Ignorant North Carolina Bans Civil Unions

[Missouribronc]

If homosexuality is a choice, then how do you explain homosexual behavior in animals, given that most lack the mental ability to choose?

Interesting.

How do you explain away bisexuality, then? Just another genetic trait? Or people who want to become a different gender. Must be genetics, because we wouldnt want to have anyone go through life based on choices, now, would we?

[Missouribronc]

Broncos Forums not much fun anymore, Mo?

Winner!

[Rohirrim]

Well, then. I've been proven wrong by, well, really, nothing, but I've been proven wrong.

Good work fellas.

Like Paul Simon said, "Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

[W*GS]

How do you explain away bisexuality, then? Just another genetic trait? Or people who want to become a different gender. Must be genetics, because we wouldnt want to have anyone go through life based on choices, now, would we?

Is the concept that sexuality comprises a spectrum of desires and behaviors new to you?

Did you consciously choose not to be homosexual?

[Vrrroooommm]

If homosexuality is a choice, then how do you explain homosexual behavior in animals, given that most lack the mental ability to choose?

If homosexuality is genetic, how could it not have eliminated itself already?

The argument isn't that it doesn't exist. The argument is that it's environmental. My parents had two male dogs. They'd try to hump each other all the time. They'd also try to hump the couch, your shoes, your head, or whatever else they could rub their weiner on.

[Vrrroooommm]

Well, he says it's been around at least 6,000 years. Sounds genetic to me.

That guy they found in the preserved in ice for 10,000 years or whatever had his skull smashed.

Legalize skull smashing, bitches.

[Bob]

Really? And who puts the stamp of "right" or "wrong" on what is an inherent, genetic trait?

Is this about gay sex, or same sex attraction? Nope, this is about gay marriage.

Again, who cares if one is born that way -- I couldn't care less. Are gay folks now born married? No? So, I guess that does imply that we are discussing the regulation of marriage which in western society has never seen gay marriage as acceptable.

[Missouribronc]

Is the concept that sexuality comprises a spectrum of desires and behaviors new to you?

Did you consciously choose not to be homosexual?

Yes.

[sirhcyennek81]

If homosexuality is genetic, how could it not have eliminated itself already?

The argument isn't that it doesn't exist. The argument is that it's environmental. My parents had two male dogs. They'd try to hump each other all the time. They'd also try to hump the couch, your shoes, your head, or whatever else they could rub their weiner on.


Oi...


:Broncos:

[Requiem]

Winner!

Yeah, I was the only cool person there. Not many cool people there anymore.

[Missouribronc]

Yeah, I was the only cool person there. Not many cool people there anymore.

You're a stud. But in a non sexual way.

[W*GS]

Yes.

I suspect a fib.

[Bob]

Only on matters where jurisdiction is shared does federal law supercede. Again, though, federal law has been going way outside its boundaries since the interstate commerce nonsense was introduced. Just because it works that way doesn't mean the constitution intended it to work that way.

Your attempting to convince a statist that the states have any rights, or that federalism has any place left in America? You must have a lot of faith in people.

[W*GS]

If homosexuality is genetic, how could it not have eliminated itself already?

Why hasn't suicide eliminated itself?

The argument isn't that it doesn't exist. The argument is that it's environmental.

Amazing, then, that this environment is replicated across so many different species such that we see homosexual behavior in so many of them, isn't it?

[Missouribronc]

I suspect a fib.

I made a choice to like breasts over square shoulders and vag over dick. Yes. I made a choice.

[Vrrroooommm]

Oi...


:Broncos:

Sorry, man... a gene that prevents fertility would knock itself out unless you want to call it a mutation (highly unlikely with the numbers) OR you assume there's just been a HUGE population of closet homosexuals all throughout history.

I guess the latter is possible... I've never given that angle much consideration, I guess.

[W*GS]

Your attempting to convince a statist that the states have any rights, or that federalism has any place left in America? You must have a lot of faith in people.

States don't have rights.

And states cannot override civil rights, no matter how much you'd like a return to the days of laws against miscegenation.

[Missouribronc]

Why hasn't suicide eliminated itself?



Amazing, then, that this environment is replicated across so many different species such that we see homosexual behavior in so many of them, isn't it?

Isn't suicide a choice?

[Vrrroooommm]

Why hasn't suicide eliminated itself?



Amazing, then, that this environment is replicated across so many different species such that we see homosexual behavior in so many of them, isn't it?

Holy ****! Are you trying to argue suicide is genetic now, too?

[sirhcyennek81]

I made a choice to like breasts over square shoulders and vag over dick. Yes. I made a choice.


You never made the conscious decision to like women. Attraction is not a conscious choice.

The choice is acting on what you are attracted to.

:Broncos:

[Missouribronc]

States don't have rights.

And states cannot override civil rights, no matter how much you'd like a return to the days of laws against miscegenation.

States have authority over this issue, though.

[W*GS]

I made a choice to like breasts over square shoulders and vag over dick. Yes. I made a choice.

You were sexually aroused by square shoulders and dick but then decided, deliberately and consciously, to prefer boobs and vag.

You're unique, I do believe.

[sirhcyennek81]

States have authority over this issue, though.


This I agree with.

:Broncos:

[Bob]

Many species exhibit homosexual behavior. Are those gays the work of Satan or something?

You certainly don't find this objectionable and evil:

http://anjruw.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/girls_kissing.jpg

Are you claiming that it is it a genetic mutation, then? As such a thing clearly would not serve to perpetuate one's genetic material or characteristics?

[W*GS]

States have authority over this issue, though.

And, just like anti-miscegenation laws, it will be determined that states cannot outlaw civil rights because of bigotry and prejudice.

[Missouribronc]

You never made the conscious decision to like women. Attraction is not a conscious choice.

The choice is acting on what you are attracted to.

:Broncos:

Of course I did. The minute I realized I was consciously attracted to boobs I made a choice to pursue that urge.

I have watched porn and seen a penis that was attractive. I made a choice to not pursue that directive.

I do believe it is a choice.

[W*GS]

Are you claiming that it is it a genetic mutation, then? As such a thing clearly would not serve to perpetuate one's genetic material or characteristics?

Sexuality is not a binary state.

[Bob]

the more you post the more worthless your POV becomes.

Your naive to think that this issue has just popped up on the political landscape, it was to distract, and to create another group to divide and conquer, -- FDR used a similar strategy in 1935.

[Missouribronc]

You were sexually aroused by square shoulders and dick but then decided, deliberately and consciously, to prefer boobs and vag.

You're unique, I do believe.

Yes. I watch porn. And I like to see big dick and attractive men.

But I am completely straight. It's a choice I've made.

[W*GS]

Of course I did. The minute I realized I was consciously attracted to boobs I made a choice to pursue that urge.

I have watched porn and seen a penis that was attractive. I made a choice to not pursue that directive.

I do believe it is a choice.

If so, then why would anyone consciously choose a path that too often results in others' misguided hatred, prejudice, and even murder, just for their own sexual pleasure?

[sirhcyennek81]

Of course I did. The minute I realized I was consciously attracted to boobs I made a choice to pursue that urge.

I have watched porn and seen a penis that was attractive. I made a choice to not pursue that directive.

I do believe it is a choice.


If you "realized it" then at some point, deep in your brain women were what you were attracted to. You did not decide that.

As you stated, you chose to pursue the tittays.

That's what Im saying. You already had it in your head to like tittays. You had to realize something that was already there.

:Broncos:

[Missouribronc]

If so, then why would anyone consciously choose a path that too often results in others' misguided hatred, prejudice, and even murder, just for their own sexual pleasure?

That sounds like a bad choice.

[Missouribronc]

If you "realized it" then at some point, deep in your brain women were what you were attracted to. You did not decide that.

As you stated, you chose to pursue the tittays.

That's what Im saying. You already had it in your head to like tittays. You had to realize something that was already there.

:Broncos:

Why?

[Bob]

If so, then why would anyone consciously choose a path that too often results in others' misguided hatred, prejudice, and even murder, just for their own sexual pleasure?

What color is the sky on your planet? What are you suggesting?

[sirhcyennek81]

Why?


As you stated, you had options. Square shoulders vs boobs, vagina vs penis. You already had a preference for more female characteristics. It was a matter of "liking more". The decision you made was to act on what appealed to you. You did not pick what appealed to you.

It was not any different for me. I prefer squared off chests, squared shoulders and penis. It appealed to me more, because I already was wired for it.

:Broncos:

[Missouribronc]

As you stated, you had options. Square shoulders vs boobs, vagina vs penis. You already had a preference for more female characteristics. It was a matter of "liking more". The decision you made was to act on what appealed to you. You did not pick what appealed to you.

It was not any different for me. I prefer squared off chests, squared shoulders and penis. It appealed to me more, because I already was wired for it.

:Broncos:

Or it's because that's what you chose.

[sirhcyennek81]

Or it's because that's what you chose.


Because I was attracted to men's chests. Not women's.

I never made the decision that I liked men's parts more than women's. In fact, women's parts never even filtered into the equation.

As I said, the choice I made was to go after what I was attracted to.

:Broncos:

[Rohirrim]

Reactionaries used the biblical argument against even women getting the vote.
These same kinds of backward, reactionary arguments always ooze up in the face of change. Women voting? Equality for blacks? Oh no! If we let this tradition fall, our country will collapse!
:puff:

[Rohirrim]

“Nothing optional—from homosexuality to adultery—is ever made punishable unless those who do the prohibiting (and exact the fierce punishments) have a repressed desire to participate. As Shakespeare put it in King Lear, the policeman who lashes the whore has a hot need to use her for the very offense for which he plies the lash.” (C. Hitchens)

[snowspot66]

Are you claiming that it is it a genetic mutation, then? As such a thing clearly would not serve to perpetuate one's genetic material or characteristics?

Genetic mutations are exceptionally common and do not need to be directly passed down from parent to offspring in order to occur in the population. Also, a gene doesn't have to be expressed in order to be carried. To this day in India children are occasionally born with light hair and/or blue eyes. A remnant from the time of Alexander the Great. We all carry the genes that tell us if we prefer men or women. All it takes is for a little chemistry to happen at just the right stage in development to switch things up.

[W*GS]

What color is the sky on your planet? What are you suggesting?

Why would anyone consciously choose homosexuality when gays are too often the victims of hate, prejudice, bigtory, and murder, just for being gay?

[TonyR]

[It's easy to] be skeptical of Obama’s motives, of how long it took, of whether this is pure and late opportunism. But when you step back a little and assess the record of Obama on gay rights, you see, in fact, that this was not an aberration. It was an inevitable culmination of three years of work. He did this the way he always does: leading from behind and playing the long game.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/13/andrew-sullivan-on-barack-obama-s-gay-marriage-evolution.html?obref=obinsite

[Rohirrim]

Why would anyone consciously choose homosexuality when gays are too often the victims of hate, prejudice, bigtory, and murder, just for being gay?

My wife and I have been good friends with a gay couple for 20 years. Unfortunately, one of these guys passed away from cancer a couple of years ago. He once told me he knew he was gay when he was about ten years old. In other words, before puberty. It's about more than sex.

There is only one thing that drives the reactionary backlash against it: Fear. And where's the one place you can turn to if you really need some fear? Religion.

[TonyR]

I think it’s possible to be opposed to gay marriage without relying on bigotry or religious zealotry. I think there is a Burkean-traditionalist, cultural-mores-should-change-slowly argument. I also think there is an arbitrariness to the definition of marriage that isn’t resolved by simply encompassing same sex couples. In the end, I don’t personally find these arguments compelling – thus I support gay marriage. But I recognize they aren’t based in bigotry.

http://dailydose.us/2012/05/02/will-cain-email-exchange/

[TonyR]

I will concede that it is possible to treat someone as a lesser human being without knowing you’re doing it, or without believing you’re doing it, but that doesn’t absolve you of your bigotry. If you like gay people just fine, but have some religious/cultural/philosophical reason for denying their right to marry each other, you are still denying their right to marry each other. In fact, the inability to tell that you’re a bigot is exactly the kind of ignorance that propels the bigotry.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/opposition-to-marriage-equality-does-equal-bigotry/

[DenverBrit]

A reminder.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[Rohirrim]

I think it’s possible to be opposed to gay marriage without relying on bigotry or religious zealotry. I think there is a Burkean-traditionalist, cultural-mores-should-change-slowly argument. I also think there is an arbitrariness to the definition of marriage that isn’t resolved by simply encompassing same sex couples. In the end, I don’t personally find these arguments compelling – thus I support gay marriage. But I recognize they aren’t based in bigotry.

http://dailydose.us/2012/05/02/will-cain-email-exchange/

I don't get the point of the argument. Marriage in America, as an institution, is in tatters anyway. People in their 20s now don't look at marriage as obligatory at all. Live together, see what happens, yada yada.

[alkemical]

that's due to their parents 'being short in love with a long divorce'.

[Bob]

That guy they found in the preserved in ice for 10,000 years or whatever had his skull smashed.

Legalize skull smashing, b****es. Yup, proof positive that murder is genetic.

[Bob]

States don't have rights.

And states cannot override civil rights, no matter how much you'd like a return to the days of laws against miscegenation.

Have you heard of the term federalism and read any of the founders words on this topic?

[cutthemdown]

A reminder.

I agree you can use that clause to defend gays marrying. Conservatives may point to the founding fathers feeling gays should be castrated. Its true many of them did. But they were also smart enough men to realize the country could change. Make a document that the peoples attitudes sort of guides what pursuit of happiness mean etc etc. So for sure we can use it just like you are reminding.

If there is something that society feels is needed to be happy, then our courts should let states decide, or if it really flys in the face of liberty, we need the feds. With many states starting to change, i think we can let the states do it. I bet very soon many states make it legal. Certainly you won't see Obama move to force any states to make gay marriage legal. But.....that is what some people think this means and it plays into the rights hands.

[Requiem]

Mo may have made the choice to like girls, but he does not get any action from girls. That has been the forum joke for years now. He has not been able to refute such claims.