Homosexuality in Australia (1 Viewer)

[samuelblayden]

just chicks marrying each other is ok

 

[MoonlightSonata]

its not natural...women and men were made for each other...to fuck and hav babies, u cant just change the natural cycle...

Incorrect. There exists natural phenomenon of homosexuality in the animal world.

"Eventually, it will be accepted", is the argument that you put foreward PwarYuex. Well by this token, some day marriages with animals will some day be accepted. The mere fact of a collective group of people indulging in something doesn't make it correct.

You have ignored my response to that point and have misquoted the argument. That is not the argument.

The contention is that there is no reason to ban gay marriage, therefore it should not be banned.

God created Man and Woman for a reason.

This premise in the argument relies on the proposition that God exists. Ergo you must prove the existence of God to continue with this argument.

The reason is to satiate our sexual desires in the natural way and also to reproduce.

You fail to state what is unnatural about being gay.

As you have been referred to by several people now, homosexuality occurs in the natural world between animals. Please explain what is "unnatural" about it.

Imagine if everyone in the world became homosexual as everyone should "have the right to equal rights". The human species would cease to exist after a couple of generations.

1. That will obviously not happen.

2. Your argument implies support for social eugenics. Why not just kill them off at birth? Hitler would be proud.

the fact is it totally disrespects the sanctity of marriage

That is an argument from tradition, a logical fallacy. It has no rational basis.

It's like me saying, in the US in 1865, that slavery should not be abolished because it would disrespect the sanctity of slavery. If there is no rational justification for something we should not continue to be chained to it.

which is a holy precious union between man and wife.

Holy? What makes it holy?

Besides from my strong religious views which most of you bitter people will knock,

I think the word you are looking for is "rational", rather than "bitter".

I believe that they should never be accepted legally, they know what they do isnt in the 'normal' lines of society therefore no they should never have any legal recognition for the things they do.

Your argument:

1. Gay people are not the 'norm'.
2. Therefore they should not be afforded legal recognition for the things they do.

Obviously that is a silly argument. One could just as analogously say:

1. Black people are not the 'norm'.
2. Therefore they should not be afforded legal recognition for the things they do.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Ok lets assume for a second that God didn't create you, rather it was electrical impulses. My question is, then who created those electrical impulses?

Logic tells us that a creation (ie you) requires a creator. Your parents created you, but then who created the first humans?

Keep discussion of whether God exists to it's relevant thread please.

 

[Riqtay]

I would like to ask you this. Are you for or against sex with an animal? If you are for or against, tell me what your reason is.

Is it unnatural or not?

 

[MoonlightSonata]

I would like to ask you this. Are you for or against sex with an animal? If you are for or against, tell me what your reason is.

I note that you have ignored my counter-arguments, and that this point has nothing to do with gay people, but I will respond anyway.

I would never have sex with an animal, because I find it repugnant to me personally. But if the animal consents and it was obvious that both participants were only gaining pleasure from such an act, then there is little reason against it. In fact I implore you to find a reason against it.

Is it unnatural or not?

What do you mean by "unnatural"?

 

[xeuyrawp]

The problem being is human shared use of technology destroys the natural selection process.

I don't think so -- I'm sure there are a number of instances where the shared benefit of technology has been enjoyed in nature.

It's impossible to destroy the natural selection process because at the heart of natural selection is the ability for a 'fit' group to alter (whether intentionally or unintentionally) activities to suit the environment.

the fact is it totally disrespects the sanctity of marriage which is a holy precious union between man and wife. Besides from my strong religious views which most of you bitter people will knock, I believe that they should never be accepted legally, they know what they do isnt in the 'normal' lines of society therefore no they should never have any legal recognition for the things they do.

Jeez you're an idiot. You've just brought up the same religiously-based argument that is time and time again shown to be a stupid card to play. Your definition of 'normal' only comes from you being a spoilt little brat, showered with too much money from mummy and daddy, told that what they tell you is right because they're ultra-conservative Catholics.

Anyway, there is no point continuing arguing -- Moonlight is destroying all of the idiots for me. (I'll take the next turn )

 

[Riqtay]

For me to counter argue against your arguments, I would have to refer back to the existence of God which I believe in very strongly, through logic. Howver this would inevitably lead to a cyclical discussion of God and his existance, which obviously you don't want to get into.

I believe that God exists due to logic and religious dogma. I believe that most things require answering, yet if we are always pursuing scientific proof rather than just logic alone, then our lives will become a constant quest for proof which not even all of the scientists can provide.

Hunger is a feeling that you feel when you are hungry. You can feel it, hear it (when your stomach rumbles) and more or less taste it. Yet can you see it? Ofcourse you can't see it but its there. The same deal goes for the existence of God.

 

[xeuyrawp]

For me to counter argue against your arguments, I would have to refer back to the existence of God which I believe in very strongly, through logic. Howver this would inevitably lead to a cyclical discussion of God and his existance, which obviously you don't want to get into.

I believe that God exists due to logic and religious dogma. I believe that most things require answering, yet if we are always pursuing scientific proof rather than just logic alone, then our lives will become a constant quest for proof which not even all of the scientists can provide.

Hunger is a feeling that you feel when you are hungry. You can feel it, hear it (when your stomach rumbles) and more or less taste it. Yet can you see it? Ofcourse you can't see it but its there. The same deal goes for the existence of God.

I find it interesting that some people are born queer, yet God is against homosexuality. Obviously He takes pride in destroying His own work.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

For me to counter argue against your arguments, I would have to refer back to the existence of God which I believe in very strongly, through logic. Howver this would inevitably lead to a cyclical discussion of God and his existance, which obviously you don't want to get into.

By all means, engage in it -- just not in this thread. I will gladly dismantle your arguments about god, but not here.

I believe that God exists due to logic and religious dogma. I believe that most things require answering, yet if we are always pursuing scientific proof rather than just logic alone, then our lives will become a constant quest for proof which not even all of the scientists can provide.

Pretty much all arguments for god are a priori since there is no material evidence. But they are still bad arguments.

Hunger is a feeling that you feel when you are hungry. You can feel it, hear it (when your stomach rumbles) and more or less taste it. Yet can you see it? Ofcourse you can't see it but its there. The same deal goes for the existence of God.

The analogy is flawed. You can measure hunger, through certain psychological states in your brain and the physical need for food through nutrient and chemical levels in your blood, etc.

 

[xeuyrawp]

The analogy is flawed. You can measure hunger, through certain psychological states in your brain and the physical need for food through nutrient and chemical levels in your blood, etc.

I bet it would be possible to test hunger levels -- maybe certain brain activity. Not to mention that hunger is linked to how full your stomach is.

 

[xeuyrawp]

Also, something else must be noted.

Whilst the Western brand of marriage is traditionally a religious (Judeo-Christian) ceremony, supporters of gay marriage want an entirely secular ceremony. That's because we can't get social equality until we get legal equality. Since most religions condemn homosexuality, obviously it's too much to ask (of an establishment hooked on traditionalism) to get religious equality. Not to mention that, I don't think many queer people want to associate with openly bigoted and hateful groups, a large population of which we see here.

Therefore, philly and others, don't think that we want to partake in your little religious tradition of sanctity and uniting of souls -- don't pretend that your religion is the be-all-and-end-all, because most out gay people, you'll find, are atheists.

It's understandable for you to be cross if we were wrecking your tradition, but remember that we want a pretty little ceremony that not only gives as a social title of 'married', but a legal title, too.

 

[philly17]

I dont believe people are born queer at all I think they come to believe 'they are gay' cose thats where they believe they fit in society and they must be gay. Pwaryuex I recieve no money from my parents I did not go to a private school, I have a job and pay for everything so dont judge me on what you think I am.

 

[kami]

I dont believe people are born queer at all I think they come to believe 'they are gay' cose thats where they believe they fit in society and they must be gay.

I don't understand how you arrived at the above conclusion - why on earth would someone choose to be part of a group that is at times viewed by bigots as unnatural, deviant and repulsive in order to fit in?

And why would there be wild animals that show similar predilections if it were all about fitting in?

 

[Vangineer]

DADDYK iz GAY

i bet ya of those 17 people, 16 people's were some same IP, probably that faggot "DADDYK"

 

[xeuyrawp]

I dont believe people are born queer at all I think they come to believe 'they are gay' cose thats where they believe they fit in society and they must be gay.

er, what the fuck?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I believe gay people are gifts to us from our god, satan.

edit: I voted 'i do not support it' initially because i thought I would have the joke vote, but it turns out heaps of people actually don't support homosexuality lol

 

[Xayma]

I dont believe people are born queer at all I think they come to believe 'they are gay' cose thats where they believe they fit in society and they must be gay. Pwaryuex I recieve no money from my parents I did not go to a private school, I have a job and pay for everything so dont judge me on what you think I am.

rofl.

"Looks like society is missing a few things, we need a lesbian goth emo chrisitian. Jane you don't look like you have a spot, take that one".

Considering some hide their homosexuality from all, it makes no sense for them to believe thats where they fit into society if they then hide it.

 

[ogmzergrush]

I was initially going to vote no opinion because it doesn't really bother me, but then I got to thinking that was a bit misleading. I strongly support homosexuality in Australia in a "do whatever you want on your own time, as long as you're consenting and responsible about it" sort of way. In a roundabout way, I guess that means more that I'm strongly against forcing opinions on others, rather than being exactly pro-gay.

 

[withoutaface]

its not natural...women and men were made for each other...to fuck and hav babies, u cant just change the natural cycle...

But a homosexual is not going to "fuck and have babies" just because s/he can't marry their homosexual s/o.

 

[withoutaface]

I would like to ask you this. Are you for or against sex with an animal? If you are for or against, tell me what your reason is.

Is it unnatural or not?

Is it or is it not unnatural to starve yourself during daylight hours for a month?
Personally if someone wants to fuck their dog and the dog enjoys it then it's no business of mine to interfere, but since dogs have no legal rights as humans marriages of such a type are just an absurd analogy.