Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

i literally scream everything i write.
i *do* have you on ignore, i just get logged out an awful lot.

besides, why is it on me to avoid you?
you should stop posting.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

You are just so cute when you get pissed off. I could just pinch your cheeks(on your face).

Please, just ignore me, I have more fun just reading what you have to say about what's going on with the other voices here.

Oh, and with this little shit right here:

Mum always told me when people tell you can't do what they do, you just do more. Pisses them off.

in regards to your mother
 

people refrain from talking to you directly because they think you're autistic and they would feel bad

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

The above premise/conclusion is decidedly shaky, mostly I think because of that phrase 'natural disposition'.

Yes we can deduce that we are split into male or female, because of natural reproduction, because that's what has enabled the continuation of the species. So yes, obviously there is a reason for the two separate sexes, absolutely. Not only that, the majority of our species has a natural disposition - or inclination, if you like - to members of the opposite sex. Again, obviously, and the reasons are apparent to anyone.

However..... what is ALSO natural - and this is what you're glossing over - is that there exists a fairly significant minority with a disposition towards members of the same sex. A disposition that occurs just as naturally, even though it doesn't contribute to sexual reproduction.

You're effectively only commenting on what you think should be the universally natural order of things - based on procreation. I think I'm providing a more realistic and honest account of what the natural order is. Ie. for whatever reason, there exists a certain percentage of us who are gay.

Insisting that there exists a single 'natural disposition' actually doesn't tell us anything of substance beyond what I've been willing to acknowledge. All it does is imply - in a somewhat vague way - some higher purpose that things should be universally this way. Well maybe they should and maybe homosexuals are - from an evolutionary perspective - defective. I'm not offended if anyone wants to speculate in that way because it's essentially a scientific and philosophical question. Evolutionary biologists have some interesting things to say about it. But the point is, things are not universally that way, and protesting "but they should be!" is pretty pointless.

The virgin reference was to make the point that you don't have to have ever had sex to still be classed as, say, heterosexual. In other words, homosexual and heterosexual usually refers to sexual orientation rather than sexual activity. I was just trying to establish a common definition (and trying to avoid that godawful phrase "practising homosexual").

OK, but I think I've explained elsewhere the reasoning behind it.

If we're getting hung up on that natural disposition phrase, then let me ask you: would you agree that same-sex attraction occurs naturally to the 6% or whatever of the population? By natural, I specifically mean in the sense of being hard-wired into us. For the moment, don't think about whether or not we choose to act on our feelings, or dwell on the fact that such activity is not compatible with sexual reproduction - just tell me whether you accept that same-sex attraction occurs naturally - in nature?

If it does, it is natural. The fact that homosexuals still happen to have genitals that can fit into the genitals of a person of the opposite sex does not change the fact that the same-sex attraction is still naturally occurring and possibly genetically-predetermined.

If you don't believe it occurs naturally and isn't as hard-wired as opposite-sex attraction is to you, then who or what is responsible for this sexual orientation? The devil?

And what of the 1,500 or so other species in which homosexual activity has been recorded?

I think you would be interested to study the origin of ethics - specifically, the evolutionary origin, or at least ethics in the animal kingdom generally. It's quite humbling. That's not to deny we don't each have our personal code of morals, whether it's rooted in the golden rule or the idea of consenting adults and not causing harm, etc. But it's useful, if for no other reason than to keep our egos in check.

But with regard to homosexuality, you have still not laid out how or why not contributing to sexual reproduction prompts a moral dimension to take over once we act on those feelings. Why does a biological issue have to become a moral issue? Or at least, acting on our biological inclination - given that no harm needs to be caused to anyone else, and both parties consent? Why the heck does morality have to be introduced at this point?

I know you're keen to emphasize that these are all your own personally held views, but in truth I think you're not being completely honest with us, and the moral dimension is in fact introduced from your religion. You're just trying to make the beliefs sound more reasoned than they are by avoiding referring to Islaam explicitly, which I guess is understandable given all the times we've criticised you for it over the years. However, the strangely arbitrary point at which morality lands into the argument is, I think, the point at which the influence of your religion's teachings is exposed.

Feel free to convince me otherwise though, that there is a rational basis for this moral angle that can be explained independent of religion.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Well, we're only born with a partially formed set of sexual equipment really. Sure, the wee-wee and hoo-hoo are there, but that's only the most visible portion of the entire sexual package - the hormones and chemicals necessary to activate everything sexually like sperm and egg production don't kick in for a good decade at least. So effectively, we are indeed born asexual.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

here's a random fact: every single one of us, male and female, started out as a female embryo. the male chromosome doesn't kick in until a few weeks after fertilization.

Re: in regards to your mother
 

lol this rules.

john, fuck off already.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

You are right. Sean and Deckard are more respectful and articulate. Which is why I hold the amount of respect I do for them.

Doesn't mean I want to take back what I posted, even if you felt disrespected, which was not my intention at all. You clearly have a problem with some of our lifestyle choices, even though you are clearly trying to persuade us that you don't judge us or anybody in particular. Maybe Sean and Deckard have the courtesy to rerfrain from turning that on its head towards you, but I don't.

I have serious problems with the life choices and attitudes that your posts represent. So is it really my invective that you find disrespectful, or that someone would actually have the nerve to tell you this?

Because, as little as you care for my ideas/posts, I find it very advantageous to read your ideas because of how contrary they are to my personal views.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

I would hardly call you less articulate, my friend!

In all honesty, you say what I think Sean and I probably feel like saying anyway. It's a good arrangement. You take the flak, we get the credit. :D ;)

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

As well as an individual's sexual "desire"(I'm sure there's a better, scientific term for this, but I'm being all Freudian Autistic) does not become an awareness to the individual until around the age of 5.

That percentage is way off, more like 10-15%.


Oh I do declare, ya'll ah fightin' ova my love. My heart is justa pitter apatterin'.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Well almost every time I post, I have to remind myself of how much more informative debates Deckard participates in turn out being than they've been when I get all pissy, so I credit him. But my natural tendency is definitely to be pissy. For the most part, I have to sit and breath deeply for a little while before replying to stuff - especially posts like that last analogy Myrrh offered up involving my wife...

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

why do you take that personally?
jsut because he doesnt frame his posts like a complete retard doesnt mean he should eb taken with a straight face either. dude is a joke.
is it really so low to acknowledge that some things go nowhere and just resort to basic ridicule for being such a crass twit?

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

And here we go folks...

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

dubman/john: go grab your handbags and duel outside of this thread :)

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Have yet to be shown where anything I've said has not made sense or not so.

I'd love to see anyone who has made those accusations prove it to be so. Yous got nothing...

Come now, try to show me and I'll show how yous're wrong again. But don't get upset when proved wrong. Again.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

fuck off, you

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

(this should appear in italicks, but those in control are nazi-ish without even knowing it)

Everyone is peeled to screen awaiting stimpee's, "NO WIRE HANGERS!" moment on du(m)bman/bitch.

(end italics)

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

i vote that the thread starter should have the ability to lock their own threads when they degenerate into off-topic rants.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Well, if you get that power, let us all hope you are able to go back and follow and recall/remember who started the off-topic rants.

Don't look at me.

As well as, the thread starter, should answer questions from the lost flock(:rolleyes:) who are trying to clarify what the topic is about, if he has the balls to do so. That would be you.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

just be zen about it and let it flow where it goes. if you started a conversation at a party and it ended up degenerating into a rant, you wouldn't be able to lock people's mouths.

unless this was an episode of the twilight zone.

and i hope it's not.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Getting back on topic - sort of - Massachusetts is spearheading a new effort to take down the ominously named "Defense of Marriage Act". The state has filed a lawsuit against the federal government charging that "In enacting DOMA, Congress overstepped its authority, undermined states' efforts to recognize marriages between same-sex couples, and codified an animus towards gay and lesbian people".

While I'm ashamed of my current state of residence, California, for prop 8, I can at least be proud of the state I was born and raised in, Massachusetts! Rock on witcho' bad self!

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

More words of wisdom: To Be Continued.

From the Land of Oz...

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Well, this was fun to read on a Sunday morning. I wish my fingers worked. I typed that last sentence about 6 times...

As far as abortion goes. I say this: develop a well thought out, reasonable explanation for what you believe, and then shut your fucking mouth until you're thrown in that position. Try clinging to the "every life is sacred" creed when you're an unemployed pothead living in your parents' basement, with no education, no savings, and no health insurance. When it comes down to it, what you believe is what you believe, and that's fine. What's not fine is when you run around and try to cram that belief down someone else's throat, especially when you've got no real world experience to base your opinion on. As far as I'm concerned, cacophony would probably write a better abortion law than 99.99% of the legislators in the country, and I would be infinitely satisfied with whatever she came up with. Abortion opinions should be reactive, not proactive. If someone asks you what your opinion on abortion is, feel free to tell them. Otherwise, just keep it to yourself.

And I love how all the straight religious folks, many of whom have fucked up, sham marriages in the first place, suddenly get all bent out of shape about the sanctity of marriage when it's the gays that want to get married. Head's up, all you'se religious types: If your church is against gay marriage, THEY WONT MARRY GAYS!! You're safe. You don't have to worry about Steve and Trenton sitting next to you in church, wondering, as are everyone else in attendance, why your wife has bruises on her arms, and why your children wont look you in the eye. They'll do what reasonable, sensible people do; skip on the pomp and formality, and get married in a courthouse, in a totally non-religious ceremony. If marriage were such a sacrosanct and holy institution, Britney and K-Fed never would have happened. So...before we go around denying basic civil liberties to people simply because they are into their own gender, maybe, just maybe, we could do something about the fact that we, apparently by the example I stated in the previous sentence, allow complete and total morons to get hitched and squirt little fuckup babies all throughout this great nation.

bryantm3, bravo on creating a thread that at least brought back a smidge, or a skosh if you will, of what this forum used to be. You took yer lumps like a man, and when you get into it with cacophony, it's hard not to take lumps.

As an aside, and I know that this portion of our tale should go into the noise section, lots has been going on with me recently. I moved back to Wisconsin, got a job, and just when I thought things were settling down a bit, the fiance and I decided, "Why the fuck don't we just get this whole marriage thing knocked out?" So we decided to do that. Then we decided to combine our newly married status, as well as my status as a veteran, into the fiscal Voltron known as The VA Home Loan. THEN my beautiful bride decided that she'd let one of those "aggregations of non-differentiated cells" implant itself within her uterus, thereby transforming her into some kind of vicious, rabid, land shark.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

can we talk about abortion again?

marriage isn't the government's job. sorry. in fact, the benefits I won't receive because I don't get married at some point in my life constitute as discrimination.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

:D

excellent news all around! i'm glad you shared this here instead of noise because i always forget that forum section exists and i never would have seen it. congrats to you and your blushing bride and your cellwad!

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

((((:D))))

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

I think my main question to you would be which benefits afforded to married couples do you feel you're missing out on? The bulk of the benefits are specific to the unique needs of a married couple that single folks don't typically have. Here's a partial list of examples I just came across:

* joint parenting;
* joint adoption;
* joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents);
* status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent;
* joint insurance policies for home, auto and health;
* dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support;
* immigration and residency for partners from other countries;
* inheritance automatically in the absence of a will;
* joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment;
* inheritance of jointly-owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate);
* benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare;
* spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home;
* veterans' discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns;
* joint filing of customs claims when traveling;
* wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children;
* bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child;
* decision-making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her;
* crime victims' recovery benefits;
* loss of consortium tort benefits;
* domestic violence protection orders;
* judicial protections and evidentiary immunity;

So I'm just wondering if you could be more specific in your stance that single people not getting benefits like the ones listed above amounts to discrimination.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Hey, congratulations! Good to know that smart people are still breeding so that we can avoid our Idiocracy future....

And of course, well said on the other stuff.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

do you remember the twilight zone movie where the little boy shut his sister's mouth permanently with his mind? eek! that gave me nightmares.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Thank you for such a rational non-biased argument

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

For the record I think that cacaphony brought up some excellent points, albeit in a very smug and condescending way that nearly made me skip over most of it. Constantly attacking the other person is not as civil as you think it is. Also I'm not sure what your argument is here; abortion should be legal through all trimesters because fringe cases like that could happen? That's like arguing against traffic fines because people can have seizures while they're driving.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

This is exactly the whole abortion debate for me. I'm also really convinced this thing would be in the bag if all the conservative religious leaders capped and traded all their hot air condemning the action into fixing the problem.

For me its simple: put contraceptives in the drinking water. Antidotes given by application only (and prerequisite IQ test)

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

smug and condescending is how i roll. this forum used to be active and fun because people weren't afraid to lay it out on the table. folks had thick skin and i never saw an argument taken personally until, say, the last year or so. things have changed, i suppose. except me, i'm not interested in change.

and frankly i don't think i made an argument. i'm not going back to re-read but i'm fairly certain i made no statements about my personal beliefs when it comes to abortion rights. i presented a scenario and asked those who think all abortion should be illegal to explain how the issues would be handled in a no-abortion world.

i certainly don't believe abortion should be legal at any point during pregnancy. frankly, having experienced pregnancy myself i'm actually very uncomfortable with the legal limit being set at 24 weeks. i felt one of the boys move at 16 weeks and at that moment i knew he was a separate being who wasn't just a cluster of cells, but my child. i didn't feel the other baby move until later because of where he was positioned, but i felt the same way about him, too.

unfortunately as much as i'm uncomfortable with the idea of legal abortions up until 24 weeks, i have to think through what i now know of the pregnancy screening process. for most pregnancies 20 weeks is the earliest you can do some crucial testing to tell you whether there are developmental or chromosomal abnormalities. if you wait until 20 weeks and get bad results, retesting would push you out to at least 22 weeks for confirmation. like if you ended up needing an amniocentesis, for example. in situations where there may be serious concerns about the development of the baby, i can see needing to allow for action to take place at that stage.

i know too many girls from the twin groups i'm a member of who delivered at 24 weeks to feel comfortable with that as a cutoff. and a week doesn't make a damn bit of difference to me, 23 is too early. which means 22 is too early. so my gut says fuckit, let's just say 20 is your last chance.

but here's the thing. there's a difference between what i believe in terms of a baby's viability and what i believe should be established as a legal framework around the procedure.

in my perfect world there would be no abortions after, say 12 weeks. that, in my opinion, is long enough to realize you've missed a period, pee on a stick, visit a doctor for confirmation, and make a decision about your pregnancy. after 12 weeks, in my opinion, cold feet should no longer be a valid excuse for abortion. only personal hardship and medical reasons should apply after that point.

but see, that's me superimposing my personal beliefs gained through my personal sense of connection to my own pregnancy. when you start talking about bringing government into it you cross a line that i don't think should be crossed. there's a danger in applying your own emotional baggage to society as a whole and trying to craft laws (which inevitably must apply punishment for violations) to the rest of the population. so while i feel strongly that my babies were people from the moment they were conceived, i refuse to force the rest of society to create a law based on that. hell, i also believe my dead mother visits me in my dreams. shall we create laws around that, too? my personal beliefs concerning the existence and persistence of the soul belong about a thousand lightyears away from any governing body.

So then i come back to rationalize it again. 24 weeks makes sense as a cutoff because at that point there is a small but real chance of viability, that the baby(ies) could survive outside of the womb. for medical emergencies the procedure should be on the table after that, but not for any other reason. i don't like it, not one itty bitty bit. i don't like the idea that someone would go 16 weeks (4 months!!) into a pregnancy and suddenly go, "you know what, i changed my mind." i don't like the idea that people aren't keeping their goddamn knees together or using appropriate protection and preventing themselves from making babies in the first place. hey, it ain't hard. i did it for 31 years, never even had a scare.

but i'm not going to advocate the idea that we make laws to punish people who aren't as paranoid about pregnancy as i was. i don't drink either, and you don't see me out campaigning to make booze illegal. when you weigh out the consequences of the two choices, terminating unwanted pregnancies versus forcing women to bear unwanted children, i think the second choice is a worse crime.

this probably reads like a disjointed string of gobbledygook because i'm up way past my bedtime thanks to two cranky boys who didn't ask permission to split their egg into two 19 months ago.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

And thank you for the non-sarcastic, totally genuine response. To clarify my stance; I just recently got married. In a church. Belonging to a protestant religion so close to Catholicism, we may as well take advice from the Pope. I myself am a religious person, and I take my wedding vows as the sacred promises they are. However, like cacophony, I'm able to divorce my particular situation from the reality of what I see, and what I see is a society that thinks marriage is some kind of neat thing to do, and discard, on a whim. I see a society that bases their opinion of gay marriage on fear and bigotry rather than evidence and logic. I see a religious community stirred up by attention-seeking politicians and paranoid fundamentalists that are totally missing the point. Hypocritically so.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

Yeah, there's a point to be made here, and you had me right up until you said something implying that the same anti-gay marriage people were beating their wives and children; afaik that'll land you in jail. I don't really know much about the gay marriage argument, and honestly don't really care; I think it's pretty much inevitable that it'll pass, probably sooner rather than later. I don't think 'society' bases their opinions on fear and bigotry; honestly I have yet to meet someone who argues against it on anything but logical grounds.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

What an opinion is based on and how it's openly argued are often two very different things. I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss underlying fear and ignorance as causes, despite how the opinions are justified.

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

saying "the bible says adam and eve, not adam and steve" has nothing to do with bigotry, and is totally a logical argument?

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

But you don't want to piss me off, you wouldn't like me when I'm angry... :p

ITSA JOKE! ITSA JOKE!!!

And could everyone just STFU about the gay marriage bit?!?

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

That's true, but it's an argument for "according to the bible, the first married couple was a man and a woman" and not much else. We've all outgrown the garden.

This does swing both ways though. You can pretty much apply this to anything. How many of the people who want marijuana legalized simply want to smoke it themselves without fear of retribution? Does the RIAA really think that file-sharing hurts the artists? Likewise, couldn't it be argued that all the gays that support same sex marriage are biased and will argue in favor regardless of whether or not, deep down, they think it's a good idea for society? Wouldn't a midget argue in favor of lowering rollercoaster height standards being relaxed and call the theme parks "anti-midget rights"?

Re: is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?
 

I really have no idea where you're going with this and what you're getting at, but....

I think it should be pretty clear why the LBGT side is fighting for same sex marriage. To have society accept relationships under the construct of marriage is de facto total acceptance of their lifestyle. So its not about any one priviledge afforded by civil contracts, but full integration as a minority into society.

Basically if you can get married and be gay you can be gay categorically.