Vote: no for same sex marriage

1. 84

   dineaneposted 14 years ago

   650 posts?
   
   I haven't read them all, so if someone else already expressed this sentiment, then I apologize...but are y'all really still entertaining this troll?
   
   And has anyone else tried to help educate him?
   
   M-hmm, check the definitions of "approved" versus "proven". Even without reading 90% of this thread, I'm sure most who bothered to reply don't care what you or your sources have "approved" on this topic.
   
   On second thought, I can tell I'm not all that interested in what you think has been proven, either.

   report
   1. 61

      mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ====
      it has been proved in science and has been stated in all holly books- if you knew them-; that:
      NO SEX BETWEEN SAME SEX;
      NO GAYS;
      NO LESBIAN;
      AND It's MENTAL DISTORTED SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP, AN HAS PSYCHOLOGICAL BACKGROUNDS.
      So, gays has right to seek psychological help and therapy to recover and become straight guys without any distorted behavior.

      report
2. 67

   its_the_skittle_eposted 14 years ago

   "I believe we are as human kind we should defend our human rights..."
   
   What are our human rights?
   You don't know what they are no one does.
   
   People should be able to love who they want to love. Love has no gender.

   report
   1. 61

      mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ===
      this is a human right..
      yes, love has no gender; but, sex has gender..
      love not means sex,,,
      you love your mother, your dad; and it doesn't mean sex..
      i hope it's clear

      report
      1. 67

         its_the_skittle_eposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         No it's not.
         
         Sex is meant to be something shared between to people that love each other unconditionally. Yes you love your mother and father and friends. But that one person who you love more then anything in the world, guy or girl thats true love. Sex shouldn't just be about sex. Sex is a thing that makes 2 peoples love stronger.

         report
         1. 61

            mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            ===
            yes, love has no gender; but sex has a gender..
            but love doesn't mean sex all times.
            and sex mean man and woman; and it doesn't mean same sex; because, sex has a gender like electric; positive attract negative; but, not the same.

            report
3. 60

   pacwriterposted 14 years ago

   Everyone is entitled to an opinion. That opinion can be labeled "hate" speech by anyone who disagrees. It has become the common tactic of so many groups to discredit any idea they oppose.
   
   My thought on same-sex marriage is this:
   
   Nature has a purpose for everything. We may not understand the purpose but how can we argue with nature? If it is natural it has to be right.
   
   The male Human body has one input port - the mouth. It has two output ports - the anus and the penis.
   
   An output port used for input is against nature.
   
   There I said it, you don't agree, that's okay too. Just allow me the right to express my opinion and don't classify it as hate speech.

   report
   1. 67

      its_the_skittle_eposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Ok yes, the Penis and Anus are out ports but so is the vagina and the female anus.

      report
   2. 59

      calebdposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Everyone has a right to their own opinion. You, however, don't have the right to be taken seriously. Your input/output port analogy is ridiculous. Perhaps you think spitting is unnatural then because that's an "output" function fulfilled by an "input." Also, I'm not sure how your input/output analogy applies to marriage. I wasn't aware of marriage ceremonies requiring union of any input/output "ports." You go to some crazy weddings if you do. You're simply using your analogy to express a distaste for homosexuality. That in no way qualifies as an argument against same-sex marriage, which if you don't like, you don't have to attend or participate in.
      
      Your opinion cannot be reliably classified as hate speech without you using it to actively discriminate. Your utterance does not inflict injury on this forum nor does it incite a breach of the peace. However, people who are offended are free to term what you say hate speech if they feel it meets those criteria.
      
      The best way to discredit idiocy is by allowing it to be aired freely so its seams will be exposed and we can pick it apart.

      report
4. 59

   calebdposted 14 years ago

   Gratuitous semi-colons!!!

   report
   1. 61

      mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ====
      yes; it's clear that gays relationship is just a Gratuitous relationship; and a lifeless....

      report
   2. 67

      its_the_skittle_eposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      LOL what

      report
5. 85

   gamergirlposted 14 years ago

   See? I said he wouldn't understand because he doesn't have a grasp on English.
   
   I was right.
   
   Whee!

   report
   1. 66

      Eng.Mposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      hiiiiiee

      report
6. 81

   SweetiePieposted 14 years ago

   This thread is still going on?  Maybe Hubpages needs to make a rule about how there can no longer be threads started to support gay bashing or racism because these guys do not seem to be stopping.

   report
   1. 66

      Eng.Mposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      it'd better if they do

      report
      1. 66

         Eng.Mposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         and that doesn't mean I agree with gay marriage
         but I ban talking about it on the hubpages
         .
         .
         .
         .

         report
7. 66

   Eng.Mposted 14 years ago

   report
8. 79

   Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

   As has been repeated again and again on this thread; being gay in not a choice...it is no more a choice than choosing to be a natural redhead or blonde.

   report
9. 79

   Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

   Okay, my final word in this thread. Don't assume that you know what goes on in others hearts. You obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

   report
   1. 61

      mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ===
      Only God knew what's in our hearts; and i just say as jesus declared." I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again."(John 3:3)
      and also " if anyone's name was not found in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." (Revelation 20:15).
      So, No gay in the book of life...

      report
10. 59

    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    Is "Cole" in the book? Guess I'm goin to hell. My name isn't there. Damn!

    report
    1. 61

       mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       ====just born again

       report
11. 59

    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    That would be lying. And then I would go to hell anyways...

    report
    1. 61

       mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       =========
       But, God knew...
       and you could see the religious view in this short forum:
       
       http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/13826

       report
12. 61

    mohamedhmmposted 14 years ago

    
    gays are taking too much power and more rights over our human rights and politician interests that the government gives us the wrong message by promoting gays; Just for their political benefits regardless what's right and what's wrong.
    
    and it's clear for us; gays not the answer for our problems or sickness; and we need to be more caring about the real solutions and real human rights and there is no meaning for being a gay or support this act; because it's just a choice for life; but; it's wrong choice and immorality choice.
    

    report
13. 61

    mohamedhmmposted 14 years ago

    Miss California Carrie Prejean ,the Miss USA pageant is saying gay couples should not be allowed to marry; and she is right and God with her.
    And; Miss California goes to Washington, plans to campaign against gay marriage; and it's great mission for the beauty of our life, and we should be with her in this mission:
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/ny- … 7474.story

    report
14. 61

    mohamedhmmposted 14 years ago

    
    A recent poll released this week shows that the majority of American voters do not want their state to allow gay marriage; So, the law makers should realize;that, there is a big difference between human rights and gays act; because to be gay it's illegal act to give them legal rights.
    
    
    http://www.christianpost.com/Society/Ho … -state-02/
    
    

    report
    1. 73

       thranaxposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       What about states that already allow it?
       
       I am from Massachusetts, where in fact, Gay-Lesbian Marriage is allowed. I do not see anything that is eating upon my rights as an American citizen and I do not see any problem with allowing a person to choose who they want to be with and who they think they should be allowed to marry.
       I am not saying that homosexuality isn't against someones morals or verses a religion or religious beliefs. I am speaking in all Law forms only, what they chose to do should be up to them. I have a few friends that are Gay, a few that are Lesbians, and a few that are Bisexual.
       Being of a different orientation shouldn't effect how you view someone in terms of friendship etc. A gay male doesn't like all men, a lesbian female doesn't like all girls, and a bisexual doesn't like every single person they meet. They all pick and choose just like a strait person and try to get with who they aim for.
       Why can't people realize it is the year 2009, it will soon be 2010. This is a digital age with many real world changes in it. Nowadays the general population doesn't judge people by Race, Gender, or Sexual Prefaces. Same goes with religion. I have friends who are Jewish and friends who praise Allah. These friends get along with me and each other just fine. Most people judge on how rich they are, what there interests are, and what they can currently accomplish.
       
       ~thranax~

       report
       1. 79

          Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Some people prefer to live in the dark ages.

          report
          1. 73

             thranaxposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             So true.
             If I may interject, without meaning anything negative, Mohamedhmm reminds me of the historic figure of "Malcolm X" but in this terms, not for religion but almost in a religious sense in anti-same sex marriage.
             
             
             The way you provide your answers and the flow of the words make me feel that impression, also because I seen a movie about him on the History Channel and its very similar.
             
             ~thranax~

             report
             1. 61

                mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                ===
                
                I am not alone;the history, science, Torah, Bible, Koran, and God with me in this mission; anti same sex marriage, gays.
                and it's for our own good as a human live in one land looking for wellness here and after; and to be gays is immorality behaviors, and not acceptable for us as a human living with many sources of knowledge, health, science, religion; that, they don't agree with this act as choice.
                
                it's not for me; it's for us.

                report
          2. 61

             mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             ====
             
             that's right; to be gay; it's like living in dark ages where lot town committed this crimes-gays- and man doing sex with man; but, in the end  God destroyed their town.; and now it's the DEAD SEA...
             So, gays came back again from lot town to take us to another lot town and dark ages again.
             gays will harm themselves and us too; because we fall in their circles under human rights claims, civil union, and liberal views.
             Morals are the same in the past, now, and later; they don't change by time or place; but, it's our choice to pass God test.
             But, How many caring about morals, values, and God.
             we have mission and purpose in this life; but, to be gay not one of them.
             

             report
             1. 73

                thranaxposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Put your God and all Gods aside and please tell me a scientific and psychological and philological approach to why we should vote no to Same-Sex Marriage, where places like here in Massachusetts it is working well, with only rare instances of any resistance at all. And when you say this, remember theirs a lot of history of the United States here in Massachusetts, including the founding fathers. Your stand on the issue, if you yourself truly believe against it you must defend your case to every single living individual to change there minds. Say your trying to convince an atheist of this (someone who denies the existence of god )(Personal note, I am not an atheist).
                
                Also, saying you can provide that, also in your post tell us how you plan on addressing the issue to someone who is Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual, and what would your means be of telling them, regardless of how they were born or think, that they are wrong?
                -Remember, if you say something like they should be killed or exiled or quarantined, you are basically bringing up more history from Massachusetts, over in Salem was the Witchcraft scare. People use to burn females at the stake for very small evidence saying there "witches" and are evil/ageist god. Applying this will make everyone not believe anything you say because basically you are saying "hey lets destroy people because we don't like how they think" which here in America has been proven to be wrong and unjust.
                
                ~thranax~

                report
                1. 61

                   mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   ====
                   AIDS

                   report
                   1. 73

                      thranaxposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      This doesn't answer the questions that must be. Your whole argument is disproved in this one statement unless you can learn or provide the answers completely.
                      
                      ~thranax~

                      report
                2. 59

                   tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Well, that's not exactly true. The people of Massachusetts were not allowed to vote on this issue, and the state legislature blatantly violated the state constitution by denying a referendum when opposition groups gathered the required signatures from registered voters to demand one. That having been said, the state is no more screwed up than it was before just because of that, although the will of the people was disregarded (again).
                   
                   It seems to me that the worst thing people opposed to same sex marriage can do for their cause is to go on and on about being opposed to homosexuality in general. They only end up looking like extremist cranks (like someone who has been posting on this thread quite a lot). Opposition to same sex marriage does not necessarily have anything to do with approving or not approving of who someone wants to sleep with or fall in love with.
                   
                   Likewise, the worst thing people in favor of same sex marriage can do is try to paint anyone and everyone opposed to same sex marriage as crazy, ranting, homophobes and/or religious extremists. Not everyone opposed to same sex marriage is motivated by religious fervor or hates/fears homosexuals.
                   
                   The calm, rational argument will rise to the top, while "God shall smite thee!" or "You hateful Nazi coward!" arguments congeal on the bottom.

                   report
                   1. 59

                      calebdposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      There is precedent for natural law arguments overruling the will of the majority. You can't honestly argue that ignoring "the will of the people" was what happened. It's reprehensible that the majority are even expected to give consent to equal rights for the disenfranchised. There is specific constitutional backing for protecting the rights of the minority from tyranny of the majority. Retrograde populism isn't a right.
                      
                      I'd love to hear a calm, rational argument against gay marriage. I'm fairly certain not all people who are against it are religious or necessarily bigoted in practice but their views are. If opposition does not have anything to do with approval of a position, what does it mean? Is there really a need to draw false equivalence between the two positions? I'm sure it sounds balanced but those two positions are nothing alike. Hyperbole, certainly, but nowhere near equivalent.

                      report
                      1. 59

                         tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         Sure you can. The laws of the state provide for a means for the people to express their views in such instances, and those consitutional means were disregarded by the legislature. Had the people of Massachusetts been give a chance to have their voice heard I expect that they would have voted against same sex marriage by a small margin and in favor of civil unions by a wide margin, but they were not given that chance. Instead, 7 people decided for almost 7 million, and the legislature hid from their responsibility like cowards. But in any case, the world hasn't ended because of it.

                         report
                         1. 59

                            calebdposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                            No, the world hasn't ended. That much is clear. There is no requirement for that specific constitutional mean to be applied in every case. 7 people decide for millions multiple times a year. Simply because it's one of those hot-button issues does not mean that going through the judiciary was ignoring the will of the people. There have always been multiple avenues for legislation.

                            report
                            1. 59

                               tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                               The specific facts of the particular case in MA did indeed mean the will of the people was ignored. If that worked out in a way you are happy with or not, it remains.

                               report
15. 60

    Leland Jansonposted 14 years ago

    Hmm, someone using religion as an argument against homosexuality?  How original.

    report
16. 79

    Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

    This conversation is going no where. You keep repeating the same things over and over again and don't listen to the facts. You are wasting bandwidth.

    report
    1. 61

       mohamedhmmposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       ===
       
       but what do you have to add, already i explained why gays not right choice for them or for us.
       So, what do you have could change that; any religious view or science view could support you?
       i doubt in that.
       

       report
17. 0

    isis_dreams2002posted 14 years ago

    i vote yes to same sex marrages as no one has the right to stop people in love being together no matter who they are . so why should any one give up the person they love just because some one else does not like it .

    report
    1. 59

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       That is all great, but isn't really the issue. Whether or not same sex marriage is legal doesn't mean people can't be together or love each other. It is a specific legal distinction.

       report
       1. 0

          Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yes, but of course they don't have the legal benefits of those who are married either, now, do they?  I'm strongly with Iowa's ruling on this.  There is no constitutional precedence. It is legally wrong as well as ethically wrong in denying a human right.
          
          She has the right idea.  She just doesn't seem fond of dragging in 1/2 argued stances on legalities...  At the core of this, her thoughts are the valid ones towards realizing full human rights.
          
          edit:  You sure have a cute dog for someone I disagree with entirely!

          report
          1. 59

             tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             There you go. That is the crux of the issue, not who is afraid of whom or what is going to get God mad at you.

             report
          2. 59

             tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             LOL! I'll take any positivity I can get!

             report
          3. 0

             isis_dreams2002posted 14 years agoin reply to this

             that is correct but I do believe that no matter if it is same sex or opppsite sex marrages all legal law findings should be the same.

             report
18. 0

    isis_dreams2002posted 14 years ago

    i vote yes to same sex marrages as no one has the right to stop people in love being together no matter who they are . so why should any one give up the person they love just because some one else does not like it .

    report
19. 61

    mohamedhmmposted 14 years ago

    Gays=immorality
    Gays=AIDS
    Gays=Anti-God
    Gays=disorder act
    Gays=HIV
    Gays=homosexual>>>>> Anti-life, Anti-health, anti- kids rights, and anti common human rights
    Gays >>><<<<< Sickness

    report
20. 59

    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    Don't be shy, tell us how you really feel.

    report
    1. 73

       Maddie Ruudposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Thread closed by admin.
       
       Nothing further to be gained here.  Both sides have stated their case, but what started as a debate has now degenerated into personal attacks and borderline hate speech.

       report