Samsara:

So if two gay people want to get married, what should it be called?

And why is them getting married a disgrace?

I would personally prefer that bigots couldn't get married. That would be a good law. It might teach them a thing or two.

mike695ca:

So you have NO ISSUES with gays in general but gay marriage is disgusting??? Your a moron and i hope you spent your youth being diddled by your priest. @Samsara I wouldnt worry, bigots usually have a hard time getting married as it is.

Samsara:

Exactly.

"I have no issues with gay people, unless they expect the same rights as other humans."

ScotsAlan:

Everyone is entiitled to the same rights. There are no rights to descrimate... on whatever level or for whatever reason.

Hotwater:

Explain why it's a disgrace. I want to understand why you feel this way. 

thefidu881:

Mike and Samsara... keep your disagreements within the limits of a debate. If you want to go off road, I bet you won't like the response at all. I got the idea about your up bringings and education on 'freedom of speech and thought'. Hotwater...get to you on this tomorrow.

ScotsAlan:

OK.

Let me answer my own question.

It seems to me, that the only people who object to gay marriage are the very religious poeple.

But China, by law, is athiest. To join the party, you need to swear an oath to say there is no God.

So really, it should follow that China is pro gay marriage. After all, there is no religious rule against it... because religion is effectively banned.

There is no moral standpoint at all, for anyone, no matter what their religion, to deny any partnership marriage.

That is my opinion. And I am sticking with it.

So, gay marriage in China should be legal.  There is actually no reason for it not to be.

nzteacher80:

"I have no issues with gays..." but the idea of them getting married makes me physically sick. Hmmm... That's like saying "I'm not racist but I sure do hate Jews, Arabs, Indians, etc." Sounds like you've got some pretty big issues with gays thefidu881. I'd guess that you are some kind of brainwashed Christian.

nzteacher80:

double post

Samsara:

NZ: He comes from an Islamic nation, I believe.

Samsara:

"Mike and Samsara... keep your disagreements within the limits of a debate. If you want to go off road, I bet you won't like the response at all."

To be honest... Mike doesn't strike me as a person who shies away from argument. So I guess we would both like a response. Specifically, to the following questions:

1. What should gay marriage be called?

2. Why is it a disgrace?

3. Why do you claim to have no issues with gays but claim that them getting married is disgusting?

4. Is "going off road" a euphemism for anal sex?

thefidu881:

My opinion isn't based on what belief I have so cut the religious bs off since religion isn't related to this issue. Not all gays are non religious. I have no issues with gays until they keep their relationship away from manipulating me or asking me to say, "you are awesome". Marriage with opposite sex is the only way keeping the cycle of life on earth continue since ages. Study botany and tell me if this is natural why isn't a single specie of plants involved in that. Why do they place a male date tree in the farm of 300 trees? Prove it from science that there are genes or chromosomes which pave way for homosexuality in one way or other. Stop bullshiting that anyone who doesn't condone the idea of homosexuality is manipulated by religious beliefs. Samsara: by mentioning limits I meant keep your arguments upto disagreements and do not retort to personal attacks, I do not give a heck about gays getting married but I do not like the idea and I have the same right as you to express myself about that. Name calling or bigoted attacks aren't the way to express your disagreement. Get the heck out of where I am from since I do not let my mind being manipulated by certain ideologies.

mike695ca:

Well now I am interested in the response I wont like at all part. What does that entail? FYI waving the freedom of speech flag dies not grant you the freedom of being a caveman pig. Nor is it an answer. Many people have asked the same question. If you accept gays as is then why is gay marriage DISGUSTING ? Where you molested by a man?? Is this why it repulses you? Your whole talk of plants and chromosomes is bullshit. That is an argument against gays in general not gay marriage. And that is where your problems are Is it not? If your not religious than what is it about that marriage paper that is so disgusting? Shhhh a secret people have sex without that paper. Lets just be real here. YOu are from a backwards packistani country living in the stone age and you dont like gays. But you also dont have the balls to say it. So you parade around the question that you didnt need to answer in the first place. Its the go-to no no no im not racist my friend is black answer. I hope when you go back home your government read that you habe no problem with gays and they stone you. That seems fair. Now! On to the response i wont like!

thefidu881:

Love it mike... out of arguments, jump to personal attacks. Waiting for a response from admin.

mike695ca:

These are not personal attacks. These are questions about your well being. Hahaha are you gonna run to admin? Well riddle me this. What do you expect to happen if you "love it"? Another question. Is the bigot really going to admin for moral support? You are delusional.

thefidu881:

Who the fu*k do you think you are mike to draw the line on what my freedom of speech entitles me to say and what not? You hypocrate jerk.

mike695ca:

How does that make me a hypocrate?

nzteacher80:

Plants aren't gay so being gay is bad. Genius. 1,500 species of animals display homosexual behaviour. I once met a doberman that was gay. Not a labradoodle, a doberman. A big gay doberman. He only tried it on with other boy dogs and was very fussy about his food. How do you explain that thefidu881?

thefidu881:

NZ...I didn't say its bad rather I said one should not manipulate me to say its great either. I didn't say kill the gays for they are disgusting. I said I find the idea of marriage between homos is a disgrace to the idea of marriage between opposite genders since it is the natural cycle irrespective of religious beliefs. You condone the idea of marriage between gays and I find it disgusting. Why do you think I am bigot if I find it disgusting? Where is my freedom of speech and thought and who the fuck that fat arse mike to call me a caveman if I don't like something? And who cares if I find it disgusting until I incite voilence against gays or gay marriages? If your parameters of development and civilization are limited to condone anything you think is right than where is my freedom of thought? I don't give a heck about what religious entities think of gays rather itsmy thought that equal perception of gay marriage and opposite gender marriage is disgusting so what? Let me have my god damn freedom of thought and speech. I called on mike as hypocrate jerk because he thinks teasing people by caricaturing their beliefs is freedom of speech(no doubt it is) but calling/opposing idea of gay marriage is bigoted. I agree that animals have been found in homosexuality but how often and under what circumstances?

thefidu881:

Mike: I have no issues with you riding on the 'shaft' of doberman(NZ mentioned), a mongolian stallion or use your car's handbreaks to satisfy your piles but I sure do have a problem if you restrict me from saying,'its disgusting'. What makes you think if someone doesn't like an idea or find it disgusting, doesn't incite voilence against the idea is a bigot or uncivilized? Is gay marriage your parameters of judging development of a society? You are a pimple on the butt of Canadian society who all the way go on exhibiting a fascist attitude towards anything he doesn't like. I bet you go on kicking every trash bin on your wayback home for not being full of junk like you.

mike695ca:

Fidu. You really are a caveman. You are just tooo stupid to still be breathing. Let me try to make this clear although i am sure i will fail. 1: when you call people Homos, to everyone in every society that doesnt partake in honor killings, female gender mutilation and forced marriages, you are considered a piece of shit, uneducated and backwards and ignorant. 2: you still cant see what everyone is saying. You clearly said that you have no problem with gays but only gay marriage is disgusting. Then you say you dont like to be forced or manipulated into saying gays are great. And then you said Homos are disgusting. I know you are stupid but try to listen. Saying these things clearly show you do not like gays at all. Not just marriage. 3. When people asked you why you feel this why, you just reply freedom of though. You give no reasons. Its my opinion and i can think what I want. Are you 7? Are you that stupid that you can not find reasonable logic to engage in conversation? You dont need to answer that part, we all know the answer. 4. This will be pretty hard to believe because well its hard for many people to believe who coincidentally all molest their sisters. But yes, gay marriage is actually a very great way of judging development of a society. This is why your family drives taxis is every country that allows gay marriages. Im guessing you dont wanna immigrate to Iraq do you? Yet Canada, the US, Australia numerous European countries, who as we speak are held in high regard for their great social development, all support gay marriage. 5 I live in China, I have never seen a garbage can that is not overflowing thus, no jealousy.

thefidu881:

Again who the f*ck are you to manipulate me to like one thing I don't like? You are one fucking moron and a fascist idiot. Mike... piss off with your fascist attitude

thefidu881:

I don't like the idea of gay marriage where I didn't say 'exterminate the brutes'. I didn't say everyone should dislike or think of that like me. Its my right to express what I don't like and you are a piece of garbage if you think I must like it.

thefidu881:

I should not be allowed to breathe? Your momma shall be persecuted for bringing you in. Deep down your hypocrate arse lies the sperms of Hitler by saying that one shouldn't be alive if he doesn't condone what you think should be condoned.

mike695ca:

No no no you misunderstand me. Im not saying you shouldnt breathe because you have a different opinion. Im saying you shouldnt breathe because you are too stupid to live. You are taking my air. People like you are a waste of space on this planet. I wont talk badly about your mother because she did nothing wrong. She was forced to be married to your father. i dont really blame you either. You were raised in a place that has no concept of peace, or compassion. You were born to be a soldier of stupidity. But you still should not be alive. Your like a cockroach. I dont hate them or blame them for being disgusting. But i still step on them.

thefidu881:

Piss off with your ladyboy mike...you should be barred from breeding further. You are teaching me lessons of civility? Oh, my cave is super great. Don't breed mike seriously.

mike695ca:

Too late. Now there are two Mikes to exterminate people like you.

thefidu881:

Mike, if you and your momma start breeding like pigs with 35x rate even then you cannot touch me you fucktard. You know despite having the worst conditions my country keeps nukes for ragheads like you. We do not molest our sisters but you sure do and post her videos online to earn your bread and butter. You delusional piece of shit, at one hand you are saying we molest our sisters and at the same time accusing us for honor killings. I don't care if a Canadian piece of shit sleeps with her momma or a dog unless the inbreed comes after killing me. Go on since I know you earn through posting videos of.... Enough from me since I have to earn by doing hard work to feed my family even if I had to drive a taxi, I will be proud of it.

mike695ca:

Whoawhoawhoa did the Pakistani just call me a raghead?!?! That is racist. Being a homophobic bigot cockroach is one thing but you just took it to a whole nother level. Shame on you. I bet when your father paid for your wife with goats milk that poor girl had no idea she was being forced to marry a racist. Thats low. Even for a cockroach like you. Tsk tsk.

thefidu881:

That's funny hahaha... my father doesn't decide who I should marry rather me so that goes above my head. OK, how about the poor Chinese girl who thought she is going to marry a Canadian guy in order to escape Chinese boys but she found out mike is a fascist and regressive retard? That mike is a gaylord. You are not only racist but a fascist as well and I dare you try me mike, I swear you would like it since Pakistani people must be afraid of a Canadian as compared to Chinese you bully around you. Don't teach your kids about your real innerself or they would end up pretty much like you, garbage.

mike695ca:

You have a lot of hate in your heart man. You hate gays, Candians, Chinese. Did your father raise you like that? To hate all non muslims? Question. Would you beat your wife for making eye contact with me? Would you kill her if i saw some leg?? Its not healthy man, you need some love in your life. Perhaps a man? Perhaps a man can show you true love and happiness.

Spiderboenz:

Gay marriage is against the "natural cycle"?  

Because only married couples have children, right?

Does this mean that sterile people shouldn't be able to get married?

thefidu881:

The fascist who call on people insects and want to step on them is telling me that I hate people. I don't hate gays, Canadian, Chinese or anyone until any of them is coming to kill me for not submitting to his will. I sure will put a couple of AK47 rounds up his arse if he thinks I shouldn't breathe because I do not like something. Prove it jerk that I hate gays or gay marriages from the thread? Is disliking and hate a common thing? Look at the nearest miror mike, you have lost all my respect for you since this morning. I didn't know that computers can hide the vile nature of jerks up to that level. You started all these personal attacks based on your assumption of my country or religious background. You don't know me mike thus you are no one to assume what I think of gay marriage is hate.

Shining_brow:

CHILDREN!!!

Go to your rooms!

Oh, FFS.... yes, Fidu is allowed to have his own opinion. And, yes, no-one else has to like it.

It's that friggen simple!

Fidu - you have invited debate against your idea - are you acknowledging it's open to being changed? That it is something that can be debated?

I'm not going to say something like "You shouldn't find it "disgusting"... you are a bigotted arsehole"... cos that's just going against the whole ideal of freedom of speech (I notice how it's ok to say that ... as long as it's with something you agree with!!!). Feelings are, by definition, irrational. You also haven't actually said whether you'd acknowledge such a marriage legally. Ie, you've said you wouldn't like it, but not whether you would accept it or not! Just cos I find capsicum disgusting doesn't mean I expect it to be wiped off the face of this planet...

Anyway - the arguments...

Firstly, you're actually wrong historically and biologically.

As has been suggested before, there are many instances in nature of animals (and, to an extent, plants) being homosexual, or displaying over homosexual tendencies. In a variety of situations... both for pure survival, and also for pleasure (I'm deliberately avoiding discussion of whether those animals are 'gay', as that would imply a level of cognizance that we humans do not have understanding of in those animals... that is, said doberman hasn't actually said "Hey guys, I'm gay... mmm'kay" - we can only go by observation of behaviour).

There are also species that are capable of changing their sex during their lifetimes. There are also animals (creatures) that are asexual, and breed through division.

There are also animals that will kill the other during, or after, sex...

So, the whole idea of 'it's natural' is a ridiculous argument to base this on! Even if you go merely by mammals... mammals are nasty animals! Cats eat their own kittens, FFS!

What's 'natural' is precisely what happens in nature... and that means, by definition, that homosexuality is natural! And, history has told us it has been since... well, history!

So, Fidu, your idea that being gay isn't natural is completely wrong. You said it goes against the life-cycle... yeah, so does murder, yet it still happens. Lots of things are against the life-cycle... and yet they still happen. Drought is a great example, but I presume you don't find drought 'disgusting'. Humans have been fking up the 'life-cycle' for thousands of years... and yet I presume you don't find that 'disgusting'.

Marriage, however, is NOT a part of nature... It's a legally binding institution (first considered a hell of a long time ago, well before there were laws - to some extent). It's part of a social construct (as much as any other part of the social constructs) There is also a reasonable argument to be made that it, too, goes against this life-cycle... after all, if one of the spouses is infertile,  shouldn't that mean the marriage should be automatically dissolved, so the other can find another partner to procreate with?

Marriage and social constructs... I mentioned that before it was a legal thing - well before there was any law... I presume you would think that any 2 (or more) consenting adults (of whatever age) being together would be just as unacceptable? Whether 'legally' married or not? After all, all it comes down to is a piece of paper...

Speaking of which... historically, there have been marriages between homosexuals (consenting and otherwise) throughout history. So, that argument is completely invalidated. Legal is, by definition, whatever the nation/area agrees at the time to be acceptable to their society (possible argument for deciding on 'civilisation' there). So, if Europe says it's ok for homosexuals (or metrosexuals, or polysexuals... or even asexuals...) to get married, and it becomes law, then that's what it is!

What I'm getting at is - you have a definition of 'marriage' which doesn't seem objectively, historically accurate. Out of the million or so years in which some version of humans have been around, you're making a judgement based on only a few hundred years (and, as we know, laws change a hell of a lot over time!) Even since the time of written history, your concept of 'marriage' is limited to only a fairly narrow, localised idea. Saying it's only meant between a man and a woman is denying reality (Mohammad was 'married' to a 9-year-old girl...!), and defining it to suit your own purposes.

Shining_brow:

Oh, I forgot to mention - no-one's asking to you say "It's great".. only to accept that 2 people the right to make a decision for themselves that the rest of the world acknowledges as being made with full legal consent.

If I have the right to write a will that excludes various people from inheriting my shit (which ain't worth much anyway), then why can't 2 adults write and sign a document saying that they are, legally, together?

dokken:

Your view is not one I agree with but I respect you for braving the tide of opinion. Nobody should have brought up your nationality, that was plain wrong and racist. By saying you have no issues with gays shows a degree of liberalism. 

Genetics is a complicated thing. For higher level complex human thinking I thing it'll be a long time before the many many genes involved would be mapped out  / understood. Nobody knows what makes a person straight or in rare cases, asexual. 

You were talking about animal modelling of homosexuality. I can tell you from my experience between 2 to 5 percent of animals are rampant homosexuals. I forgot the number but when I studied transgenic mice at university it was frustrating because we lost a few each cycle because we could not get them to breed.  I think that is proof positive homosexuality is genetic in origin.

thefidu881:

Shining, your argument are pretty valid at certain points but your assumptions are wrong that I won't find 'murders' disgusting. That's where mike went off road by assuming that I hate gays and all the bs. Anything today is and shall be open to debate, I say that and I stand by this idea no matter what. You went wrong again by asumming that my disliking of gay marriage equivalent to opposite sex is manipulated by religious beliefs since I dished out religion at first reply. Gays are part of nature so I accept that and have no problem with them, I don't hate them neither I despise them but I find it disgusting. So what? Does it matter to anyone around me until I go on like mike to crush them while declaring them uncivilized? If the government allows and give rights to gays, ants or chickens, is it necessary that I should reject or condone it while I know governments across the world don't give a flying fuck over millions of poor people? Take an example of taxes, Government impose taxes on us and we have to pay it even if we find it disgusting. I hope you got my point on this whole gaymarriage thingy. Coming back to the hypocracy that lies deep down in our nature, freedom of speech doesn't/shall not be mainpulted by jerks like mike otherwise I will have my freedom of resistance which can beat the 70shades out of his fat arse. Tolstoy in his 'Letter To A Hindu' says, "do not resist evil but try not to paricipate in it either". Qouting this doesn't mean I am assuming the gays or gay marriage 'evil'. I just don't like it and don't want to participate in making it or resisting it and its my right to do so.

thefidu881:

Double.

Shining_brow:

Fidu, you did take me out of context.... it happens. I'm presuming it wasn't deliberate, just difficult to read through a wall of text!

I wrote: "So, Fidu, your idea that being gay isn't natural is completely wrong. You said it goes against the life-cycle... yeah, so does murder, yet it still happens. Lots of things are against the life-cycle... and yet they still happen. Drought is a great example, but I presume you don't find drought 'disgusting'. Humans have been fking up the 'life-cycle' for thousands of years... and yet I presume you don't find that 'disgusting'."

I'm using examples of what goes on in nature, and how we have different views of it.. Some things get a value judgement on them, others don't.

"You went wrong again by asumming that my disliking of gay marriage equivalent to opposite sex is manipulated by religious beliefs since I dished out religion at first reply."

I'm confused by this... Also, I didn't even mention religious beliefs! You did. You also talk of 'manipulation'... what manipulation? By the LGBT movement to try to get equal rights? Or by the religious movements who say they don't deserve them - that marriage between a man and a woman is worthy of legal protections, but marriage between man and man, or woman and woman isn't? If so, why?

"is it necessary that I should reject or condone it while I know governments across the world don't give a flying fuck over millions of poor people?"

Different argument! a) is it necessary to accept or reject government policy... well, on one hand, no. On the other, it's what makes up society and civilisation. If everyone rejected government policy, what would society be like? If everyone unquestioningly accepts, you get China...

b) being disgusted by something because it doesn't take into account all the other bad things in the world that the government ignores is a straw man argument... ie, full of shit. It's quite possible to have simultaneous issues being debated etc all at once.  And not effectively dealing with one ought in no way to influence the position of the others.

"I just don't like it and don't want to participate in making it or resisting it and its my right to do so."

Fair enough! But I will still ask you the question - as we're all individuals on this forum, and (for most of us) have an equal say (with some tossers who should be banned...). Do you think that gay people ought to have the same rights as non-gay people to enter into the legally binding contract called 'marriage'?

I notice that around the world, there are many who seem to think/feel similarly to yourself - ie, they don't like the idea... however, their sense of 'justice' and 'fairness' over-rides those basic tendencies, and they find it would be 'wrong' to deny these rights to human beings.

thefidu881:

You didn't get me on Government policies. I meant that if Government gives equal rights to gay marriages, it doesn't concern me at all rather I take it as tax law. I may not like it but accept it as it is. Again on equal rights to anyone doesn't concern me rather I appreciate if people get what they want. Isn't that quite simple. By disliking an idea doesn't necessarily means I will oppose it until the idea or policy THREATEN my rights. This whole thing is debatable in the context of 'freedom'. I feel being manipulated by mike who without arguing within civility showed his regressive junk mind. That is hypocracy at peak when you go on advocating equality but think of people different to you as insects. When I said I have no issues with gays, I meant that and if I just don't like it due to any stupid arse idea it is still my freedom to doso. What I found funny in the arguments is the dilllusion and straight ass assumptions based on geographical superiority complex. Isn't that in full contrast to the idea of freedom and equal rights one is advocating?

Cathyosullivan92:

Would you still find it disgusting if it was your own child that was gay? Homosexuality is not a choice. Shame on you.

ScotsAlan:

Adoption? Plenty of unwanted kids out there. Adoption... buying selling kids... normal in China... both ancient and modern.

Englteachted:

Primitive thinking demands that the child be of your  own blood

Hotwater:

It's an interesting debate. Is a civil union the same as a marriage? To me yes, though I got married twice. First time in UK for tax benefits after we'd already lived together 6 years and bought a house (& our first child was due), 2nd time in China because it was important for my partner. 

Why is it important for some gay people? Because they want to be treated the same under the law and see being married as the way to show their commitment to each other. So for me it is important that gay people should have the right, if they choose, to get married. 

iWolf:

Hmmm, does marriage indicate a religious aspect to the union?

Assuming that it does indicate a religious concept, I'm just wondering what is the percentage split between "marriage" and civil union for hetro people (but too lazy to search)? And does anyone give a rat's arse?

Hotwater:

People were having "marriages" (pledges, whatever!) before the days of present day religions. So I have no issue what other people do so long as it does not negatively affect me. 

Gay at people getting married has absolutely no affect on me so let them do it. 

Shining_brow:

I think the fact that there is objection to being 'married', versus.. 'united' is the sticking point. If you're going to say that all people are equal, then so should society accept that equality - not just in fact but also in word. If, on the other hand, you're going to limit the use of the word 'marriage' to only men and women (or, as I mentioned above, holy prophets and 9-year-old girls), then you're clearly discriminating.

Mateusz:

Really? The country is officially atheist, and they don't let you into the Party unless you are atheist. Any other religion (especially Islam and Christianity) are severely restricted as a matter of policy... sounds kinda fanatical.

As the government has demonstrated that being theistic is by no means a requirement for being homophobic (the current Pope's statements on homosexuality are lighyears beyond any Chinese leader, despite the stereotype that all Catholics hate gays), it's unlikely that they're on the verge to changing laws. Homosexuality was considered a mental disease in China until very recently.

ScotsAlan:

This is the same as I was thinking expat.

Except that when I read any Chinese article about being gay, I get the impression that China is still in the "schoolboy sniggering" stage.

ScotsAlan:

  I agree xunliang. But I think 10 years, not 50.

The 50 years behind the west is an interesting thought. It has a lot to do with what prompted my question.

See here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/11/north-carolina-gay-marriage_n_7561886.html

So, North Carolina, in order to get around the federal law that allows gay marriage, has enacted a law that allows it's government workers to discriminate.  Effectively, they are allowed to refuse to marry anyone.

This is a big thing for me. I am one half of an inter racial marriage.

And look what happened in the west, less than 50 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Yup. Inter racial marriage was illegal.

Amazing

xunliang:

Wow. Didn't know that. 

Strawberry66:

I won't approve the gay marriage for the political reason. A country needs population.

Shining_brow:

Strawberry - this world needs less humans, not more! Or, are you like 99% of the rest of the world, and think that it's "someone else's responsibility" - and not yours?

Strawberry66:

I said it in a polite view. A country does not want to promote the gay throughts.

Lord_hanson:

Good thinking Vicky. China is very under populated and has a shortage of men. It would be a disaster if they were allowed to marry.

Hotwater:

Marriage is a celebration of love.

Gay people, like heterosexual people, are capable of loving each other. 

Ergo....gay marriage is as valid as straight marriage. 

Your cat cat argument is a straw man. 

RiriRiri:

You said it yourself: marriage is the celebration of love.

I love my cat. Therefore, why couldn't I marry it? Or my office chair for that matter. I love my office chair, never said a word about my farts for years, if that's not true love tell me what is. Why the fuck couldn't I marry it? Because you're a fascist who doesn't understand my way of life? Who are you to set the limit?

ScotsAlan:

The point about gay marriage is it gives people in the partnership the same rights as hetro married couples. shared tax allowances, inheritance rights, pension rights etc. Without gay marriage, a couple could be together for life, then if one suddenly dies intestate, the surviving partner could find themself with no legal right to anything.

RiriRiri:

If it's just about tax and shit then it should matter even less then, so yeah yeah sure sure can I marry my cat already?

nzteacher80:

If your cat can sign the marriage register then you can get married. The real question is... How does it affect you if two gay people get married?

Samsara:

Riri:

Marriage should be between two consenting adults (adults understand what marriage means, and are both choosing it). That rules out cats, chairs and 12-year-old girls. I think telling two adults (who are just as intelligent, grown up, and aware as you) that they can't marry because of their gender is quite unreasonable.

Let's face it: Some people feel uncomfortable about the idea of man/man intimacy, and therefore decree that it is "wrong". Then they try to invent objective-sounding reasons for their disapproval (like "marriage is about continuing the species", "people will start marrying animals" or "God hates fags").

RiriRiri:

Now the deal is simple: either marriage is about facilitating two people doing their biological duty to society, or it's about “love”.

If the former, then please explain me how does this work for gays.

If the latter, then explain me who the fuck are you to tell me who or what I can and can't love. I can get consent from my cat anytime, just let me grab some tuna pudding and we're good. So yet again, are you trying to impose your fascist regressive views on my life choice? Why are you going against my personal freedom? How does me marrying my cat affect you? It doesn't as far as I know. So what's your problem?

See, you can't possibly be telling me why should I care as long as it doesn't affect me while going all board long about how Chinese don't give a shit about anything. It's about principles and about what a society is based on. I don't give two shits about everyone's own sexual likings and practices, but marriage isn't meant for validating everyone's little fantasies. Or it is, then you made your choice and there again: who are you to set the limit to gay people?

And we didn't even scratch the problem of the world consensus this issue is fucking up.

mike695ca:

Riri your chair cant give consent. Nor can your cat. How do we know that your chair actually loves you? How do we know you dont rape that poor chair? Or that it is old enough for consent. Usually you are pretty great at this stuff but its a dumb example haha. Im more impressed that people actually engaged you in that convo, what I am interested is the consensus issue you brougjt up. Care to elaborate?

Hotwater:

Stupid arguments here from Riririri.....pointless discussing any further with him as he is using strawman arguments 

ScotsAlan:

Monty Python has the answer:

http://www.montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Life_of_Brian/8.htm

RiriRiri:

Valid point from mike: consent.

Okay then, let's forget about animals and inanimate objects: how about the 5 human beings that I love, including my sister and my mother?

Oh and my grandpa because, heh, what the hell, I have a big heart. Do we have an issue here?

Marriage is about love (and taxes), remember, so here we go again: who are you to tell me how many consenting human beings I can officially love? Monogamy is Fascism.

You can see the Pandora box this stupid shit opens yet? These are the issues you're going to face 10 or 20 years from now, unless of course one of you can offer me a convincing reason why it wouldn't happen (or you're fine with it, after all).

And we didn't even scratch the issue of procreation and adoption here. All this for a community whose majority never asked for anything in the first place, which makes me actually feel sorry for all the bad publicity.

Mike, the consensus I was talking about is the fact the whole world, as in the majority of countries and people on this planet, see marriage the same way I do, and we could roughly agree on at least one fucking thing no matter who we are from.

Shining_brow:

(ok... let's start re-typing this all over again....)

There's one simple point that you've all missed here... marriage is NOT about love... it's about law.

Anyone can say they love anyone else... or anything. However, that don't mean squat legally.

However, when someone gets married (legally), they are given various rights in law under certain circumstances. These rights include control of finances, property, and even medical decisions. From a logical point of view, it should make no difference who is given this legal right, if they are an informed, capable adult (you'll note that there are laws in place regarding marriage and mentally disabled people!)

Cats and chairs make pretty lousy legal decisions...

I can give my best friend Power of Attorney (cos he's back home, and I'm here, and it's more convenient to sort out banking issues, etc), and no-one will care. So, should I choose to 'marry' a guy, why should there be any problem with him automatically having that same right (when I die...)? I mean, again logically, what's the real difference between a wife and a husband when one of them drops off? Or other situations come into play...

Riri, you brought up the idea of being married to a family member... historically, there's already that precedent. However, now, in most countries that's frowned upon.

nzteacher80:

I just don't believe what you're saying Riri. I don't think that you believe yourself either. I think that you are being intellectually disingenuous. You should just come clean (no pun intended) and say that you find the physical act of homosexual love repulsive. You, I and everyone else here knows that's the truth. It's the elephant in the room.

Lord_hanson:

@riririri, Monogamy was introduced for a reason. To keep public order. If people were allowed to marry as many women as possible then those at the top would marry all the women. The many at the bottom would be pissed off that they don't have women and revolt and kill those at the top.

sorrel:

@ Lord Hanson

do you see any difference in what is happening now in China?

the guys at the top with the money have the mistresses.

the guys at the bottom (40 million conservatively in China) will never marry unless they buy women.

Result? increased human trafficking and unrest with smaller poorer countries that border China.

Shining_brow:

"

Lord_hanson:

@riririri, Monogamy was introduced for a reason. To keep public order. If people were allowed to marry as many women as possible then those at the top would marry all the women. The many at the bottom would be pissed off that they don't have women and revolt and kill those at the top."

So... women aren't people now?

And, why not "if people were allowed to marry as many men as possible... ", etc etc.

"Monogamy was introduced".... I'm not so sure that it was! Granted, it has been enshrined in law, but I think the general idea wasn't 'introduced', it's just that humans found that they liked one person more than the others, and the whole 'love' thing over-rode the desire to go seeking others (in many societies). Fort the most part, those married people on this board (and most that you will be able to think of) aren't monogamous because of the legalities against polygamy, but because they don't have that urge to find another life-partner/spouse. (no, mistresses, affairs, flings, boyfriends, etc do not count...!)

Hotwater:

Is that a selfie Vicky?

nzteacher80:

You seem obsessed with homosexuality. You also seem very hateful and angry. I feel sorry for you. Do you just sit at home and seethe with anger at the idea of gay people being together? Do you just sit in your apartment and fume with frustration over the idea of two men being intimate with each other? I'm guessing that you do. Whatever people do in their bedrooms is their business. As long as everyone is a consenting adult then that's just fine with me. They can do it hanging from the ceiling until they are blue in the face - I couldn't care less. It's their business. Not mine and not yours.

fada:

@zhen: I want to be inside you so much

Shining_brow:

I know, I shouldn't respond (feed) this... but I sometimes like a good argument.. and ripping someone apart with logic and fact...

Firstly - 3 year old do not display 'sexuality' in the sense that you mean... they show 'curiosity', and this includes doing different things with different body parts...their own and others... without the discrimination that adults (some) show.

AIDS - a virus (probably designed by some military) which is spread through some fluids in the body (the most obvious being blood). While (some) homosexual practices transmit blood more easily than some heterosexual practices, as you pointed out, heterosexuals can contract it too through sex. Why? Because of the exchange of fluids... Statistically (ie, scientifically), AIDS transmission from a positive to a negative person, is just as likely regardless of sexual orientation. (gods, it must suck to know that fact!!)

As well (as any intelligent, informed person would know), you must actually have the virus in your system before it can be passed onto another - it is not magically created when a penis enters an rectum... (just curious... why does it have to be a man's rectum? Why not a woman's??) Lack of basic biology and scientific knowledge is really scary :(

Why should a person who is interested in their own gender also (automatically) be interested in sex with children? This makes absolutely no sense at all!!! (not that the rest of your rant does...). Again, statistically, paedophiles are NOT homosexual, nor have homosexual tendencies (ie,only want to have sex with an adult of their own gender). TOTALLY and COMPLETELY different sexual orientation...

Again, facts are that the CBC came in when some guy (male) in Beijing was accused of raping an (adult) female (ie, heterosexual.... holy crap - that means some of them are bad!!!) Not cos of any allegations of child pornography.

(ps - Bring up how the Nanjing Massacre never happened to Chinese, and watch these people squirm and get violent.)

"sew on women's body parts and play a role" OWWWW - that'd hurt!!! Are you referring to their arms? do they have to cut open the stitches? Why don't they use velcro or something?

"But America worships these animals. What is worse is ignorant ass parents who think their pre pubescent child is a transsexual, and allow them to me gender roles and demand that schools bend over and kiss their behinds"

I have no idea what you're blabbering about... I also suspect you're confused (well, obviously)- but about the meaning of 'pre-pubescent'...

"Marriage is between A MAN AND A WOMAN. End of story. Chinese will not accept this. No society has accepted homosexuality."

Again, historically, you're wrong! Yes, China WILL accept this. Yes, MANY societies have accepted this... so ignorant, you haven't even looked at the laws in many countries around the world today (let along historically...).

"It's dangerous, spreads disease, suicide and criminality rates, suicide and a threat to children"

Do people suicide twice?? What criminality rates? Do homosexuals rob more liquor stores than heterosexuals? "More red lights are run through by lesbians than any other segment of society" is not a headline I've ever read anywhere... If you look at the statistics (which, obviously, you wouldn't - cos that would just destroy any 'argument' you had), the VAST majority of prison inmates are heterosexuals... along the lines of 90+%.

How does it 'spread disease'? If two people live in a monogamous relationship, how will they 'spread disease' to anyone other than their own partner? This one even defies BASIC logic!!!

Yeah... moron only speaks moronic.

(please include in any further posts of yours the disclaimer that you do not use any science, fact or logic in your posts...).

Cathyosullivan92:

I feel sick at your ignorance after reading this. I hope for the sake of your children they are not homosexual. How could they ever be happy with a father like you?  Are you some sort of machine? You write about your cousin, your own blood dying from a horrible illness and you continue to spout your hatred for all of the world to see. I will pray for you. 

As an irish citizen from a predominantly catholic country I have never been so proud of my country than last month when we were the first country in the world to unite and vote yes to gay marriage. 

I really hope some day you see the error of your ways before you have to stand before god and be judged for your thoughts.

Hotwater:

First time I've seen this reply. You are one sick motherfucker 

nzteacher80:

Yep. What a cnut. I bet you are great fun at cocktail parties. 

ScotsAlan:

I think China will change fast. Not in the countryside, but in the cities.

Hotwater:

Pointless comment on this topic as China is officially an atheistic country according to the CCP. So religious bigoted views like yours don't count. 

Shining_brow:

It's also BLATANTLY WRONG! Please, I challenge you, to PROVE that "homosexuality is forbidden" in ALL religions!!!

Also, no, marriage is NOT just a 'sacred thing related to religion'... history completely disproves this.

nzteacher80:

There is a man that lives in the clouds and he watches us all the time. He gets really angry when he sees men have sex with each other or if they get married. What a load of horse shit.

Hotwater:

Care to explain why?

CDiable:

Nothing to do with this topic.. You know if you're out for a few pints and there is a d**k in the group. That's the feeling I get towards ScotsAlan.

Shining_brow:

Actually, 'conservative' in Australia is mostly in regards to fiscal policy, not ethics. And the Liberals are a conservative political party.

Although, I will say, in this instance, there is some truth to the usual stereotypes. But there is a clear section of the current conservative government that does want gay marriage, and wants the party members to be allowed a conscience vote!

ScotsAlan:

I give it two years. Grandparents demand grandkids. And the the single child law, lots of potential grandmas etc will be open to the concept of gay kids adopting.