30-10-2004 00:47									#91
	Remove this text

I think it's possible to make a non-religious argument for his position... but then my position is most certainly not religious and probably appears as a reasonable compromise, which ruins my "hated by all" philosophical extremist chic .

	30-10-2004 00:50									#92
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi That opens up lots of cans of worms though. The abortion rights folks, insist that abortion is part of the rights for women, and to require male consent crushes their position.

While I agree that a woman needs to have the legal right to decide without LEGALLY required arbitration from a husband, I also think that a pregnant wife who has an abortion without taking a personal initiative to privately talk with the husband beforehand is being grossly insensitive and cold-hearted with her husband.


So basically -- no, a woman's right should not be legally tied to the husband. But, a wife who loves her husband will privately talk with her husband through the decision-making process.

Of course, this is only in concern of those husbands who are loyal, responsible, and not abusive and are in every way, part of their wife's life.

	30-10-2004 03:10									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Human life doesn't begin until the mind works. Otherwise it's all plumbing...

Societies that treat developing humans as plumbing are really heading in the wrong direction.

By far your worse argument is your response to the reversible comatose patient. You say "He was and is a part of society, so I count that as life." Here you do value potential life because the life has already impacted society.

It's nice to have such a nuanced, bullshit position on something that has killed, what, 40 million kids now?

quote: I call BS -- Bush has declared a number of times, publicly, that he strongly believes that marriage is only between a man and a woman. THIS implies his strong support for the amendment of bigotry and discrimination.

He does not want the most powerful government in the world to advocate and accept federally recognized unions between gays. I think this is important because otherwise people can marry a soup can otherwise. To maintain some level of consistency in the process ,at the very least, he is justified . He is not stopping you from holding hands or going to gay rallies or whatever gay things you like to do. But he is stopping you from a federally sanctioned union, which is much more reasonable I think we can all agree.

	30-10-2004 03:18									#94
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf He does not want the most powerful government in the world to advocate and accept federally recognized unions between gays. I think this is important because otherwise people can marry a soup can otherwise. To maintain some level of consistency in the process ,at the very least, he is justified . He is not stopping you from holding hands or going to gay rallies or whatever gay things you like to do. But he is stopping you from a federally sanctioned union, which is much more reasonable I think we can all agree.

Why do you dehumanize gays by comparing marriage between two people of same gender to that of one's desire to marry an inanimate object?

And an amendment that actively promotes discrimination against a minority group is NEVER, EVER reasonable.

	30-10-2004 03:25									#95
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: And an amendment that actively promotes discrimination against a minority group is NEVER, EVER reasonable.

I have a minority group called a gang, we like to shoot people and hit up banks, holla holla.

quote: Why do you dehumanize gays by comparing marriage between two people of same gender to that of one's desire to marry an inanimate object?

There are plenty of reasons to legalize same-sex marriage. And soup-can marriages. And pet-marriages.

At the same time, you need to draw a line. Marriage is and has always been between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation and raising children. The moment you make it so obviously an institution of sodomy and pleasure-seeking is the moment the country and its people lose some respect and dignity.

	30-10-2004 03:30									#96
	Remove this text

For now, I'm not going any further down the road of migraines with you, Wiggy.

	30-10-2004 03:35									#97
	Got spare money?

Brave Sir Robin ran away
Bravely, ran away...away...
When danger reared its ugly head
He bravely turned his tail and fled
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out
Bravely talking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin

	30-10-2004 03:52									#98
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

How dare you use the power of the python AGAINST a gay person!!

	30-10-2004 04:40									#99
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf At the same time, you need to draw a line. Marriage is and has always been between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation and raising children. The moment you make it so obviously an institution of sodomy and pleasure-seeking is the moment the country and its people lose some respect and dignity.

I'll take this up.

1) Marriage never has, and never will be, about procreation. Procreation and marriage are unrelated activities.

2) The line is drawn by wherever society accepts it. There is no rhyme or reason as to why we accept some pairings as legitimate and others are not, it is arbitrary. You directly represent the type of thought which opposed interacial marriage. Public morality is in a state of constant evolution, and is reaching the state in which many can accept gay marriage. As a society we DO accept sodomy now, and all the wonderful pleasure it brings to its participants.

With all the evil things happening in the world, that gay people simply want a peaceful good thing like marriage is drawing opposition is plain sick. The conservative establishment should be more concerned with the issue of promoting equality among men and building bridges to a peaceful world than what people's private sexual preferences are in their home. How dare you oppose something that will make other people happy with no harm or cost to yourself.

	30-10-2004 05:08									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: 1) Marriage never has, and never will be, about procreation. Procreation and marriage are unrelated activities.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever read in my life.

I guess if you accept that, you can justify any definition of marriage. Marriage is a cultural fling that changes generation from generation. Do with it what you will!

	30-10-2004 05:10									#101
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Marriage is about love.

The marriages vows aren't promises to procreate, IIRC.

	30-10-2004 05:12									#102
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

The generational shift into making marriage about sodomy and screwing members of ths same sex, solely for the purposes of pleasure, is quite the pillaging of a once honored, family institution.

	30-10-2004 05:13									#103
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf At the same time, you need to draw a line. Marriage is and has always been between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation and raising children. The moment you make it so obviously an institution of sodomy and pleasure-seeking is the moment the country and its people lose some respect and dignity.

I wonder where's the dignity:

- Britney Spears get married for 6 hours in order to have sex (with a man), or
- two old Women who loved each other and lived together for the last 40 years finally get married.

	30-10-2004 05:14									#104
	Got spare money?

It's scary but his argument is common in the anti-gay marriage camp. They don't seem to be able to distinguish between a bowl of soup, a vulnerable child and a free thinking, consenting adult

	30-10-2004 05:18									#105
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf The generational shift into making marriage about sodomy and screwing members of ths same sex, solely for the purposes of pleasure, is quite the pillaging of a once honored, family institution.

The definition of marriage has always shifted in history

At first, it was an institution whose aim was to define a man who is responsible for the children.
Then it became an institution that made women dependent of their husband, legally as well as economically.
Then (during the 20th century), marriage was about love. Reproductive issues were much less important, as the children of unmarried couples got recognized, and as non-reproductive sex appeared.
Finally, today, marriage has completely lost its bond with reproduction, which is only a continuation of the trend naturally started by women's freedom and contraception. It is so unbound with reproduction that some countries who allow same-sex marriage forbid these couples from adopting children (like Belgium). Marriage and parenting is now completely unbundled.

	30-10-2004 05:22									#106
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: I wonder where's the dignity: - Britney Spears get married for 6 hours in order to have sex (with a man), or - two old Women who loved each other and lived together for the last 40 years finally get married.

First of all, marriage is open to abuse. No need for the government to endorse further abuse.

And yes, gay people can love each other. But because homosexuals universally seek to discourage a culture of love tied with procreation, and the institution that provides and has provided for centuries for the healthy American family, the government need not endorse their practice.

Especially when their practice involves sodomy and degenerative and fruitless lustfulness, in many cases.

	30-10-2004 05:22									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Wiglaf... you remind me of what Bush would be like if he posted!

	30-10-2004 05:26									#108
	Inflate your Upload Space

Cool!

	30-10-2004 05:27									#109
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Finally, today, marriage has completely lost its bond with reproduction,

What?

	30-10-2004 05:27									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy Wiglaf... you remind me of what Bush would be like if he posted!

Why did you have to say something he would take as a compliment?

	30-10-2004 05:28									#111
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Hey Sir Robin is back.

	30-10-2004 05:31									#112
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf Especially when their practice involves sodomy and degenerative and fruitless lustfulness, in many cases.

I am 23; I am currently having a "degenerative and fruitless lustfulness" with my girlfriend for the time being. It doesn't hinder us from having projects of living together, and having kids, once this becomes timely.

Yet, for the time being, all sex I have with my girlfriend is utterly "fruitless" as we make a point of not having kids before the end of her studies.

Does it mean we are not worthy of marrying, since we have sex in an avowed non-reproducive way?

	30-10-2004 05:33									#113
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

You are suggesting that marriage is predominantly an institution of fruitless lustfulness? That's brilliant

	30-10-2004 05:39									#114
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf You are suggesting that marriage is predominantly an institution of fruitless lustfulness?

Yes.

I am suggesting that marriage is -since ~the middle of the 20th century- primarily a matter of love between two people.These people, as a token of their love, have sex, although it doesn't systematically lead to the birth of a child (what we calll "family planning").
Sometimes, these people want to go through a major common undertaking, which is having a child. Yet, most of the sex a married couple will have, is non-reproductive. This is why modern families have between one and three children, rather than 5 or 6 like in the 18th century.

	30-10-2004 05:56									#115
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf You are suggesting that marriage is predominantly an institution of fruitless lustfulness? That's brilliant

I resent your portrayal of two people comitting to each other in a loving relationship as "fruitless". Marriage is about the union of individuals, not the mere act of reproduction. Worrying about having marriage for the explicit sake of procreation is more profane than having marriage for the sake of love between two people.

And once again, you 're worry about something which doesn't matter. Explain to me YOUR stake in this issue and how gay rights effects YOU.

	30-10-2004 06:16									#116
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Yes. I am suggesting that marriage is -since ~the middle of the 20th century- primarily a matter of love between two people.

If you cannot make the distinction that marriage is 1000000000000 times the procreative institution that homosexual marriages would be, then you are not worth talking to.

quote: Worrying about having marriage for the explicit sake of procreation is more profane than having marriage for the sake of love between two people.

I think we can all agree that marriage is for BOTH LOVE AND PROCREATION, not necessarily one or the other "explicitly" as you just said. The moment you cut out the procreation bit is the moment you can justify marriage with anything, and it's also the moment you change one of the primary functions of marriage (to promote at least some sort of family structure etc)

quote: And once again, you 're worry about something which doesn't matter. Explain to me YOUR stake in this issue and how gay rights effects YOU.

This is like saying, who cares about genocide in Ethiopia if it doesn't affect me personally. In fact, why debate anything if it doesn't directly affect you.

Even so, the fundamental institution of marriage is one of the defining aspects of civilization. I'd say it's worth defending.

	30-10-2004 06:30									#117
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Why did you have to say something he would take as a compliment?

I'm going to hate myself now for as long as I live

	30-10-2004 06:31									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf I think we can all agree that marriage is for BOTH LOVE AND PROCREATION, not necessarily one or the other "explicitly" as you just said. The moment you cut out the procreation bit is the moment you can justify marriage with anything, and it's also the moment you change one of the primary functions of marriage (to promote at least some sort of family structure etc)

Now you're in a paradox. It's not necessairly about one or the other, but I can't cut out procreation for particular marriages?! You're taking two distinct stances here. Then you having something ELSE which is weird, promoting "some sort of family structure". Well, by all means then we shouldn't be discouraging gay marriage but rather encouraging gay marriage AND adoption. Even if by your raw instinct you hate gay marriage, isn't taking an impoverished baby from China and giving him to LOVING gay parents in the United States better than leaving him to rot in unsanitary conditions in China?!

quote: This is like saying, who cares about genocide in Ethiopia if it doesn't affect me personally. In fact, why debate anything if it doesn't directly affect you. Even so, the fundamental institution of marriage is one of the defining aspects of civilization. I'd say it's worth defending.

I'll accept that it bothers you on an ethical level. But then you STILL have a problem justifying your interest in this particular issue. How is it possible that you actually care more about this issue rather than the tremendous actual suffering that is taking place in the world? Are you honestly going to sit here and argue to me that the more noble fight is against homosexual marriage or is it more important that we raise awareness about the horrible human rights violations taking place in Pakistan?

Maybe it's best just to hand gay people their civil rights and fight the battles that actually matter.

	30-10-2004 06:39									#119
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Now you're in a paradox. It's not necessairly about one or the other, but I can't cut out procreation for particular marriages?!

The occassional marriage, sure. If one parent can't have kids, then obviously that is a relatively rare exception to the procreation rule.

To use that as a justification to let homosexuals invade the practice and further degrade the institution to MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE seriously de-value propagation is absurd.

quote: Maybe it's best just to hand gay people their civil rights and fight the battles that actually matter.

It's called multi-tasking. You can be both against gay marriage AND do something else too, you know.

	30-10-2004 06:40									#120
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Wig, what does it matter to you anyway? Gay people don't oblige you to be sodomised along with them? Or am I missing something?