it's been a while since we had a thread on gay marriage

[thegreekdog]

The choice "why not" accurately describes my views on gay marriage.

That being said, if civil unions resulted in the same benefits as marriage, apart from calling such unions "marriage," what would the downside be?

"Separate but equal" should not exist.


BAM!

That's a good reason.

This might be offensive to some, but every time I see or hear the words "separate but equal," I think CO-ED BATHROOMS!!!

Speaking of co-ed bathrooms... we had co-ed bathrooms in college. I gotta tell you, as an 18 year old, co-ed bathrooms were freaking awesome.

[SultanOfSurreal]

The choice "why not" accurately describes my views on gay marriage.

That being said, if civil unions resulted in the same benefits as marriage, apart from calling such unions "marriage," what would the downside be?

"Separate but equal" should not exist.


BAM!

That's a good reason.

This might be offensive to some, but every time I see or hear the words "separate but equal," I think CO-ED BATHROOMS!!!

Speaking of co-ed bathrooms... we had co-ed bathrooms in college. I gotta tell you, as an 18 year old, co-ed bathrooms were freaking awesome.

you were educated in a bathroom?

that explains a lot

[thegreekdog]

The choice "why not" accurately describes my views on gay marriage.

That being said, if civil unions resulted in the same benefits as marriage, apart from calling such unions "marriage," what would the downside be?

"Separate but equal" should not exist.


BAM!

That's a good reason.

This might be offensive to some, but every time I see or hear the words "separate but equal," I think CO-ED BATHROOMS!!!

Speaking of co-ed bathrooms... we had co-ed bathrooms in college. I gotta tell you, as an 18 year old, co-ed bathrooms were freaking awesome.

you were educated in a bathroom?

that explains a lot

It was an Ivy League bathroom.

[SultanOfSurreal]

It was an Ivy League bathroom.

there's a difference between mold and ivy you know

[2dimes]

Wait, is "Educated" used here like the police song 'wrapped around your finger' where he sings, "I have only come here seeking knowledge."?

[pimpdave]

Those were the best bathrooms. I always found it most funny when other dudes were like, "Oh man, all of my illusions are being shattered," as he described a girl having groaned and farted while obviously sitting on the throne.

Having grown up with a sister, I had none.

[thegreekdog]

Those were the best bathrooms. I always found it most funny when other dudes were like, "Oh man, all of my illusions are being shattered," as he described a girl having groaned and farted while obviously sitting on the throne.

Having grown up with a sister, I had none.

I vividly remember one fine morning (3AM) walking into the bathroom to find two girls making out... topless.

Apart from that situation, I did see a few naked girls going into or coming out of the shower.

[pimpdave]

Those were the best bathrooms. I always found it most funny when other dudes were like, "Oh man, all of my illusions are being shattered," as he described a girl having groaned and farted while obviously sitting on the throne.

Having grown up with a sister, I had none.

I vividly remember one fine morning (3AM) walking into the bathroom to find two girls making out... topless.

Apart from that situation, I did see a few naked girls going into or coming out of the shower.

Okay, you're making up the first one. No way do I believe that. But I so want to. And I now have pleasant images in my head.

The second, yeah, that was always a surprising eye opener. But it only happened when people (I'm assuming you) stole their towels.

[thegreekdog]

Those were the best bathrooms. I always found it most funny when other dudes were like, "Oh man, all of my illusions are being shattered," as he described a girl having groaned and farted while obviously sitting on the throne.

Having grown up with a sister, I had none.

I vividly remember one fine morning (3AM) walking into the bathroom to find two girls making out... topless.

Apart from that situation, I did see a few naked girls going into or coming out of the shower.

Okay, you're making up the first one. No way do I believe that. But I so want to. And I now have pleasant images in my head.

The second, yeah, that was always a nice eye opener.

I'm making up the first one.

This one is true - A friend and I were walking through the court yard area by the freshmen dorms. There are ground level rooms that look out into the large court yard. So, my friend taps me on the shoulder and gestures with his head and says, "Look at that shit." I turn and there are two girls (roommates). One girl is completely naked, getting ready to put on some clothes. The other is stripping, presumably getting ready to take a shower. So, like any red-blooded hetero or bisexual males, we stopped and stared. Unfortunately, the naked one saw us. Hilarity ensued as she tried to shut the shades and put on clothes at the same time.

[GloryOfThe80s]

50% oppose?

oh my, please tell me who gays harm by marrying each other... seriously... if marriage is such a sacred thing how come so many people (even those who oppose gay marriage) get divorced again

live and let live bigots

[GloryOfThe80s]

50% oppose?

oh my, please tell me who gays harm by marrying each other... seriously... if marriage is such a sacred thing how come so many people (even those who oppose gay marriage) get divorced again

live and let live bigots

hmmm now that I read the last comments I fear I have gone back to the serious side of the discussion... should have checked first

[Frigidus]

50% oppose?

oh my, please tell me who gays harm by marrying each other... seriously... if marriage is such a sacred thing how come so many people (even those who oppose gay marriage) get divorced again

live and let live bigots

hmmm now that I read the last comments I fear I have gone back to the serious side of the discussion... should have checked first

Yeah, people against gay marriage tend to not argue their points very often, so these threads usually boil down to those for it making sarcastic quips about the slight majority grossed out by butt sex.

[thegreekdog]

I suppose I could argue for the people against gay marriage (even though I am for gay marriage). I've done it in other threads.

[Frigidus]

I suppose I could argue for the people against gay marriage (even though I am for gay marriage). I've done it in other threads.

Exciting. It's not an easy position to take, I tell ya.

[GloryOfThe80s]

I suppose I could argue for the people against gay marriage (even though I am for gay marriage). I've done it in other threads.

why argue for them? (or my English is not good enough to get what you mean

[Frigidus]

I suppose I could argue for the people against gay marriage (even though I am for gay marriage). I've done it in other threads.

why argue for them? (or my English is not good enough to get what you mean

He's saying that since nobody is going to show up to argue against gay marriage he can take that side just to make this an argument instead of a conversation.

[hecter]

I suppose I could argue for the people against gay marriage (even though I am for gay marriage). I've done it in other threads.

why argue for them? (or my English is not good enough to get what you mean

He's saying that since nobody is going to show up to argue against gay marriage he can take that side just to make this an argument instead of a conversation.

It's called "Devil's Advocate". It's when you argue a position you don't agree with.

[Snorri1234]

I suppose I could argue for the people against gay marriage (even though I am for gay marriage). I've done it in other threads.

why argue for them? (or my English is not good enough to get what you mean

He's saying that since nobody is going to show up to argue against gay marriage he can take that side just to make this an argument instead of a conversation.

It's called "Devil's Advocate". It's when you argue a position you don't agree with.

When nobody knows you don't agree with it it's trolling.

[thegreekdog]

Some people are religious. Some people's religions dictate that marriage is between a man and a woman. So, people are upset that gay marriage would be prohibited by their religion and thus a marriage between a man and a woman would be cheapened.

Another argument is that the logical next step after permitting gay marriage is that religions would be required, by law, to both recognize and perform gay marriages. Slippery slope and all that. (On a somewhat related note, the Catholic Church is concerned about the abortion language in the healthcare bill... digression, sorry).

For a lot of people, including me, it is difficult to separate their religion from, for example, voting. I'm pro gay marriage, but I'm Catholic. I understand the religious concerns and I'll be the first to argue that religions should not be required to recognize or perform gay marriages. However, barring that eventually occuring, I'll also support gay marriage because it really doesn't hurt anyone.

[MeDeFe]

Some people are religious. Some people's religions dictate that marriage is between a man and a woman. So, people are upset that gay marriage would be prohibited by their religion and thus a marriage between a man and a woman would be cheapened.

Some people need to understand that a religious marriage and the state recognizing two people as married are not the same thing, despite the same word being used. People can be religiously married without the state recognizing it, and the state can recognize a marriage despite the involved persons never having seen a priest(ess) or similar.

Another argument is that the logical next step after permitting gay marriage is that religions would be required, by law, to both recognize and perform gay marriages. Slippery slope and all that. (On a somewhat related note, the Catholic Church is concerned about the abortion language in the healthcare bill... digression, sorry).

Hardly. See point one. I think freedom of religion still carries enough weight to allow priest(esse)s to say they will not do a religious marriage for two people if it goes against their religion.

For a lot of people, including me, it is difficult to separate their religion from, for example, voting. I'm pro gay marriage, but I'm Catholic. I understand the religious concerns and I'll be the first to argue that religions should not be required to recognize or perform gay marriages. However, barring that eventually occuring, I'll also support gay marriage because it really doesn't hurt anyone.

Then some people (no, not you, because you seem to be capable of thinking) need to ask themselves whether a Talibanistan where religion dictates the law, even for those who have a different religion, is really preferable to a free society.

[Phatscotty]

I'm mostly here to laugh at the mods. Quick question, where in the bloody blue blazes did phatscotty find that gem?

google "beastiality" :: images :: about page 5. I considered the graphic nature, and concluded that all you could see, really, was his opposable thumb. It could have been anything underneath there...

[Woodruff]

For a lot of people, including me, it is difficult to separate their religion from, for example, voting. I'm pro gay marriage, but I'm Catholic. I understand the religious concerns and I'll be the first to argue that religions should not be required to recognize or perform gay marriages. However, barring that eventually occuring, I'll also support gay marriage because it really doesn't hurt anyone.

Then some people (no, not you, because you seem to be capable of thinking) need to ask themselves whether a Talibanistan where religion dictates the law, even for those who have a different religion, is really preferable to a free society.

I'm convinced my sister wants this country to be a Talibanistan (but only if it's Baptist, by Gawd!). She's a Baptist who claims that Catholics and Methodists are going to hell (never mind the Agnostics and Muslims!).

[MeDeFe]

I'm mostly here to laugh at the mods. Quick question, where in the bloody blue blazes did phatscotty find that gem?

google "beastiality" :: images :: about page 5. I considered the graphic nature, and concluded that all you could see, really, was his opposable thumb. It could have been anything underneath there...

Part of the penis was definitely visible.

[Phatscotty]

"oh then we're on the same page, because i'm not sure how gay marriage is related to marrying an animal"

Both types of sex happen in nature, may be part of genetics as far as preference goes, and in both cases babies aren't made.

IMO he is reffering to the homo-sexuals argument, that no group, no matter how small, can be denied their civil rights, to force a religious institution to perform a marriage ceremony. The Animal boinkers are next in line. Just saying, don't look behind you unless you are into goat play.


I prefer dog play over goat play, here's a picture of me playing with my dog while naked, unfortunately the moderators will remove it soon.


Just because it feels good does not make it right

It seems like you took the poster a little personally. Something in your "voice" I am very, very sorry. It was not aimed at you.

[thegreekdog]

CONTINUOUS DISCLAIMER (to avoid cries of "troll" and "homophobe") - I am playing Devil's Advocate. I'm for gay marriage.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled program...

Some people need to understand that a religious marriage and the state recognizing two people as married are not the same thing, despite the same word being used. People can be religiously married without the state recognizing it, and the state can recognize a marriage despite the involved persons never having seen a priest(ess) or similar.

To permit gay marriage is not about a religion recognizing a marriage. Rather it's about people, generally, having to recognize a marriage that their religion dictates they should not believe. For example, if Evangelical X is walking down the street with his wife and encounters Gay Man 1 and Gay Man 2, who are married, Evangelical X does not believe he, as an indivdiual, should be required to recognize the marriage. A poor example, yes, but imagine if Evangelical X owns a store that sells wedding gifts or is a wedding photographer (there was a case about this I think) or is an employer of Gay Man 1 who wants to bring his spouse to a party where only spouses are permitted. Evangelical X would feel uncomfortable in such situations and his religion, a very large part of his life, would dictate that he could not recognize such marriage.

I think freedom of religion still carries enough weight to allow priest(esse)s to say they will not do a religious marriage for two people if it goes against their religion.

You would think so. Except that religion in the last few decades has been continuously under siege. The government, the media, television, movies, and the general public have increased the instances of religious hatred. For example, there are fears that the government may require Catholic hospitals to perform abortions. The religious are roundly mocked on television news and commentary shows. Movies denigrate religions. And the general public is clamoring for restrictions that would impinge on one's religion (for example, requiring Muslim women to go through body scanners).

Then some people (no, not you, because you seem to be capable of thinking) need to ask themselves whether a Talibanistan where religion dictates the law, even for those who have a different religion, is really preferable to a free society.

These are not beliefs of one religion. There are many religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) that believe homosexuality is wrong. Thus, we are not creating a theocracy.