If you're okay with homosexual marriage would you support..

Jack...it is your right to feel and believe the way you do about Gay Marriage.

I personally am not thrilled with it either but I understand that what I think and believe is governed by my Genetics, upbringing and experience.

I have been to some places on the globe that have long and deep cultural practices that would...if I told you a few...would make you sick.

But even though I saw these cultural practices as strange....as long as there was no one being physically hurt....I learned to respect them.

Gay Marriage is the same thing.

AboveAlpha

 

Examples of them..?

 

Examples of Gay Extremists or Extremists in other Groups or Parties?

AboveAlpha

 

If they did not speak for "any" homosexual they simply would not be able to exist.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes.

What do you regard as "extremist" behaviours, and then cite some examples of extremist homosexual actions and behaviours...

 

I quite believe it.

I would not want that here either.

 

Well...as example when an Extremist Gay Rights group wanted to march in the Boston St. Patrick's Day Parade.

The issue was not about them marching as being Irish...the issue is they wanted to march as Gay Irish and do so in a most flamboyant way....as you don't see Irish in the Parade with signs saying...Hetero Only Irish Club.

The St. Patrick's Day Parade was cancelled that year much to the dismay of millions.

AboveAlpha

 

Okay.

Let me put it another way.

What would you call infiltration of already powerful homosexual lobby groups, or the creation of homosexual rights groups, by those who really wanted to gradually get access to male children?

And have you stopped to ponder if such people would see any possible incentive in doing this, as a means of eventually promoting their own agenda..?

 

Jack...just because a couple is Gay with a Male or Female child has no bearing upon any agenda other than that child's best interest.

I think time would be better spent watching our children around Priests and the like.

AboveAlpha

 

What would you call infiltration of already powerful homosexual lobby groups, or the creation of homosexual rights groups, by those who really wanted to gradually get access to male children?

And have you stopped to ponder if such people would see any possible incentive in doing this, as a means of eventually promoting their own agenda..?

 

Such an agenda is Pedophile by it's definition and nature.

Homosexuality is not specific or connected to Pedophilia.

AboveAlpha

 

Equality under the law should not be sacrificed in the name of tradition, in my opinion.

I have no problem with any consenting beings being seen as joined in the eyes of the state. 'Marriage', and 'Tradition' are matters for the church.

I think this is waht they want. Equal treatment under the law. They don't want to join your church and corrupt your kids. They just want to be able to make medical decisions for each other, get the tax advantages, and the other benefits the government bestows on couples.

I imagine gay folks don't really care if you respect them. In fact, I'd imagine that gays get no respect from you anyway, married or not. I have no problem with gay people being joined by the state for purposes of gaining access to the legal benefits of marriage. You traditionalists can decide whether or not you want to recognize them, but you do NOT have the right to use the strong arm of the government to force YOUR 'traditions' on everyone else.

 

There was also a long tradition of slavery....should that have continued ? Should anything just go on because it was always that way without consideration for a changing social order?

Clarabel[/QUOTE] For me, it doesn't fall under the concept of "equal rights." You can still get married - just not to a person of the same sex. I consider it no different than the other laws regarding marriage. Clarabel[/QUOTE]

Please...they can still get married...? That's like saying that a black person can still ride the bus, as long as it's in the back. And it is about equal rights, the courts has repeatedly said so

Clarabel[/QUOTE] I am mostly libertarian about how people live their lives. I am not going to feel differently about this. Yes, politicians can force it upon us. They do a lot of things that don't represent me.Clarabel[/QUOTE]

Libertarian..? Then you should agree that government should get out of the way of peoples private lives. Instead you twist it around as the government forcing something on you. It's not even about you.

 

IMHO the libertarian position should be that marriage agreements and contractual arrangements should be administered by the participants' religious leaders and/or lawyers, and the government should stay out of it entirely; that all marriage laws should be repealed.

 

So if you're gay, you should be told in early childhood that you will NEVER be married? When do you think is a good time to go ahead and let your fellow American citizens know that they will never enjoy the happiness or benefits of marriage that they see their fellow citizens enjoying? Because I know that even in childhood (14-1, women start dreaming about weddings, dresses, and all the happiness that comes with a marriage. Are you saying that we should let gays go ahead and dream about something they will never have, or should we just instruct them in middle or high school that marriage will NEVER be an option for them? It's kind of wrong to let gay kids grow up dreaming. If we are really going to restrict marriage to them, shouldn't we at least tell them at an early age?

 

Well said!! Bravo!!!

 

Clearly so.


Have you stopped to ponder if such people would see any possible incentive in hijacking the homosexual groups , as a means of eventually promoting their own agenda..?

 

No.


.

 

It is two different matters/subjects.

End of story.

 

I fear we are talking at crossed purposes.

I was speaking about the homosexual lobby groups being hijacked(which there is history of), by paedophiles, who then use that position to gradually push for "paedophile rights". I was speaking about the dangers of this.

Do you have a view on that?

 

What consenting adults do among themselves is none of my concern.

Homos getting married doesn't infringe upon my rights. Multiple adults entering into a relationship doesn't personally effect me in the least.

I guess I fail to see the issue.

 

So is this it then? Is that what it all comes down to, a selfish drive? No matter what anyone does, and it's wider social implications as long as it is not directly effecting you, it's fine?

 

Call it whatever you want, but the fact remains that I respect the right's of consenting adults to do as they please, as long as nobody is victimized in the process. Social implications be damned.