Miss Cali. sparks furor over gay marriage comments.
ziggy @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:45 pm
Wow,and I allways thought everyone was equal.
Pseudonym @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:45 pm
kenmore kenmore:
Oh.. maybe the fact that they have to fight for everything.. they are and have been discriminated against.. if they were treated equally, there wouldn't be the marriage issue... or they wouldn't lose jobs because a school board discovered their sexuality.. no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!
Perhaps I should be clear that I am not discussing "mean" treatment by other individuals. I am talking about equal treatment as citizens under the law. And since I am a single white male, I guess I should not attempt to discuss issues of marriage, sexuality, or race ever again, since I don't have "empathy" with those situations. Actual principles don't apply ever.
kenmore @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:46 pm
apparently not on this site.. right?
Pseudonym @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:46 pm
mapleleafs mapleleafs:
I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.
I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.
2Cdo @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:47 pm
kenmore kenmore:
2Cdo 2Cdo:
kenmore kenmore:
no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!
But you see it so using your logic you must be gay! Does your wife know about this? Or is this done on the sly?
no i am not.. but be careful.. i got warnings for mentioning someones sexuality..
You got warned for mentioning someones sexuality or ridiculing it? Merely mentioning something should not be grounds for a warning.
mapleleafs @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:47 pm
Pseudonym Pseudonym:
kenmore kenmore:
Oh.. maybe the fact that they have to fight for everything.. they are and have been discriminated against.. if they were treated equally, there wouldn't be the marriage issue... or they wouldn't lose jobs because a school board discovered their sexuality.. no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!
Perhaps I should be clear that I am not discussing "mean" treatment by other individuals. I am talking about equal treatment as citizens under the law. And since I am a single white male, I guess I should not attempt to discuss issues of marriage, sexuality, or race ever again, since I don't have "empathy" with those situations. Actual principles don't apply ever.
Ever read Blink from Malcolm Gladwell?
I don't know, you mentioned the "single white male" thing - I think you'd find the book interesting.
kenmore @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:48 pm
Pseudonym Pseudonym:
mapleleafs mapleleafs:
I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.
I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.
no! keep that to your self thanks..
mapleleafs @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:49 pm
Pseudonym Pseudonym:
mapleleafs mapleleafs:
I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.
I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean YOU in particular. I generalized that as most people's basis for the argument is religion.
Pseudonym @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:49 pm
ziggy ziggy:
Wow,and I allways thought everyone was equal.
This has never been true ever. Individuals have always been unique. Equal protection under the law is the fundamental principle that has been corrupted in many of these cases.
ziggy @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:49 pm
I think Maple leaf should realize that the church should have no say in what people do,2 guys want to get married,fine,2 gals and I hope i'm invited.
mapleleafs @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:50 pm
ziggy ziggy:
I think Maple leaf should realize that the church should have no say in what people do,2 guys want to get married,fine,2 gals and I hope i'm invited.
I agree the church should have no say.
Was I not clear on that?
ziggy @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 pm
mapleleafs mapleleafs:
Pseudonym Pseudonym:
mapleleafs mapleleafs:
I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.
I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean YOU in particular. I generalized that as most people's basis for the argument is religion.
Wow.and your not useing it?
ziggy @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 pm
mapleleafs mapleleafs:
ziggy ziggy:
I think Maple leaf should realize that the church should have no say in what people do,2 guys want to get married,fine,2 gals and I hope i'm invited.
I agree the church should have no say.
Was I not clear on that?
If they had no say then why would you care?
Pseudonym @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:52 pm
Blink from Malcolm Gladwell? I'll Google it, but I make no promises.
As for religion, well, it is the fundamental basis for one's life philosophy. That's what religion is by its very nature. So my perspective is (I hope) always grounded in my religious belief. It is just that many of the basic assumptions of society work from fundamental principles from which we all operate.
ziggy @ Fri May 08, 2009 5:54 pm
Well I have no religious beliefs so I tend to see things for what they are and not ruled by some religious dogma that tells me whats right or wrong.
You should try it sometime. 