[Gobbler]

Does throwing barrels at plumbers make you a better gorilla?

[floppydisk]

Is that your definition of a gorilla?

[Zatoichi]

well, if the only other thing they might throw is poo ... then yes, I'd say it makes you a better gorilla.

[Gobbler]

Also, I find that tie makes him look very dashing. Maybe we've got it all wrong and he's trying to formulate some sort of message, it's just that we aren't ready for it yet.

[Gobbler]

PRT:

Halogen lamps. Imagine being one. And now I have that sound of quadrillions of screaming atoms in my head, as they're being ionized over and over again, just for humanity's perverse viewing pleasure.

[Deucaon]

You know if the government got rid of the tax/inheritance inequality between singles and couples then there would be a lot less homosexuals demanding their so-called rights. Plus there'd be a whole lot less bureaucracy.

[J m HofMarN]

So-called rights.... So marriage and the socio economic perks it brings is not an actual right? Please explain why homosexuals demanding this so-called right are harmful to society at large.

[Deucaon]

J m HofMarN, on 27 December 2010 - 07:21 PM, said:

So-called rights.... So marriage and the socio economic perks it brings is not an actual right? Please explain why homosexuals demanding this so-called right are harmful to society at large.

If it's granted by the government then it's not a right, it's a privilege. In this case it's an overly glorified privilege. It's an overly glorified privilege defended by the same type of people who wish it banned. The kind that wish to use the government to make everybody do what they want them to do. Of course the only reason the vast majority of homosexuals care is because of the tax/inheritance benefits. Apart from that, marriage is a completely foreign concept to homosexuals. The purpose of marriage is to legally protect the wives of the union so the husband doesn't skip bail when the wife gets pregnant. Since homosexuals don't breed, they have no need for marriage. It has nothing to do with love or whatever airheads say. It's a legal contract.

As far as "allowing" marriage between homosexuals, I think it's beneficial for "society" (by which you mean government, obviously) to "allow" it. Otherwise they'll hide their homosexuality, find a spouse and breed. Then "society" will be stuck with it for at least another generation. Of course I believe that all marriage should be outlawed or unrecognized by the government. That way it's all equal and there will be much less bureaucracy. That's with my society, of course. My ideas for foreign societies differ somewhat.

[J m HofMarN]

So then what do you consider to be basic human rights? Is a privilege less important then a right? Why or why not? Why are gays who want to be able to marry "the same type" as bigots who are against gay marriage for no reason? Please explain that completely random assertion. Also please explain the following:

Why is marriage a completely foreign concept to homosexuals? Do they not feel love and desire to have a ceremony and documentation to prove that?
Why can't homosexuals have children? Are you against gay adoption or single parents who have homosexual partners?
Why do you not know what marriage is? Are you trying to say that that is the historical reason for marriage(It's not) or are you implying that its the current nature of marriage (it's really, really not)
Why would it benefit society to disallow or not recognize marriage?
Why would homosexuals have to breed if society didnt allow them to marry? Can't they still live fairly openly if they're unmarried to people of the same sex?
Why does marriage create bureaucracy?

[Deucaon]

J m HofMarN, on 28 December 2010 - 03:27 PM, said:

So then what do you consider to be basic human rights? Is a privilege less important then a right? Why or why not? Why are gays who want to be able to marry "the same type" as bigots who are against gay marriage for no reason? Please explain that completely random assertion. Also please explain the following:

Why is marriage a completely foreign concept to homosexuals? Do they not feel love and desire to have a ceremony and documentation to prove that?
Why can't homosexuals have children? Are you against gay adoption or single parents who have homosexual partners?
Why do you not know what marriage is? Are you trying to say that that is the historical reason for marriage(It's not) or are you implying that its the current nature of marriage (it's really, really not)
Why would it benefit society to disallow or not recognize marriage?
Why would homosexuals have to breed if society didnt allow them to marry? Can't they still live fairly openly if they're unmarried to people of the same sex?
Why does marriage create bureaucracy?

I'll keep this as short as possible and this will be my last post here so as not to hijack this thread. You want more then create a thread. Anyway...

(1) "Rights" don't exist. They're just something self-entitled idiots tell themselves so they feel important. Similar to people who think they live "in the greatest country on Earth." It's so they can feel all important without having to do any work. Apart from that, it's propaganda used by powerful people to bomb powerless (or less powerful) people into submission.
(2) Homosexual supremacists and heterosexual supremacists both want to use the government as a weapon against anybody who disagrees with their opinions. To be fair, though, the government is a weapon. But I have a problem when people don't acknowledge as such then go on hiding behind so-called human rights or so-called human decency. If all marriage was illegal/unrecognised then this wouldn't be a issue at all.
(3) Marriage isn't about love. It's a legal contract designed to protect the partner which gets pregnant. I clearly wrote that in my previous post.
(4) I'm against adoption. It's better that they're raised in state care so they can grow up to faithfully serve the government like all publicly schooled children.
(5) I seem to know more about marriage than you.
(6) I wrote (IN MY PREVIOUS POST, MIND YOU) that it's healthier for society to recognise and allow homosexual marriage. Are you semilliterate or do you simply choose not to read posts you're replying to?
(7) Because society's standard is that they find a partner and have children. I mean in actual societies, not quasi-societies like the one/s America has.
(8) Regulations, information gathering and paperwork creates bureaucracy.

[Icey]

You are a crazy person, Deucaon. There is no such thing as homosexual supremacists or heterosexual supremacists, if anyone believes or identifies themselves as such, they are insane.

[Deucaon]

Icey, on 29 December 2010 - 11:31 AM, said:

You are a crazy person, Deucaon. There is no such thing as homosexual supremacists or heterosexual supremacists, if anyone believes or identifies themselves as such, they are insane.

I agree that they're insane. But they're there. You can identify the homosexual supremacists because they're the ones who argue that every historical leader was gay. I don't know why they do this, maybe because most famous historical leaders tend to be narcissistic to a fault. You can identify the heterosexual supremacists because they're the ones who believe homosexuality can be cured through social conditioning. Of course homosexuality can no more be cured by social conditioning than schizophrenia or podophilia can. In any case they both use the government to enforce their view of the world, like all supremacists do. Homosexual supremacists believe that homosexuality must be idolized and heterosexual supremacists believe that homosexuality must be suppressed.

[J m HofMarN]

I created a thread for this in debate club. Please go about your pointless random thinkage. Also, hiya Icey!

[Icey]

Hey dude, I came back after getting a digest with this craziness in it. It was like offensively... I lack the words to properly express myself.

[J m HofMarN]

Was it from newswatch magazine? Those guys are awesomely crazy and they send you free magazines full of pictures of Obama and Mao if you tell them youre crazy too.