10 Aug 2007, 2:33 pm
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
But people don't suddenly turn into a man when they reach a particular age,
Well, depends on where you draw the line, I guess.
Women get more masculine and men get more feminine as they age.Masculine... feminine... whatever. They don't turn into a man. However masculine they are, they still can't marry each other.
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Everyone at some point in their life is a kid and (assuming they reach the average life expectancy etc.) becomes an adult. Different.
Yes, "different", but these differences are merely circumstantial.
The differences between paedophilia and homosexuality are 'circumstantial' are they?
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
I wasn't allowed to marry when I was 8, neither were you. You can marry the woman you want to be with. I never will be able to. The age law is there to protect kids from perverts.
So, who judges them to be perverts? Why are they perverts if, like a woman's lust for a woman, it's just always been natural to them? You're being awfully judgmental of perversions for someone advocating what most people still think is.
Because they're harming kids.
On what atheistic basis, when its consentual? I do believe it harms kids, but I believe that because of my Christian views. I don't see where you can get that true belief from your atheism.
Sopho wrote:
Just like rape is wrong, it's wrong to f**k a child.
Not the same, when the latter is consentual. Both are still wrong, but not because they are identical, as you claim.
Sopho wrote:
Those laws preventing adults from marrying kids are designed to PROTECT people (children). Who needs protecting from gay marriage?
Everyone else.
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 2:36 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Sopho wrote:
We're unconvinced because you haven't provided any decent arguments in support of your position.
You definately havent, all you have stated is that you feel your are entitled fundementally.
Did you actually read through the whole thread?
I don't just 'feel' I am entitled. If, by that, you meant I recognise that it is sexist discrimination, then yes. But I also stated other reasons. All you have come up with is that somehow legalising gay marriage will mean a shedload more people will suddenly turn gay and you won't get your pension because there won't be enough kids.
And tbh, we only need one reason: rights.
Rights isnt a reason, you are making the assumption that you should be automatically entitled to something.
again.... so why are you entitled to your pension then... cause you're the majority? lol
by the fear in your words... you make it sound like the immigrants are the majority
They're working on it... give 'em time, and keep the borders OPEN!!
economics belong in another thread.... unless you feel you have some support to portend that gay immigrants are the cause of a long history of ecocomic decline resulting in the age structure of european countries... and america... we're the ones that want all the tired... weary... and bla bla bla masses.............
some of our states with the higher gay communities do quite nicely actually
i just fail to see how economics related to gay rights
10 Aug 2007, 2:41 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 2:42 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:42 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
But people don't suddenly turn into a man when they reach a particular age,
Well, depends on where you draw the line, I guess.
Women get more masculine and men get more feminine as they age.Masculine... feminine... whatever. They don't turn into a man. However masculine they are, they still can't marry each other.
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Everyone at some point in their life is a kid and (assuming they reach the average life expectancy etc.) becomes an adult. Different.
Yes, "different", but these differences are merely circumstantial.
The differences between paedophilia and homosexuality are 'circumstantial' are they?
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
I wasn't allowed to marry when I was 8, neither were you. You can marry the woman you want to be with. I never will be able to. The age law is there to protect kids from perverts.
So, who judges them to be perverts? Why are they perverts if, like a woman's lust for a woman, it's just always been natural to them? You're being awfully judgmental of perversions for someone advocating what most people still think is.
Because they're harming kids.
On what atheistic basis, when its consentual? I do believe it harms kids, but I believe that because of my Christian views. I don't see where you can get that true belief from your atheism.
Sopho wrote:
Just like rape is wrong, it's wrong to f**k a child.
Not the same, when the latter is consentual. Both are still wrong, but not because they are identical, as you claim.
Sopho wrote:
Those laws preventing adults from marrying kids are designed to PROTECT people (children). Who needs protecting from gay marriage?
Everyone else.
1. It harms kids because it's getting them involved in something they're too young to understand. An 8 year old shouldn't be having sex. The only adults that children should have relationships with are their family and teachers etc., that kind of relationship, not a sexual one. And I don't get any of my morals from atheism. I get them from myself. I don't follow atheism like a religion or set of rules.
2.It's non consensual though. Kids can't consent. And I never said they were identical. I made the point that they're both sex with someone who isn't consenting.
3. How does me marrying a woman in any way harm you? And if it does, then I can just as easily say that you marrying a woman harms me. But I'm not stupid enough to do that, because I know other people's relationships don't have any affect on me.
10 Aug 2007, 2:42 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:44 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 2:49 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:49 pm
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Your logic is flawed. You just draw the lines where you want them, or where you happen to honestly see that they go -- neither of which makes you correct. You could just as easily say that women should be allowed to go into occupied men's restrooms and use the urinals -- "'cause after all, MEN are allowed to! No fair!" Such logic leads to a mess -- in more ways than one.
\you know... if people could all respect one another.... there would be absolutely no need for sep sex bathrooms. did adam and eve need them?
that's the issue here... repsecting everyone. you're not cause god says not to
That's not the issue at all. The dignity of man was created by God, by Him making man in His image. Therefore, He said, people should not kill each other, because it's an offense in the sight of God to see people in His image killing each other. The problem is when people say to Christians: "I don't care what you're God says. Now respect me!"
10 Aug 2007, 2:54 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:55 pm
Sopho wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Your logic is flawed. You just draw the lines where you want them, or where you happen to honestly see that they go -- neither of which makes you correct. You could just as easily say that women should be allowed to go into occupied men's restrooms and use the urinals -- "'cause after all, MEN are allowed to! No fair!" Such logic leads to a mess -- in more ways than one.
\you know... if people could all respect one another.... there would be absolutely no need for sep sex bathrooms. did adam and eve need them?
that's the issue here... repsecting everyone. you're not cause god says not to
And also because it affects other people - it would be dangerous to allow men into women's toilets. Whereas allowing me to marry a woman doesn't harm any straight people.
Not in any ways you care to think about, no, but then you've made clear that you don't "give a f**k what they want" when it comes to conflicting with what you want the right to do.
Last edited by Ragtime on 10 Aug 2007, 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
10 Aug 2007, 2:56 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:57 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:57 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 2:58 pm
10 Aug 2007, 2:58 pm
Sedaka wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Ok, the netherlands has a significantly higher rate of gay relationships than the UK. Now do you know what I am getting at?
They also have lower instances of teenage pregnancies and STDs among young people. We should be aiming for a society more like theirs if anything. And the economy there seems to be doing fine as well.
he's missing the key point that the age structure of countries is not directly linked to the proportion of the gay comunity... but has more to do with the size of families in straight relationships (and gay... they do adopt you know) and jobs available within that country.
even if everyone never had another kid, it'd take a while (i know he doesnt think so) to even put a dent in changing the age structure of any country.
it's a weak argument.... look at emmigration in those countries and you'll see that's more of an issue than immigration or whatevr he wants to say....
He doesn't seem to like immigration either.
I dont object to immigration per se, but i do when it gets to the rate we have it at. It is at the potentially destabilising level now, there is a limit to what the UK can cope with.
immigrants can have kids too (just like gay couples)......... so what's your beef?
it's when ppl leave the country to have kids eslsewhere that's more of a problem
That is the problem. Immigrants have kids faster than we do, within ghettos. Then we all sit down and wait for racial violence to start up.
so........ how can we tie your bigotry specifically into the topic of the thread? most immigrants are not homosexuals... and we've been through this one many times already
you could apply your theory to all of.... say india (minus the being due to imiigrants)
this issue then comes back to HAVING JOBS... which is why economics are sucking and you're looking for any excuse to blame for threatening your pension
*yawns* The immigration I am talking about is to replace the children that gay people are not having. Again you miss the point.
