1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Should homosexuals be allowed to marry

Discussion in 'Debate Forum' started by Mark1006, Apr 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Well-Known Member

    Don't try to make me look like the bad Guy. I've argued for Gay marriage right from the start. Here's the actual quote:

     
  2. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

    What is a book licker?
    Serious question.
     
  3. noob21

    noob21 3 sum!!!

    I think homosexuality is stupid and pointless and should be look at by the scientific community. If I acted like a frog people would think im an idiot and call me wierdo but when a gay man or female acts like the oppisite gender its supposed to be looked at as normal... Thats stupid. Outside of behavior their are 38 sexual chromizones and maybe alot of these "gay" cases should be checked medicaly for a possible loss of sexual chromizones are some other form of psychological aspect that effects the human behavior. BUT! I think regardless of my opinon that gays should be able to marry because its in the constitution of the united states that man have the right to self expression regardless of what mans (including me) opinon is and if man wants to marry a frog the by god let man marry frog. And yes that includes politoad.
     
  4. GaZsTiC

    GaZsTiC Alternating

    I dunno. Probably something 'unnatural'.
     
  5. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

  6. Niihyl

    Niihyl Posthuman

    Er, that's not the problem. We're not arguing which genocide has more freakin' attack points or something. You said you didn't see it as important. Which it, I'm sorry if my opinion offends you, was.

    My. God. Ninja'd again. I need to keep a finger on F5.

    What the heck do you have against book lickers too? You don't even know what it could be, and you'd happily discriminate against it.

    ... That giant signature is bugging me...
     
  7. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Well-Known Member

    Typo, obviously.
     
  8. Ethan

    Ethan Banned

    That would be a whole other ball park really. I'd debate it from a theological stand point but I'm not as quite well versed in Christian apologetics and theology as I used to be.

    But the whole it isn't natural argument bites, because what's unatural isn't always wrong. When the gay people say "Oh but dolphins do it, so it's in nature" doesn't really work either. What's natural for one species isn't always natural for another. Spiders eat their young, we don't. People water down the definition of natural as to simply occurring in nature, when that's not true. For something to be natural it would have to be a normal and reoccurring pattern of behavior in a single species. Spiders eat their young, almost always. This is a normal pattern for their species, it is deemed natural. Human mothers develop strong maternal bonds with their children, this is a natural and reoccurring pattern of behavior. Homosexuality? Eh, it's kind of up in the air on whether it's natural human behavior. It's been documented since written history began, but we don't have enough scientific evidence to prove that it's instinct for some. I mean, we have a lot don't get me wrong, but if we had all the proof we wanted there wouldn't still be a debate.
     
  9. CSolarstorm

    CSolarstorm New spicy version

    Did any of us say that the holocaust was the worst happening of the millenium? We only insisted that it was relevant and not "a blip" like you had said.
     
  10. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

    Pretty much any argument either side can bring up in this debate is weak and lacks supporting evidence; which is why we still have it. It all comes down to subjective personal opinion which is a zone of no compromise.
     
  11. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Well-Known Member

    Except that in this case it is relevant cos homosexuality is noticeable in animals, just like it's noticeable in humans and like someone else mentioned earlier the human race is just another big part of the animal kingdom.
     
  12. CSolarstorm

    CSolarstorm New spicy version

    Nah, we're stronger than you. Mind you, this is by your own logic, you're pretty outnumbered.
     
  13. Niihyl

    Niihyl Posthuman

    ... You won't change your opinion. I won't change mine. The same arguments continue to repeat. This debate has come to a stalemate, unless lightning strikes us all and you get proven right by rays of light and angels trumpeting. At which point I will still not change my opinion.

    If that's true, what's the point of this thread?

    Prejudice is BS. Doesn't matter to who, it's BS all the same.

    And besides, we all have some supporting evidence. But this is all a question of opinion and morality. We can't PROVE anything. I suppose this is all just meant to convince people who come to the thread, or just express our opinions.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2011
  14. Ethan

    Ethan Banned

    Which arguments in particular? The natural argument perhaps, but there's a lot of supporting evidence to suggest that sexual orientation isn't a conscious choice, backed by a lot of studies. If what you're suggesting is that because this is a moral issue at heart, and ultimately a battle of ideologies, therefore pointless, well that might be true. It doesn't make the discussion worthless though.
     
  15. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

    To entertain our notions of grandeur and intelligence; which for you is merely a facade.

    @Ethan: The marriage of homosexuals merely comes down to a battle of societal media-influenced liberal morals versus Christian fundamentalism. It's still worth discussing though.
     
  16. CSolarstorm

    CSolarstorm New spicy version

    I can only speak for myself, but I'm speaking for family and friends, not the liberal media.
     
  17. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Well-Known Member

    I think we should close this discussion. Alleviate is clearly outnumbered and we're just going around in circles.
     
  18. Niihyl

    Niihyl Posthuman

    The anti-gay opinion isn't necessarily only Christian fundamentalism. And the pro-gay opinion isn't necessarily media-influenced etc. I come from a Christian family. Most of my friends are Christian, Mormon, Catholic, etc. And yet, I'm not against it. And yes, it's worth discussing. I'm just hesitating away from the exact same arguments repeated over and over in these past 70 pages.

    And of course, being outnumbered doesn't make you wrong. Let's try and get out of that circle. This is a pretty big issue.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2011
  19. ebilly99

    ebilly99 Americanreigon champ

    So it comes to people who can think and Fundies got it
     
  20. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

    Being outnumbered isn't a reason to give up.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page