Homosexuality in Australia (2 Viewers)

[Dougie]

I care. I would like to hope many people care about the future of society and the world beyond our lifetimes. To not is just arrogant.

maybe not arrogant, but at least short-sighted ignorance

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

don't you just love when someone can be bothered to write down what you're thinking and trying to convey, but goes to the effort to do it properly, rather than in one long sentence
nice one!

Thanks
You’ll notice bshoc still claiming he’s actually using valid arguments, and, as I said, ignoring all rebuttal in favour of brilliant political outlooks like "who cares what happens in 40 or 50 years?"

How do you know our generation is the most conservative in 30 or 40 years?

 

[Dougie]

Thanks
You’ll notice bshoc still claiming he’s actually using valid arguments, and, as I said, ignoring all rebuttal in favour of brilliant political outlooks like "who cares what happens in 40 or 50 years?"

How do you know our generation is the most conservative in 30 or 40 years?

actually i can kinda see how people think our generation is the most conservatist since WWII. i think it's more the fact that there are more people one both ends of the scale, pushing the old limits further than before. but back to the homosexuals in oz, and the fact bshoc can't hack the fairness of society and the fact what he thinks doesn't make it right

 

[_dhj_]

I know a minute amount of true Authoritarian Conservatives.

Mostly I just know Socially Liberal/Economically Conservative or Socially Liberal/Economically Liberal individuals.

That and good, honest blue-collar workers that want equality and decent wages for themselves and time off to look after their families.

His "Conservatives" are nothing but a bunch of tired old hacks and some fiscally conservative people he's confused with being socially conservative due to his lack of a grasp on true Libertarian thoughts/arguments.

Well I don't see anything wrong with holding views inconsistent with any particular ideology.

Ideologies categorise people's values and worldviews. They're not meant to be entire sets of ideas one must ascribe to in order to be credible.

 

[dieburndie]

Well I think there's a lot of shit wrong with being an authoritarian conservative, which is completely consistent with a political ideology.
I pretty much think all social conservatives are stupid and wrong about everything, while you can stand almost anywhere economically and in my opinion still make a somewhat credible case for your views.

 

[Graham Trevor]

bshoc has taken a great deal of his arguments from wikipedia, so I thought it fitting to do the same.

"In Freud's psychoanalytic theory, Reaction Formation is a defense mechanism in which anxiety-producing or unacceptable emotions are replaced by their direct opposites . . . It has been speculated that an example of Reaction Formation is homosexuals acquiring hateful views toward homosexuality, thus turning them into homophobes."


It's just something to think about.

 

[withoutaface]

That doesent change the fact that by asking the government to recognise any sort of marriage, you were essentially opposing the platform of all libertarian parties.



I'm pretty sure libertarians like Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan and Goldwater would disagree with you on that one.

I never said that. I said that your argument is wrong, illogical and homophobic. I believe that if marriage has to be recognised by the government, it should be open for any sexuality, and indeed for polygamy.
Also where's your source on Goldwater's position? He was in favour of gays being in the military and I can't find anything about his position on gay marriage.
Either way, I am attacking your argument because you're a moron, not because the idea that gay marriage is supported by me (see http://community.boredofstudies.org...olitics/108601/official-argue-waf-thread.html if you're going to contest this).

 

[bshoc]

bshoc has taken a great deal of his arguments from wikipedia, so I thought it fitting to do the same.

"In Freud's psychoanalytic theory, Reaction Formation is a defense mechanism in which anxiety-producing or unacceptable emotions are replaced by their direct opposites . . . It has been speculated that an example of Reaction Formation is homosexuals acquiring hateful views toward homosexuality, thus turning them into homophobes."

It's just something to think about.

Think about it, because arguing this either way is useless on the internet, but given that 1% of the population is gay, you dont have much in the way of statistic significance.

 

[bshoc]

I never said that. I said that your argument is wrong, illogical and homophobic. I believe that if marriage has to be recognised by the government, it should be open for any sexuality, and indeed for polygamy.
Also where's your source on Goldwater's position? He was in favour of gays being in the military and I can't find anything about his position on gay marriage.
Either way, I am attacking your argument because you're a moron, not because the idea that gay marriage is supported by me (see http://community.boredofstudies.org/214/news-current-affairs-politics/108601/official-argue-waf-thread.html if you're going to contest this).

I'll argue with you however I want, you think you're so smart yet all you can say when your stupid economic or political arguments get wasted is call people morons, do you see a stallion when you look in the mirror? Because everyone else just sees an ass.

 

[bshoc]

I care. I would like to hope many people care about the future of society and the world beyond our lifetimes. To not is just arrogant.

People who truly care about society dont want their kids growing up in a world where a man can marry a farm animal, another man, a toaster etc.

Thats why marriage is still marriage and will stay that way for however longer humanity exists on this planet, becuase there are more intelligent and far sighted people in this country then there are moronic leftist whiners who just want to legalize everything without putting any thought as to why it was illegal in the first place.

 

[Graham Trevor]

Think about it, because arguing this either way is useless on the internet, but given that 1% of the population is gay, you dont have much in the way of statistic significance.

1% of the population is openly gay.

 

[bshoc]

1% of the population is openly gay.

Ah yes the whole you dont like gays so you must be one argument, do you leftists all read out of the same retarded book or something, get some original opinions morons.

 

[Graham Trevor]

Ah yes the whole you dont like gays so you must be one argument, do you leftists all read out of the same retarded book or something, get some original opinions morons.

No, no, impossible -- a couple of days ago I mistakenly left my Big Book of Leftism at a friend's place


It's a logical conclusion -- people hate what they fear. What better way for a person to prove that they're not homosexual than to oppose homosexuals?

 

[bshoc]

Thanks
You’ll notice bshoc still claiming he’s actually using valid arguments, and, as I said, ignoring all rebuttal in favour of brilliant political outlooks like "who cares what happens in 40 or 50 years?"

How do you know our generation is the most conservative in 30 or 40 years?

Incase you havent noticed, arguing with 5+ angry retarded leftists isn't easy or intellectually stimulating, if I get 10 replies to 1 post I'm only going to adress the best one, I feel like a preacher or something "gather round my children" lol

Also I never specified a timeframe, I only said that gay marriage given current demographics will not be legal in our lifetimes, and after that we wont be in a position to care because we'll all be well, dead, how is our youth more conservative than 30 years ago? Talk to people who were in our age group and in university 30 years ago. Like all youth groups there is an overt social and economic discontnent among us, which will lift as we age as it has to all others, I used to support labour, be pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion all that not long ago, I guess some people grow up quicker than others. i believe Churchill summed it up best

"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." -- Winston Churchill

 

[bshoc]

No, no, impossible -- a couple of days ago I mistakenly left my Big Book of Leftism at a friend's place

It's a logical conclusion -- people hate what they fear. What better way for a person to prove that they're not homosexual than to oppose homosexuals?

Since I'm not opposing it on any inherit "hate" of gays, I can assure you I would be holding such a position even if I were gay myself, as many gays actually do, this is not a lifestyle question, its an ideological political one, ie. the left and libertarians vs. everyone else.

 

[bshoc]

now who's using the word moron when they can't actually "win" the argument or provide proper back up to his arguments.

tut tut.."answer questions, dont throw hate"(Nolanistic)

Seeing as how I'm pretty much the only person who has provided sources - and you can look back a few pages to verify - you exactly aren't in any position to talk.

Saying stuff like "you havent backed it up" in thread where I'm the only person who has doesen't say much about your intelligence or judgement, infact its what people usually resort to when they're too beaten or stupid to come up with anything new or construrctive, an unfortunate reality for the left.

 

[withoutaface]

I'll argue with you however I want, you think you're so smart yet all you can say when your stupid economic or political arguments get wasted is call people morons, do you see a stallion when you look in the mirror? Because everyone else just sees an ass.

Says he who was happy that the donkeys swept the house.

[/doubleentendrowned]

 

[dagwoman]

Comparing gay marriage to marrying farm animals just shows how homophobic and ignorant you are of the whole issue. And don't even try to claim you've backed up your "arguments" with evidence. If it's so boring for you to try and "reason" with us "retarded lefties", then leave like you were going to when you claimed yourself the "victor". We're more than happy to go back to having a reasonable discussion.

 

[goldendawn]

To be honest guys, I have no idea why everyone is still arguing with bshoc. I got bored of hearing him spout the same, unevidenced prejudice thirty pages ago. He has demonstrated limited capacity to read and understand arguments, limited capacity to synthesise intelligent responses and has been generally behaving like a giant boob. This thread has not seen real political or philosophical debate for a while (although I must say there are some truly perceptive members in here with some fantastic responses). It just seems to me that this thread has become an exercise in 'what does bshoc find revolting and can't explain'.

 

[ichigo.bankai]

man i dont care people are gay and will stay gay like that for da rest of thier lifes so i dnt care and it doesnt bother me any way u want to be gay be gay but i dont support them