Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 10/10/03 06:26 PM, SouthPhillyGangsta wrote: Male to male bonding is nasty..Girl to girl bondin is bangin!

then i'd bet you'd LOVE to see ellen degeneres and k.d. lang go at it huh?
shut the fuck up

At 10/10/03 08:35 PM, izuamoto wrote:

At 10/10/03 06:26 PM, SouthPhillyGangsta wrote: Male to male bonding is nasty..Girl to girl bondin is bangin!

then i'd bet you'd LOVE to see ellen degeneres and k.d. lang go at it huh?
shut the fuck up

Ah yes, the old "Gays are bad but lesbians are rad!" point. I will second the motion of shutting up and add my own clever comment:

"Grow up and see the United States for what it is. It will not bow to the views of one person, or of a church, or of a collection of people gathering in hate and oppression of another group of people. As Andrew Jackson said, America will be for ALL the people, or by god, it will be for NONE."

To be truly honest, I don't like gays and lesbians. I just don't.

However, does that mean that they don't get their own rights?

FUCKING NO.

The constitution includes EVERY CITIZEN OF THE U.S.A., regardless of race, sex or age. No exceptions, exchanges or negotiations.

Of course, gay marriage won't see much in church. Catholics haven't changed in a thousand years, and there's no reason that they will now. As vile as it sound's, they have the right to refuse to recognize gay marriage.

It's the gay person's choice, and should be left to him.

well i am complet6ly agaisnt gay marriage i dont feel that being gay is the way somme one i s born i belive that it is the way they r cuz they cant get no neden so fuck them why do they have to get married thats fucking sick im srry i dont have a problem with gays just the thereoy wat ever that means pok fuck this shit

i am really really amazed to learn there are still people this unenlightened and this ignorant in the world...just wow... wow... i guess things really don't change eh?

"well i am complet6ly agaisnt gay marriage"

1) learn to type
2) this's also a legal issue. and on the legal issue of this, you lose. so that overrides whatever argument you're about to say.

"i dont feel that being gay is the way somme one i s born i belive that it is the way they r"

make semi-intelligent sentences, please.
are you TRYING to say that homosexaulity is a choice? then i want to see you choose to be homosexual right now. go on, try it. what, you can't do it? but i thought it was a choice

"cuz they cant get no neden"

what?

"so fuck them why do they have to get married thats fucking sick"

because it's legally protected under the constitution. besides, even if it wasn't, what exactly is 'sick' about them getting married? different? of course. but different doesn't mean sick

"im srry i dont have a problem with gays"

bull

"just the thereoy"

the theory of what?

"wat ever that means pok fuck this shit"

what the fuck are you talking about? whatever you're smoking, i want some

At 10/12/03 10:03 PM, LaGwAgOnNoFxPuNk wrote: well i am complet6ly agaisnt gay marriage i dont feel that being gay is the way somme one i s born i belive that it is the way they r cuz they cant get no neden so fuck them why do they have to get married thats fucking sick im srry i dont have a problem with gays just the thereoy wat ever that means pok fuck this shit

I read this post at least thrice, but I still can't make out anyhting out of it! Especially the word "neden". What the hell does it mean!? Even if it was mispelled I can't think up a word to replace it.

At 10/12/03 10:03 PM, LaGwAgOnNoFxPuNk wrote: well i am complet6ly agaisnt gay marriage i dont feel that being gay is the way somme one i s born i belive that it is the way they r cuz they cant get no neden so fuck them why do they have to get married thats fucking sick im srry i dont have a problem with gays just the thereoy wat ever that means pok fuck this shit

CONGRATULATIONS!!!

You just won the "Opinionated Asshole Who Can't Type Worth Shit or Make a Valid Argument of the Day" Award!!

Way to go, YOU!!!

At 10/12/03 10:03 PM, LaGwAgOnNoFxPuNk wrote: well i am complet6ly agaisnt gay marriage i dont feel that being gay is the way somme one i s born i belive that it is the way they r cuz they cant get no neden so fuck them why do they have to get married thats fucking sick im srry i dont have a problem with gays just the thereoy wat ever that means pok fuck this shit

lyk lol om gwtf totlany i agr33 wit u i m jermy hoho i m ag 3 adn i kan taip wlel!!!!111!111

Alright, let's try to intelligently comprehend what's being said here.

So essentially you are telling us that you do not think gays should marry because you believe homosexuality is a choice and you think it's fsking sick.

Unfortunately, there's a flaw with the whole 'it makes me sick' argument, as wonderfully illustrated by essayist Scott Bidstrup here...

"It's disgusting. Has the person who says that ever watched sausage being made?

There are many things that go on in society that we would consider disgusting, but we don't outlaw them just because of that. In fact, many of these activities are quite essential to the functioning of a modern society, but we simply turn our minds to other matters and don't concern ourselves with them.

Heterosexuals need to remember that they themselves are 'disgusting' to many homosexuals; it will come as quite a surprise for them to discover that the feeling is mutual. Yet it would be ludicrous for the gay person to suggest that heterosexuality ought to be persecuted; why shouldn't it work just as well the other way around? Isn't respect and tolerance a two way street?"

And...

"The thought of gay sex is repulsive. Well, it will come as some surprise to a lot of heterosexuals to find out that, to a lot of gays, the thought of heterosexual sex is repulsive! But does that mean the discomfort of some gays to heterosexual couples should be a reason to deny heterosexuals the right to marry? I don't think so, even though the thought of a man kissing a woman is rather repulsive to many homosexuals! Well then, why should it work the other way? Besides, the same sexual practices that gays engage in are often engaged in by heterosexual couples anyway. Prompting the ever-popular gay T-shirt: "SO-DO-MY -- SO DO MY neighbors, SO DO MY friends."" ~ Scott Bidstrup

I think Pecan Pie is disgusting but I dont think it should be against the law to eat it.

At 10/13/03 01:56 AM, The_Apostate wrote: I think Pecan Pie is disgusting but I dont think it should be against the law to eat it.

Exactly.

At 10/13/03 01:56 AM, The_Apostate wrote: I think Pecan Pie is disgusting but I dont think it should be against the law to eat it.

I never had pecan pie before, but I think it is illegal for it to get married. I'm just kidding, thats a really good point.

Personally, the objection to gay marriage is repulsive, but there is one reason that I am glad of it.
Wait for it...

The objections to the marriage of gay persons is the icing on the cake of an even bigger issue: The continued failure of america to separate church and state.

The point was made earlier that the Church, as a private organization, has the right to refuse to marry gay people. However, the Church is not the only organization that can legally perform marriage.

http://usmarriagelaws.com/sear...iants_requirements/index.shtml

Scroll down to fing your state.

For example, in New Mexico: Any ordained clergyman whatsoever, without regard to the sect to which he or she may belong may perform marriages.

In New Jersy: "[various government officials] and every minister of every religion, are hereby authorized to solemnize marriage between such persons as may lawfully enter into the matrimonial relation; and every religious society, institution or organization in this State may join together in marriage such persons according to the rules and customs of the society, institution or organization."

Thereore, anyone who wants to perform a gay marriage, can.
So the real obstacle is that the US Government, which functions outside of any religeon has decreed that homosexual marriage is illegal.

Why? On what nonreligious grounds is homosexual marriage discriminated against?

(taken from http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/30/bush.gay.marriage/ )Even as he made it clear that he did not support the idea of gay marriage, Bush appeared to issue a call for tolerance.

"Yes, I am mindful that we're all sinners," the president said Wednesday when asked for his views on homosexuality. "And I caution those who may try to take the speck out of the neighbor's eye when they've got a log in their own."
...The act also defines marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."

Hmm...
I defy anyone who believes that homosexual marriage is wrong for legal, not religeous reasons to find a coherant, logical reason to back them up.

On a side note, according to US law, no state of being is illegal. They can get you for possession, but they can't touch you even if you're high as a kite.
They can make it illegal for homosexuals to marry, but they can't make it illegal for homosexuals to be married
I hear Canada's a nice place for a wedding...

At 10/2/03 06:37 AM, dannys_place7 wrote:

dumb ass basic is only 6 weeks long i joined when i was 17 1/2 thats the min and im already a corpral so shut the hell up i do know what im talking about.

6 week basic and you're a Corporal after half a year?
What are you? A liar? No North American military would send a troop with that little training overseas.

I'm in the military and I'm calling shenanigans on you.

You're banned because your attitude is offensive toward other users and you're a liar too.

At 10/12/03 10:03 PM, LaGwAgOnNoFxPuNk wrote: well i am complet6ly agaisnt gay marriage i dont feel that being gay is the way somme one i s born i belive that it is the way they r cuz they cant get no neden so fuck them why do they have to get married thats fucking sick im srry i dont have a problem with gays just the thereoy wat ever that means pok fuck this shit

Punctuations are our friends, so are captials and the rules of grammar for the english language. This makes no sense what so ever. Now you say you have no problem with them, yet you say its sick and they dont need to get married. And I think you are trying to also say that nobody is born gay they just choose to be gay. NOw before you respond to our posts, please find a dictionary, and get someone to proof reader your post before you post it again.

Haven't posted or commented on a lot of ANYthing lately, and I'm going to break my silence/hiatus to comment here.

Obviously, a thread this long? Just about everything's been covered. I won't end up enlightening anyone, but I do want to state my opinion on a few points that have likely been brought up.

1: "Being queer is a lifestyle choice."

HOW you choose to live a homosexual life is a choice. But BEING homosexual, in my opinion, is as much of a choice as is your born gender. Being a bi-sexual woman, I don't see it as kink, as cool, as 'hip'. I think people would be surprised to know how many homosexual men and women feel the way I do about it. I'm talking about the stereotypes places on everyone, BY everyone.

Being bisexual pulls me out of either sexual-orientation 'community' into one of my own. Bisexuals are seen by the straight community as being slutty, greedy, and gay. Bisexuals are seen by the gay community as being fence-sitters, greedy, and straight. The dominant community (the straight one) see gay people as being promiscuous, dangerous, without morals, sinful. So...knowing this...knowing that while there's more awareness and acceptance and knowledge NOW than there ever has been, and yet there's still hate toward a sexual preference...KNOWING that being gay will likely piss off some of your family and friends and make you sad and make THEM sad...KNOWING that regardless of where you live you're going to see oppression of some sort, even if it's not being able to marry the person you love...

Why the fuck would you CHOOSE something like that? If I were straight? My life would be easier. MUCH EASIER. I wouldn't have gone through the confusion and the pain of telling my family and fearing rejection and wondering if being with HIM is really what I want over being with HER, but knowing I refuse to have BOTH at the same time...I wouldn't choose that. It's happened, and I'm happy, but if I had a choice? I'd have taken the easier road.

(That, I'll repeat, is all stereotyping. I obviously have the brains about me to know that not everyone feels the way I do, nor do they place the stereotypes I mentioned.)

2: "Gay sex is GROSS!"

The 'pecan pie' example said enough. HAHA! That was awesome.

3: "Why should gays get special rights?"

I'm not sure why this is an argument, ever. Special rights? Let's all of a sudden that the gay community had more members than the straight community. That all of a sudden, gays were everywhere, everyone was queer, except for that rebellious and sinful little group known as the 'hets'. Let's see how quickly that argument would change if suddenly the 'special' right of marriage for a minority was taken away, and given only to gay couples.

Yeah, I know. IF IF IF. But it still makes sense in my warped head.

Okay, that's it. I'm done rambling. I just really needed to get all that out. Especially about the 'nature or nurture' argument.

Ta ta!

At 10/14/03 04:37 PM, House_Of_Leaves wrote: Yeah, I know. IF IF IF. But it still makes sense in my warped head.

That should be you cat-phrase, House.

At 10/14/03 08:28 PM, TheShrike wrote: cat-phrase*

*Catch-Phrase

House Of Leaves -- wow. That was an amazing reply. Thank you for the insightful post. =)

At 10/14/03 04:37 PM, House_Of_Leaves wrote:
Being bisexual pulls me out of either sexual-orientation 'community' into one of my own. Bisexuals are seen by the straight community as being slutty, greedy, and gay. Bisexuals are seen by the gay community as being fence-sitters, greedy, and straight.

You know... as a gay male myself... I've never understood why the average gay has so much beef with bisexuality. It really disturbs me... isn't respect and tolerance a two way street? We're all in this together... and personally, I have nothing against bisexuals. A lot of my friends online are bisexual, and I can understand them... bi-hostile gays are just jerks, in my opinion. -_-;

Wish this world were a bit more tolerant and understanding... well, it's getting there. People would never have thought of this a hundred years ago.

Au contraire. (did I spell that right?)

During the rennissance (damn my spelling) homosexuality was, if not accepted, then known at that level of 'as long as they're not obvious about it.'

It is a known fact that Leonardo, Michaelangelo, Carravaggio, and countless other artists, as well as the aristocrats who commissioned them, had a fondness for boys. In fact, there was more tolerance for homosexuality four hundred years ago then there is today.

WHY? Because religeon was finally being seen around that time as less of an all-encompassing blanket then a guide. Fanatics had less influence, and where you have less fanaticism, you have less senseless hatred

I...think? The 'Au Contraire' was to the A_O's comment about it not even being thought about 100 years go. There's nothing contrary to that, it's right.

The Renaissance wasn't 100 years ago. ;)

There's -always- been openly homosexual areas. Take Berlin right before the second world war. There were gay cabarets everywhere, which is one of the things Hitler came down on, hence the upside-down pink triangle symbol. The fact is that, especially here in america, people have always been afraid. Of everything. Including sharing their inner thoughts and feelings, preferences, anything that was contrary to the norm, or the Bible.

Were people depressed? Yes, but they weren't free to talk about it. Were they gay? Yes, but they weren't free to talk about it. Were they anorexic? Yes, but it was seen as spiritual rather than a mental disease or a body-image issue. There's always things people don't want to talk about, and historically, homosexuality is one of them.

Besides. Would they let have let those Renaissance men get married to one another, no matter how openly gay they were? Probably not.

People as a majority, whoever may it be, will almost always shun that which is different from themselves.

Were people depressed? Yes, but they weren't free to talk about it. Were they gay? Yes, but they weren't free to talk about it. Were they anorexic? Yes, but it was seen as spiritual rather than a mental disease or a body-image issue. There's always things people don't want to talk about, and historically, homosexuality is one of them.

Good point, Leaves. I do tend to forget to account for the differences between what was known at the time and what is known now. Thanks for calling me on that.

At 10/15/03 01:25 PM, Psuedoname wrote: People as a majority, whoever may it be, will almost always shun that which is different from themselves.

Thanks for the common sense.

This thread got me curious with the comments regarding gay not ok but lesbian is ok. I asked alot of the girls I know at school which they would prefer to watch, guy on guy or girl on girl, the majority said girl on girl. It was strange and so not what I was expecting to hear. Well carry on.

yeah, guy on guy is gross to watch, unless you're a gay dude or a one of those women who's into it. so what? this goes back to the pecan pie arguement. Another thing, guys have this idea of lesbians being ok if they're hot chicks who really just want to get it on with a guy like in porn videos. well, out of every hot lesbian couple there's probably 5 or 6 nasty butch lesbian couples. but some guys are so stupid, and i'm so wrong for trying to destroy their little fantasies

It's like this. for anyone who isn't turned on by it, guy on guy is just really really gross.No matter how good looking the guys are, unless you're into it.

But when you picture girl-on-girl:
A) you don't imagine the scary ones
B)twice as much female anatomy
C)there's no things in places there shouldn't be

now, personally, while i don't like pecan pie (great example) i not only support anyone's right to eat it, but will defend it. The way i see it, if pecan pie is outlawed, key lime may be next. Then blueberry, apple, lemon merangue... And i don't think the government should dictate what pie you eat.

And don't ask what all those other varieties are. I only know i like lemon, lime, and apple (now talking strictly confections)

what about straweberry rubarb? am i the only one who likes strawberry rubarb?!

BEHOLD! For I am the holder of answers. The problem with gay marriage is that marriage, when pertaining to humans and not a non-literal use of the word, is the union of a man and woman by definition. To propose gay marriage is like asking for tea that is made out of coffee. It also depends on the religion under which they want to get married. If you are gay and catholic, thats too damn bad, catholic doctrine does not believe in gay marriage. I am not saying that gays are bad or anything or that there should not be made some alternate legal union option for gays; however,the institution of marriage was created for the union of a man and woman.

At 10/15/03 10:09 PM, RugbyMacDaddy wrote: This thread got me curious with the comments regarding gay not ok but lesbian is ok. I asked alot of the girls I know at school which they would prefer to watch, guy on guy or girl on girl, the majority said girl on girl. It was strange and so not what I was expecting to hear. Well carry on.

I imagine it would depend on how explicit it is.

I mean... yes, on one hand, explicit lesbian porn is probably less extreme than explicit gay porn... but on the other hand, depending on how you define the terms, the answers you get will be drastically different.

If you describe pornography, yeah, I imagine a lot of people would say lesbian.

If you were to say non-explicit, however, I imagine that more females might be inclined towards male-male intimacy.

On what grounds do I say this?

I don't know how many people here know what Yaoi is, but it is all the rage amongst adolescent women in Japan. The polar opposite, Yuri, sees substantially less popularity. (Nothing explicit behind the links, to those of you who are paranoid. ;P)

So what I'd say is less people want to see explicit male/male relationships, but romanticized, emotional male/male relationships would appeal to women more than romanticized, emotional female/female relationships.

... just food for thought. ^_^