Zack Addy!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
tlongII said:
Personally, I hope that part isn't true. I don't have a problem with gay couples, but I think it would be wrong for them to raise children. Call me old-fashioned, a bigot, or whatever, but I think that's wrong.
Click to expand...

Studies have found zero evidence that children raised by gay couples are any less happy or well-adjusted (as children or later in life) than children raised by straight couples. So, if that's your concern, it's unfounded.

If your opposition isn't based on the welfare of the child, then yes, it's just bigotry.

And it will happen. It's not at all uncommon across Europe and as religious fundamentalism drops in this country, it will become perfectly acceptable here, too. Opposition to gay marriage and gay adoption drops with age. As the older generation passes on and the younger, more tolerant generation becomes the majority of the voter base, gay rights will gain more and more traction.
 
Minstrel said:
The comforting thing is, for all the resistance from religious bigots and "traditionalists," it's pretty obvious that they're doomed to end up on the wrong side of history. The trend within the country and the trend in the democratic world at large makes it very obvious that eventually gay marriage and adoption by gay couples will be standard part of American society.

A hundred years from now, people will look back on the people who oppose gay marriage in today's society with the same sense of baffled tragedy as people today look back on racists who opposed interracial marriage.
Click to expand...


If we keep redefining everything, maybe a hundred years from now people will call a television a watermelon instead.


What if they look back on people who tried to equate an unfortunate brain disorder with skin color as the people who finished off this country once and for all?
 
I'm in the phillipines right now, its a VERY religious country, I'm pretty surprised how many transvestites are out walking around the streets.....like dudes in dresses and lipstick...pretty crazy.
 
Shooter said:
Yep, I'm afraid you're right. This country has turned its back on many of its traditional values, and it's a sad state of affairs.
Click to expand...

Yes, but you should understand that that's exactly what many people used to say about the idea of interracial marriage and women's rights. Much unhappiness about how America was losing its way by abandoning traditional notions of the woman's place in society and the purity of races. And how it would hurt American society. Society hasn't been hurt by those things in the slightest, and it won't be hurt by gay rights.

I understand that you will never, ever change your mind on this. That's fine. I'm heartened by the fact that people with your mindset will dwindle further and further into minority until, like past notions of the ills of women voting or taking part in the workforce or the ills of interractial marriage, the whole idea of preventing gays from marrying or adopting becomes laughable.

We're going the way of the Roman Empire, with more and more degradation every passing day.
Click to expand...

The Roman empire didn't fall apart due to homosexuality being acceptable. It fell apart due to corruption, the undermining of the democratic process and the concomitant curtailment of individual rights. Also, empires are inherently unstable, in the historical view. You can subjugate far-flung provinces for only so long.
 
bodyman5001 said:
What if they look back on people who tried to equate an unfortunate brain disorder
Click to expand...

You've already admitted that you're a troll on subjects like these, so you'll forgive me if I don't rise to the bait. ;)
 
Last edited:
Minstrel said:
Yes, but you should understand that that's exactly what many people used to say about the idea of interracial marriage and women's rights. Much unhappiness about how America was losing its way by abandoning traditional notions of the woman's place in society and the purity of races. And how it would hurt American society. Society hasn't been hurt by those things in the slightest, and it won't be hurt by gay rights.

I understand that you will never, ever change your mind on this. That's fine. I'm heartened by the fact that people with your mindset will dwindle further and further into minority until, like past notions of the ills of women voting or taking part in the workforce or the ills of interractial marriage, the whole idea of preventing gays from marrying or adopting becomes laughable.



The Roman empire didn't fall apart due to homosexuality being acceptable. It fell apart due to corruption, the undermining of the democratic process and the concomitant curtailment of individual rights. Also, empires are inherently unstable, in the historical view. You can subjugate far-flung provinces for only so long.
Click to expand...

do you believe this acceptance will eventually fall the slippery slope to other "taboos" such as pedophilla, beastilaity, etc?

Why or why not?

I believe there are advocacy groups such as NAMBLA out there right now....maybe in 15-20 years, who knows what will happen.
 
Makes me sad that you would think that what I said isn't true.

What isn't a brain disorder these days?

Not trying to "troll" as people say, just trying to play devil's advocate.
 
Xericx said:
do you believe this acceptance will eventually fall the slippery slope to other "taboos" such as pedophilla, beastilaity, etc?

Why or why not?
Click to expand...

No, because unlike gay marriage, pedophilia and beastiality aren't only between consenting adults.

Pedophilia has actually been shown to harm children, emotionally. Beastiality would fall under mistreatment of animals.

Legislating against harm to others is perfectly valid. Legislating "I don't personally like it, so you please don't do it" isn't.
 
Minstrel said:
Yes, but you should understand that that's exactly what many people used to say about the idea of interracial marriage and women's rights. Much unhappiness about how America was losing its way by abandoning traditional notions of the woman's place in society and the purity of races. And how it would hurt American society. Society hasn't been hurt by those things in the slightest, and it won't be hurt by gay rights.

I understand that you will never, ever change your mind on this. That's fine. I'm heartened by the fact that people with your mindset will dwindle further and further into minority until, like past notions of the ills of women voting or taking part in the workforce or the ills of interractial marriage, the whole idea of preventing gays from marrying or adopting becomes laughable.



The Roman empire didn't fall apart due to homosexuality being acceptable. It fell apart due to corruption, the undermining of the democratic process and the concomitant curtailment of individual rights. Also, empires are inherently unstable, in the historical view. You can subjugate far-flung provinces for only so long.
Click to expand...

This is pure and utter bullshit. The part about our society not being hurt by certain things. Women's rights may have been the right thing to advance morally but the feminists have sure as shit hurt this country.

Tell me what the country was like in the 50s. I wasn't there, but from what I have witnessed, men worked and women stayed at home and raised children. The man provided a home, a car and family vacations and such. The women taught the children to read and write and watched them when they weren't at school.

Fast forward 50 years and most women HAVE to work. There are very few one income families and the ones I see live paycheck to paycheck because the couple (or just the man) is stubborn and wants to live that way.

There may have been plenty of horrible things in the past, but there are plenty of things we have screwed up in the future.

PS....when I am outnumbered in a discussion 100 to 1 because I am talking to people from the Pacific Northwest, I tend to try and tread lightly as this board is my stop for Trailblazer info. Not discussion with a bunch of loony lefties.

So, I will say what I feel like but try not to get banned.

I admitted that my disgusting sister clouds my perspective on this issue, that doesn't make me a troll. That just makes me like someone in a debate about abortion, I have very firm feelings on it and it would take a lot to change.
 
Minstrel said:
No, because unlike gay marriage, pedophilia and beastiality aren't only between consenting adults.

Pedophilia has actually been shown to harm children, emotionally. Beastiality would fall under mistreatment of animals.

Legislating against harm to others is perfectly valid. Legislating "I don't personally like it, so you please don't do it" isn't.
Click to expand...


You know, I bet the billions of cows we slaughter for food would rather get a little back door action from some crazy guy once in a while. You probably want to stop everyone from eating meat too...except gay guys.
 
Minstrel said:
No, because unlike gay marriage, pedophilia and beastiality aren't only between consenting adults.

Pedophilia has actually been shown to harm children, emotionally. Beastiality would fall under mistreatment of animals.

Legislating against harm to others is perfectly valid. Legislating "I don't personally like it, so you please don't do it" isn't.
Click to expand...

What if the dog is the "giver"?

As for pedophillia.....its exploitation, but again, its been tolerated in the past....perhaps as society changes, it will be more tolerated in the future. you never know.
 
Xericx said:
What if the dog is the "giver"?

As for pedophillia.....its exploitation, but again, its been tolerated in the past....perhaps as society changes, it will be more tolerated in the future. you never know.
Click to expand...
Maybe all heterosexuals are going to hell. You never know.
 
bodyman5001 said:
You know, I bet the billions of cows we slaughter for food would rather get a little back door action from some crazy guy once in a while.
Click to expand...

I think that's an excellent point. There's definitely an ethical dilemma to slaughtering animals when we don't need to for survival--essentially for "entertainment" (good taste).

Clearly, animal rights fall well down the ladder of most people's (including mine) ethical priorities compared to rights for humans. But I could certainly envision society moving away from killing animals for food in the future. I don't know that that will happen, but it might.
 
Minstrel said:
I think that's an excellent point. There's definitely an ethical dilemma to slaughtering animals when we don't need to for survival--essentially for "entertainment" (good taste).

Clearly, animal rights fall well down the ladder of most people's (including mine) ethical priorities compared to rights for humans. But I could certainly envision society moving away from killing animals for food in the future. I don't know that that will happen, but it might.
Click to expand...


I was clearly trolling, don't cherry pick what you wanna talk about:ghoti:

Oh yeah, Soylent Green.
 
Minstrel said:
Why? If you make a good point, rather than merely an attempt at "button-pushing," I'm happy to respond. ;)
Click to expand...

I always make good points. You missed the part about calling a tv a watermelon.

People used to draw on cave walls. Now we feel like we are super smart and shit.

It all boils down to what gets taught in the schools. Think about it.
 
bodyman5001 said:
You missed the part about calling a tv a watermelon.
Click to expand...

I didn't miss that, I just didn't feel there was a lot of insight. There's no redefinition going on, because the idea that "marriage" always has and always must mean between a man and a woman is essentially religious in nature. Marriage does also mean a partnership...so there doesn't need to be a redefinition to encompass two people of the same sex partnering.

The idea that this is a step towards a loss of social coherence doesn't seem very reasonable. Nobody's going to lose all sense of what's what if homosexual couples can make the same commitment to each other that hetereosexual couples make.

It all boils down to what gets taught in the schools.
Click to expand...

I think that's reversed. What gets taught in schools depends on societal beliefs. Alien overlords don't set school curriculum, society does. The trend for democratic societies has been to progress towards more individual rights, insofar as they don't infringe upon other people.
 
Minstrel said:
Studies have found zero evidence that children raised by gay couples are any less happy or well-adjusted (as children or later in life) than children raised by straight couples. So, if that's your concern, it's unfounded.

If your opposition isn't based on the welfare of the child, then yes, it's just bigotry.

And it will happen. It's not at all uncommon across Europe and as religious fundamentalism drops in this country, it will become perfectly acceptable here, too. Opposition to gay marriage and gay adoption drops with age. As the older generation passes on and the younger, more tolerant generation becomes the majority of the voter base, gay rights will gain more and more traction.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see these "so-called" studies your referring to. :lol: I seriously doubt their validity. I have no opposition to gay marriage as homosexuality is seen in many species as well as humans. Homosexuals raising their offspring is not however and is unnatural.
 
tlongII said:
I'd like to see these "so-called" studies your referring to. :lol: I seriously doubt their validity. I have no opposition to gay marriage as homosexuality is seen in many species as well as humans. Homosexuals raising their offspring is not however and is unnatural.
Click to expand...

Why not? What reasons do you have?
 
Man, I wonder how Golden State is going to defend out bigs down low? Oh my bad, I thought this was a forum about basketball. Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rastapopoulos
Bogus! "The Zack Addy Storyline Bones Fans Still Don't Understand"
Replies
16
Views
784
Hoopguru
Hoopguru
BoBoBREWSKI
Jody Allen might be the most unusual pro sports owner ever
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
sheed30
S
Natebishop3
Yang Hansen name
Replies
28
Views
2K
blazerkor
blazerkor
Denny Crane
Notice New York sports forums
Replies
2
Views
120
kreidertime
kreidertime
SharpeScooterShooter
Notice Western conference realignment - 2025
2 3
Replies
68
Views
2K
kjironman1
kjironman1

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top