SF throws down the gauntlet to Cali

[Ben Kenobi]

They are still seperate issues. You can take any issues and link them, but it doesn't negate that marriage is about the union of a couple (hell, of a group even), and procreation is about the forming of life. Marriage does not form life.

Funny word, union.

Consider that for a minute.

Can the union be properly consummated? If you argue that the union is the only point, then you must alter the union to fit this change.

The union is not the same, and one of the indicators, that the union is different is that no children come from it.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


So why should we allow something if it is not something that ought to be done?

It is about what they ought to do. That's the whole debate. You argue they ought to marry, while I would say that they should not.

Anything else is meaningless.

What if they say that you ought to not get married? Why is your opinion more valid than their opinion?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior
It's not the same.

I never get him angry enough to say something funny to me.

Maybe he s you? I'd keep an eye on your inbox if I were you.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


So how can I win? By being silent, so that you feel more confortable Fez? By being more outspoken than I am already?

You have no right to infringe on my constitutional rights. You have no right to infringe on the constitutional rights of any gay person. Go voice your opinion. Voice it till you turn blue.

I'm just blind to it, I think... it shouldn't really matter who one sleeps with, unless it causes problems for the person. And there are people who feel trapped by the lifestyle, even if you feel satisfied.

Feel trapped? What kind of B.S land do you live on?

No, and no. But I don't know if you can understand. I do this not to condemn you, but rather to show you another option, that no one will really talk about because it is unpopular.

You are not going to strip my constitutional rights away. What you propose is no option at all.

[Ben Kenobi]

What if they say that you ought to not get married? Why is your opinion more valid than their opinion?

That's what the whole debate has been. What are my reasons? How are they different? Why should they not be treated the same.

If the reasons make sense, you ought to abide by them. If they do not, then I need to make better points.

Consider this, where in any thread, have you seen one of the supporters of gay marriage showing you the good that will come from this change?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Funny word, union.

Consider that for a minute.

Can the union be properly consummated? If you argue that the union is the only point, then you must alter the union to fit this change.

The union is not the same, and one of the indicators, that the union is different is that no children come from it.

Civil unions are constitutionally inadequate as they are not applied in every state as marriage.

[The Mad Monk]

It seems to me that pissing off a sizable voting bloc, and other, sympathetic blocs in the state, as well as going against his actor's instincts to do the popular thing, all to uphold an oath of office many find to just be window dressing, is a commendable thing.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Consider this, where in any thread, have you seen one of the supporters of gay marriage showing you the good that will come from this change?

And what exactly is so evil about gay marriage? How the hell will it harm you?

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


That's what the whole debate has been. What are my reasons? How are they different? Why should they not be treated the same.

If the reasons make sense, you ought to abide by them. If they do not, then I need to make better points.

Consider this, where in any thread, have you seen one of the supporters of gay marriage showing you the good that will come from this change?

What was the bad again?

[Agathon]

@ the fascist trying to defend constitutional rights.

[Ben Kenobi]

You have no right to infringe on my constitutional rights.

What constitutional right? Where is this right enshrined in the constitution of the United States?

Feel trapped? What kind of B.S land do you live on?

There is such thing as a formerly gay person, Fez.

Civil unions are constitutionally inadequate as they are not applied in every state as marriage.

WOOOSHHH!!!

Missed the point entirely, Fez. Read the post more carefully.

And what exactly is so evil about gay marriage?

Real list of positive benefits there Fez.

Could you at least try to answer the question?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


What constitutional right? Where is this right enshrined in the constitution of the United States?

Equal protection clause.

There is such thing as a formerly gay person, Fez.

No there isn't. If you actually believe the crap you type, seek help. Gay people cannot be "cured".

Real list of positive benefits there Fez.

Could you at least try to answer the question?

I am waiting for the negatives.

Why don't you try to at least answer questions?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Agathon
@ the fascist trying to defend constitutional rights.

F**k you. I am no fascist.

[DaShi]

I think he was referring to me.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No doubt the majority of everyone else would be standing around appreciating the warmth as you slowly toasted.

Well, at the very least I'd have marshmellows on a stick as he was toasting. I'm not totally heartless .

@ the fascist trying to defend constitutional rights.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who found that ironic .

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


F**k you. I am no fascist.

Like **** you aren't.

You are the boot stamping on a human face forever, even if it is this boot.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Agathon


Like **** you aren't.

You are the boot stamping on a human face forever, even if it is this boot.

Where are you? On your own planet? Go wake up. If I am fascist, you are Pol Pot. Wake up and smell the coffee, and get a damn clue.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben one last question. Why are you so against gays.

I make a radical distinction between the person, and his sexual proclivities. You are not whom you sleep with. Therefore, I am not against gay people, but rather against the homosexual act.

Did you yourself have any homosexual tendencies and was cured through Christianity?

No, not in the way you are thinking, no. I was not a very nice person before, and I did many things that I no longer do. Sleeping with a man was not one of them.

That's him.

What about you?

Not in that manner, no.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Where are you? On your own planet? Go wake up. If I am fascist, you are Pol Pot. Wake up and smell the coffee, and get a damn clue.

And if I don't, will I be sent to a concentration camp?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


I make a radical distinction between the person, and his seual proclivities. You are not whom you sleep with. Therefore, I am not against gay people, but rather against the homoseual act.

Then you are not heterosexual because who you sleep with does not make you who you are?

I am sorry but that doesn't make sense.

And if you are against homosexual acts, then too damn bad.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, just thrown from helicopters, Aggie .

[Giancarlo]

STFU ABOUT THIS. Agathon grow the hell up and leave me the hell alone. I am trying to question BK on his faulty reasoning. I am not here to have a flame fest with you.

[Agathon]

*note to Jaguar Warrior. See how easy it is. You just aren't trying.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But you haven't been called a moron yet, though he did tell you to get a clue. Perhaps that is close enough.

[Ben Kenobi]

NYE:

These posts are starting to flow together in a rational fashion.

Interesting. Not intended, but sometimes that's how they work.

You'd do well arguing for slavery or apartheid along these lines, at least until your views were in the minority of recognised electors. What then, Ben? Will you accept organised religions being banned when the majority become atheists and are good and tired of religious behaviour that they see as immoral?

Good point. However, I argue that marriage cannot be a fundamental human right because it requires two people to exercise the right.

As for perversion? I think that there are many things people do that count among that number. Sodomy is one of those, a perversion of the purpose of sex.

But again, by that same standard, I too am perverted for some of my earlier actions in my life. So we are all in this together.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, you are merely perverted for your love of Mariah .

[Ben Kenobi]

Then you are not heterosexual because who you sleep with does not make you who you are?

Let's take this from another direction.

You have two ways of defining sexual orientation. One is by the acts that the person commits, another is by the desires.

I am splitting the definition. If I were to sleep with a man, that would no more make me gay, than it would be if you slept with a woman.

However, one of the consequences of this split is that one's proclivities do not control one's actions, in that one can restrain them, or even go to the opposite of one's desires.

In this sense, you are not whom you sleep with, you can control your sexual desires.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
You have two ways of defining sexual orientation. One is by the acts that the person commits, another is by the desires.

I'm sorry but I am both.

I am splitting the definition. If I were to sleep with a man, that would no more make me gay, than it would be if you slept with a woman.

I am gay. Period. I slept with guys. That is my decision. But I am naturally homosexual in my thoughts as you are naturally heterosexual.

However, one of the consequences of this split is that one's proclivities do not control one's actions, in that one can restrain them, or even go to the opposite of one's desires.

And what is wrong with having these desires? The bible say it is wrong?

In this sense, you are not whom you sleep with, you can control your sexual desires.

But I am gay. That is who I am. Rather who I am, is who I am attracted to.

[Ben Kenobi]

Step by step.

Suppose you slept with a woman.

Would you no longer be gay?

But I am naturally homosexual in my thoughts as you are naturally heterosexual.

But by your definition I cannot be heterosexual. I have not slept with anyone else. All I would have to go on is the desire.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Step by step.

Suppose you slept with a woman.

Would you no longer be gay?



But by your definition I cannot be heterosexual. I have not slept with anyone else. All I would have to go on is the desire.

I knew I was gay before I slept with anybody.

I am not going to sleep with a woman. Ewwww...