Well It's Democracy

[MicroScreen2]

Marriage is failing because the people who are married don't want to be. To blame another Group who does want to be married is frankly insane.

was that aimed at me?

[MicroScreen2]

Originally posted by vidcc+5 August 2004 - 20:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 5 August 2004 - 20:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MicroScreen2@5 August 2004 - 13:26
in response to the first post (havent read the rest yet)

marriages were invented to keep couples commited for the sake of the children. Even for hetrosexuals these days marriage is pointless because society accepts divorce as an everyyday thing for couples who fell out of love or whatever reason with no regards for the welfare of the children. in this light i cant really say i&#39;m dead set against same sex marriage but its pointless IMO because i believe same sex parents are immoral cos the kids will get bullied and wont learn about proper family life.

before anybody brings it up i think its disgusting to justify a possible generation of broken kids so the next generation can have same sex couples as the norm.

interesting idea about the invention of marriage.

I would like to address the children being beaten up point...... This only happens because of discriminatory and biggoted ethics taught to the children that do the beating. [/b][/quote]
i wasnt thinking about beatings, i was thinking of the psychological stuff like name calling and that they&#39;ll be made to feel like an outcast, but beatings do happen.


whether its discriminatory or not, forcing kids to go through it wont stop it.

[Biggles]

Originally posted by MicroScreen2@5 August 2004 - 20:10

Marriage is failing because the people who are married don&#39;t want to be. To blame another Group who does want to be married is frankly insane.

was that aimed at me?

I don&#39;t think so.

I was referring to the political comments regarding banning same sex marriage as protecting and promoting different sex marriage. I fail to see the connection.

If you fall into that camp and feel the shoe fits then by all means wear it.

[J'Pol]

So we are saying that people&#39;s rights should be diminished because of the ramifications of them getting them.

Tell that to Martin Luther King, tell him that a wee woman refusing to give up a seat on the bus will lead to riots in the street. Tell him civil disobedience will cause all sort of bother for his people and ask him if their civil rights and equality are worth it.

I make this as a general point, not just in relation to the topic at hand.

[MicroScreen2]

Originally posted by Biggles+5 August 2004 - 20:17--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Biggles @ 5 August 2004 - 20:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MicroScreen2@5 August 2004 - 20:10

Marriage is failing because the people who are married don&#39;t want to be. To blame another Group who does want to be married is frankly insane.

was that aimed at me?

I don&#39;t think so.

I was referring to the political comments regarding banning same sex marriage as protecting and promoting different sex marriage. I fail to see the connection.

If you fall into that camp and feel the shoe fits then by all means wear it. [/b][/quote]
i&#39;m poor at stringing sentances together so i thought my post may have come across wrong.


j&#39;pol. i think this is a little different. martin luther king never employed a third party against their will and welfare to suffer because he wanted the opportunity to do something unnatural.

[Biggles]

Originally posted by MicroScreen2+5 August 2004 - 20:28--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MicroScreen2 @ 5 August 2004 - 20:28)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by Biggles@5 August 2004 - 20:17
<!--QuoteBegin-MicroScreen2

@5 August 2004 - 20:10

Marriage is failing because the people who are married don&#39;t want to be. To blame another Group who does want to be married is frankly insane.

was that aimed at me?

I don&#39;t think so.

I was referring to the political comments regarding banning same sex marriage as protecting and promoting different sex marriage. I fail to see the connection.

If you fall into that camp and feel the shoe fits then by all means wear it.

i&#39;m poor at stringing sentances together so i thought my post may have come across wrong.


j&#39;pol. i think this is a little different. martin luther king never employed a third party against their will and welfare to suffer because he wanted the opportunity to do something unnatural. [/b][/quote]
No problem

I think by playing the "unnatural card" you show your hand too much.

Those who opposed the blacks in the 1950s thought, for example, mixed marriages between black and white unnatural and an evil abomination. A black lad courting a white girl was liable to wake up dead.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by MicroScreen2@5 August 2004 - 14:14
i wasnt thinking about beatings, i was thinking of the psychological stuff like name calling and that they&#39;ll be made to feel like an outcast, but beatings do happen.

I used beatings in a general term, name calling and any other action can be taken in that term. i didn&#39;t misunderstand your usage.

whether its discriminatory or not, forcing kids to go through it wont stop it

I have no doubt that human nature won&#39;t be changed i merely pointed out that it is because of biggoted attitudes that it happens at all.

I&#39;ve been beaten to the post in pointing out that one shouldn&#39;t forego ones human rights because of the "cost", However you have raised a different topic to marriage...not all Gay couples want to have children.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by MicroScreen2@5 August 2004 - 21:28

j&#39;pol. i think this is a little different. martin luther king never employed a third party against their will and welfare to suffer because he wanted the opportunity to do something unnatural.

The most telling word above is unnatural. It speaks more than any cogent argument you may have provided.

Employ is indeed another one, as it suggests it is the gay people who are deliberately using children to further their own ends. Surely it is the bullies who should be blamed for their abhorrent actions.

However is is good to hear that Black Children were not bullied either physically or mentally as a direct result of the civil liberties campaigns. I had always thought they were victims as well.

[MicroScreen2]

sex is natural between different races but not for same sexes, if it were, girls could have kids with girls and bos could have kids with boys. so yeah i stand by the idea that its unnatural.


what word should i have used instead of "employ"?.. "take"? "victimise"? "hire?"

Surely it is the bullies who should be blamed for their abhorrent actions

if i were to force someone into the lion&#39;s den and they get killed, am i entirely without blame?

I&#39;ve been beaten to the post in pointing out that one shouldn&#39;t forego ones human rights because of the "cost", However you have raised a different topic to marriage...not all Gay couples want to have children.

my idea of marriage is solely or the welfare of children, apart from a big party all it does for the couple is put them i wedlock

[J'Pol]

If you were to stand quietly holding a banner saying that just because you were Black did not mean you were entitled to less rights.

Then someone punched you in the face for doing it, whose fault would that be.

Martin Luther King and The Mahatma before him advocated passive resistance. They risked themselves, their families and their children when they did this.

As a direct result of this the world is a better place. Because they said no, we shall not take this, neither shall we lower ourselves to the level of those who would attack us.

We shall overcome.