Bet you didn't see THIS coming....

[Barbarian]

Posted by: Andail Ã, : "I have nothing against gays as long as they hit on me"

What do you mean with hit? I am missed or you'll have nothing against gays as long as they still try to pick you up?

Man, that's funny!

Ã,  Heheh.. Either it's a funny typo... or, he get's upset if gays don't hit on him / try to pick him up. Ã, 

Ã,  Ã,  Ã, Anyways, Ã, it doesn't matter to me if a person is gay or not, it's their personal choice. Ã, Just try to respect each other regardless of sexual orientation I think is what people should strive for.

[Nacho]

Yeah Petter, knowing in some way your sense of humour I was alsmost sure that you were not commiting a mistake when saying that... The thing that resulted so funny was that I misunderstood it and I've been very close to reply:

"You should take a position, because you're so handsome that some of them will finally try to pick with you"

But then I read it propperly.

Funny... as I said. 

And Unilin, I told (This is the third time) that there are two countries where gy marriage is legal. One is Denmark, thanks for pointing that the other is Canada, or some of their provinces at least... But what does have to see with my "Fight for it if you care" stalement? I haven't expressed my opinions about gay marriage (actually it's a subject that does not interest me a bit...), I just told that with the nowadays legal enviroment IN MANY COUNTRIES that marriages can't be done.

[Haddas]

Farl, it was a parodic reference to the very worn out cliché "I don't have anything against gays, as long as they don't hit on me."

This remark is surprisingly often uttered by ugly, sloppy, spaghetti-eating man-pigs.

I've never said that!

[Barbarian]

Okay, an interesting tidbit of news I just seen in which some US conservative groups are now claiming some cartoons are "brainwashing" kids and turning them gay. LoLÃ, 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4190699.stm

Here's a few interesting quotes from that news-article:

"SpongeBob - who appears on the children's cable channel Nickelodeon - is seen as an icon for adult gay men in the US, apparently because he regularly holds hands with his sidekick Patrick. "

"...conservatives say it sees the video as a cunning attempt to promote homosexuality. "

"We see the video as an insidious means by which the organisation is manipulating and potentially brainwashing kids," Paul Batura, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, told the New York Times. "

-------------------------------
Ã,  Ã,  Hahah... Yeah, boy, that SpongeBob really turns me on... I think... after seeing how darn sexy of a sponge he is, and after seeing those SpiderMan dancer videos too many times... arrrgh, I'm being brainwashed.. I'm.. turning... GAY!! Help mEeEee... heheh..Ã, 

Ã,  Ã,  But really, I think it's just stupid for someone to blame a cartoon for " insidously manipulating and brainwashing" people and promoting people to become gay.Ã,  I hardly think an animated Sponge will turn anyone gay. * Puts in an Anime video of some cute guys dressed up as girls... *Ã,  Ahhh, errr.. okay now, go back to working on your AGS game now.. nothing more to see here.. Hehehe...Ã,  Ã, 

[Babar]

Holding hands is considered gay  :o ?
Wow.... and here there is regular "hugging" between men for just a greeting.

But isn't Jenna really hot in that pic??? She's more slim now, isn't her???

hahah....talk about insidious. You trying to test peoples sexuality? 

[Nacho]

I was saving a buck for the first one saying that about lovely Jenna, Babar! It's yours!Ã, 

[PaulSC]

My basic view on gay marriage is: If you're defining marriage in non-religious terms, then homosexuals should be perfectly welcome to the benefits of the institution. If you're defining marriage purely in religious terms, then the government shouldn't have any involvement with it - marriage should be a purely private institution, and if necessary, the government should set up a secular alternative.

Maybe I’m being idealistic, but I just don't think governments should be in the business of discrimination.

As for the inevitable "next thing you know people will want to make marrying goats legal!!" reaction, if these people would use their heads before jerking their knees, they might notice that there is a key difference in that, unlike homosexuality, bestiality is a non-consensual act (with the possible exception of consensual dolphin sex - in which case I say knock yourselves out!).

[Nacho]

As for the inevitable "next thing you know people will want to make marrying goats legal!!" reaction, if these people would use their heads before jerking their knees...

Should you use recognise that you haven't been using your head if I proove that an approaching to gay marryage has provoqued demmands of non-commonly accepted marryage forms?

http://es.news.yahoo.com/fot/ftxt/20050118173631.html

Well, it's in Spanish... google for translators!Ã,  But it tells that the "Council of superior Justice" wars that allowing gay marriage will make people to demmand "poligamic", "incestuous" or "zoophilic" marriages. 15 minutes after the bried, the muslim community demmanded tho allow poligamic marryage.

Which should be cool, if women were allowed to marry with many men, but the claim just wants "many women for men". And that puts women in a lower position in front of the law to men.

And that, goes against the Spanish Constition.

And no laws can go against the main source of laws... which is the constitution.

So, yeah, demmanding gay marriage makes that non-accepted ways of marriage are claimed.

So, use your head.

And... the best of all this, is that I am for gay marriage in front of the law... And religions doesn't matter me as long as I sold my soul to Blazed last week...Ã, 

But I want you to think twice before being that unfair with a portion of the society. A portion where I am not... but a portion I respect enough to say that "they don't use their heads".

[wyr3x]

errmm ... i'm a man ... but i'm lesbian ... i like girls a lot  ... but i respect anybody's choices ....

[lgm unplugged]

Obviously I'm not the best at online debates, so I always forget to mention something.

I do share the view that marriage is when two people love eachother and want to spend their lives together. That is exactly how I've always seen it. Obviously I am a Christian and follow the religious ideas given from the Bible and believe that there is a God. And I believe that God gave us the gift of life, the gift of the opposite sex, the gift of companionship, the gift of MARRIAGE, and the gift of sex.

Not knowing exactly if the Bible states it directly, so I can't say for certain, but I really don't think God intended for a man to have sexual relations with another man. I don't think he intended for them to get married either... And in my eyes (and the eyes of many other people,) marriage is reserved for man and women.. As it even says in the ceremonial speech. (I pronounce you MAN and WIFE.)

But then again, Marriage isn't only a Christian practice.. So I guess, if you're Muslim, Jewish, or Hindu.. Homosexuality could Ã, play into things differently.

I really hope I don't sound like a jerk.. And I REALLY hate it if I am contradicting myself. I know I am repeating myself, but I just want some clarity. I know I tend to look like and idiot most of the time.

And DG, I really don't understand the Cookie Monster reference.....

[DGMacphee]

It's just a joke I got from another forum. It's not actually referencing anything. It's just a funny (if sarcastic) way of saying, "Well, there you have it".

Also, Christian or not, don't you think it's a little much to assume what God intended for man. I mean, I don't want to get too much into the philosphical nature of God, but he did give man free will so who's to say what God intended for man. I mean, to say that God is testing our faith by putting the possibility of homosexuality into our existence while giving us free will seems to me like... well... God is screwing with our minds.

[Matchew]

errmm ... i'm a man ... but i'm lesbian ... i like girls a lotÃ,  ... but i respect anybody's choices ....

wow, there are just over a hundred replies and finally this guy does the "I'm a lesbian" joke, christ man did you read any of the replies or are you just takin the fuckin piss beotch?

And now on a more pertinant point, God loves everyone, he create us, he damn well should. Gays are god's children too, if they want to do stuff differently, let em enjoy their lives, they love each other, it's all good. The church is run by a few small minded old farts and a load of good guys, but they feel that they do not wish to cross the Pope and his cardinals.  he may not wish to let gays marry or rear children but he's old an wont be livin much longer ( don't get me wrong, I still respect the guy, but you can't stop the inevitable) sooner or later he'll be replaced and hopefully by a good guy, and maybe all this can change for a new modern society. if not, it's bordering on nazism (well it is)

After all, the pope just works for god, he aint the almighty.........

[Gregjazz]

errmm ... i'm a man ... but i'm lesbian ... i like girls a lot  ... but i respect anybody's choices ....

wow, there are just over a hundred replies and finally this guy does the "I'm a lesbian" joke, christ man did you read any of the replies or are you just takin the fuckin piss beotch?

Dude, chill.

Okay, overall, arguing about this topic is pointless. It's not going to solve anything, let alone change someone's viewpoint. All it's going to do is make everyone grouchy.

The original point of this thread was that Peter Thomas was announcing his homosexuality. But then again, I really don't see the point of that considering homosexuals have spend so much effort making homosexuality accepted in society and "normal."

Oh well, never mind. I think the original purpose of this thread has been accomplished -- Peter Thomas announcing that he's gay. There is no need to turn it into a debate.

[Blackthorne]

Go Peter Thomas!   I wish you luck in all your endeavours... it isn't always easy being happy with youself, no matter what you are.

Bt

[SSH]

Also, Christian or not, don't you think it's a little much to assume what God intended for man. I mean, I don't want to get too much into the philosphical nature of God, but he did give man free will so who's to say what God intended for man. I mean, to say that God is testing our faith by putting the possibility of homosexuality into our existence while giving us free will seems to me like... well... God is screwing with our minds.

Please explain how God could have made homosexuality IMpossible? Asexual reproduction? Really tight asses? Everyone having severe haemerrhoids?

Anyway, wouldn't free will be meaningless if you only had one choice?

[PaulSC]

Farlander:

My point was: just because accepting both would involve a change to marriage laws, doesn't mean that homosexuality must automatically be equal to bestiality (or even polygamy) - it seems to me that that's the implication when people shout "what next?!". Just because homosexuality, bestiality, necrophelia, pedophilia etc are all condemned by Christianity and/or society doesn't stop them all from being very different things that bring up very different issues.

I do understand the worry that "if you change one thing, then anything could be changed", but I'd be more inclined to take it seriously if it wasn't for the fact that inter-racial marriage was widely banned and morally condemned until relatively recently. The people who were against that were probably felt just as objectively morally correct and heaven-bound as the people who fight against gay marriage today, but how many will admit to being against inter-racial marriage in this day and age? Like it or not, everything has always been changing.

[Nacho]

I am pro-gay marriage, but I was annoyed about the "they do not use their head". That sentence has less sense even now, that you say that you understand it... I guess it was a slip... no problems! 

[TerranRich]

God didn't intend anything for humanity. Hence the "free will" we so dearly cherish.

* TerranRich gives the thumbs-up to Petey

And that is a VERY good point, PaulSC, well said!

[HeirOfNorton]

For the whole God vs. Homosexuality thing, I think lgm's main poiint (and do correct me if I'm wrong) was that HIS SPECIFIC religion defined marriage as between a man and a woman ONLY, and did not allow homosexuality/gay marriage, but that his beliefs need not be taken as doctrine by others with other religions.

And, indeed, the Cristian bible (and the Jewish one, too) specifically forbids homosexuality. Well, okay, it actually forbids sex between two men, and doesn't really say much about other forms of homosexuality or gay marriage. The same parts also forbid bestiality, adultery, eating pork, and selling your daughter for the wrong price. Also, based on these old testament laws, polygamy is A-okay, and pedophilia and prostitution are kinda iffy.

I should point out that according to Christian doctrine, all laws of the old testament are superceded by Christ and the new testament. Jesus spoke quite highly and often about the sanctity of marriage, but (that I recall) he didn't bring homosexuality up much at all one way or the other. Again, do correct me if I'm wrong.

All of this is just my (possibly ill-informed) interpretation of the books I've read. Feel free to ignore me completely.

HoN

[Tiki]

HeirofNorton:  I'd like to see those verses you're talking about before I take anything you've said seriously.  I recognize some parts, but I seriously doubt that there is a verse entirely like the one you mentioned.  If you can show a verse, then I might have something worthwhile to reply with.  People just shouldn't saying things about the Bible and/or God,  unless they actually cite verses from the Bible itself to back them up -- even if they are Christians.