) that was due to erupt approximately 150 years ago. Next time you facepalm, try doing it harder. Also, try not being a dick.

You're not the moderator. Answering every post individually is not necessary or wanted.

1. You are talking about YOUR country, not mine. Mine happens to be doing well, thank you very much.
2. You are clearly another alamrist, calm down, worse things have happened and your society has survived them, e.g. the Great Depression.
3. In modern society, a society like yours is significnantly less likely to collapse, sure some things are problematic, but that doesn't mean they can't be fixed.
4.I'll reply to any motherfucking post I like.

Well, I was talking about MY country. And you responded to my post when you "facepalmed", which is rude.

You don't get to redefine the context of my post.

Do you have any support for your suggestion that modern societies are less likely to collapse? We don't know the duration of most of the old societies, but most of them lasted considerably longer than any modern nation, including yours. Every society is susceptible to failure, and I think our current information exchange technology and worldwide economy makes us MORE susceptible, not less.

Celestial phenomenon causing EMP = done.
Thermonuclear war = done
Collapse of energy supply = done
Nearly universally fatal plague in a society where you can literally be on the other side of the world in half a day = done.

I'm not an alarmist because I'm not stocking up the basement, but you really need to get some historical perspective, man.

Also, did I mention you're really unnecessarily rude? I don't know why you feel you need to speak that way.