Homosexual Penguins

[Weltall]

You're right, except for the common sense and evidence parts.

If you were wondering why, in the other thread, I asked you if you slept through your tenth-grade biology class...

Ah, good old "the good old days were better"... always said, by conservatives, throughout history... and generally not correct...

I think it's unarguable that times were better when marriages were stable, children had two parents, girls weren't getting pregnant at fourteen, and weren't killing babies to make up for their indiscretions. When drug use wasn't rampant and murder much less common.

There are definite benefits to the 'good old days'.

Huh? Maine's doing fine... Democratic governor, Democratic state house (both branches), two Democrats in the House, and two moderate Republicans in the Senate... :)

Well, it's fine for you that your state is on the level of a banana republic. Leave the rest of us alone.

Marriage is about monogamy and it would strengthen that if these people were formally joined. Civil Unions are a okay alternative that isn't good enough but will have to do for now, I think.

As if they wouldn't be divorcing all the time, or something, right? As if being gay somehow makes for a better marriage?

Ha.

You don't either. Not that it would matter, given that I know (either of) you would never listen for a millisecond...

If that were true, this thread would have never gotten a response. You may remember that it began with you posting what you thought was proof and me responding to that.

Laws are based on harm... if we (as a society) looked at this objectively we'd see that no one is hurt by allowing homosexual unions.

No one is 'hurt' if I sit in the middle of the sidewalk and masturbate, either. Yet, there are laws against that. I guess it's right-wing fear and hatred that keeps public masturbation illegal too.

Polygamists only don't marry because it wouldn't be allowed... it's illegal in Utah of course but elsewhere it'd be banned if there was a problem with it. And you don't give any convincing reasons there why my reasons for those things are wrong while yours for homosexuality are right...

Why should polygamy be banned if homosexual marriage isn't? What good reason to keep polygamists from being unhappy? It's discrimination! Maybe they're born that way!

Incest... that is a extremely ancient ban, going back well before human civilization and probably before modern humans existed. Why? Okay, so a one-off incestious relationship won't do much harm, that is probably true... but it becomes a serious problem if it's common. Just ask the European royalty... they aren't called 'blue bloods' for nothing. :)

Well, I don't support it for a minute, but if you allow homosexual marriage on the virtue that conventional marriage discriminates against them, you have to allow for these, because conventional marriage also discriminates against these types of people too, and the reasoning is no better or worse than it is against homosexual marriage.

I believe they should all be illegal. You believe that one group of people deserves special consideration and the others can go to hell, though, I'm sure that if there were someone out there even more liberal than you, they'd push for incest and polygamy legalization.

You're right, in the Civil War most soldiers of the South were poor whites who fought either because they were spept up in the anti-North sentiment, or because they wanted to keep the blacks down -- I mean, look. These people have nothing. They are on the bottom... or would be if not for blacks. That gives them a class below them, and they want to keep them there... that was true in some of the North as well -- see the draft riots in New York City, where the Irish hated the blacks because the blacks were taking Irish jobs on the bottom rung of the ladder for less money...

Actually, a vast majority of Confederate soldiers fought because they were conscripted. They were drafting, at one point, all the way to age 45, an old man in those days.

Oh, and I don't hate christians or religion. I don't have a problem with people going to church (I went to one for most of my life after all), or believing what they think is right... the problem is when you take your morals and apply them to everyone without stopping to think if your morality SHOULD apply to everyone (ie, all morality is not objectively right)... just keep your beliefs to yourself and believe whatever you want. Like most people do in New England... we just don't discuss religion much. One reason I dislike Bush is because he's so religious... prayers, constant Biblical references... that I do not like at all. His faith I may disagree with but can't say "you are wrong and your belief system is totally wrong" because there is obviously no way to prove God doesn't exist... it's shoving it in our faces I dislike. Leiberman has a similar problem, IMO. Too religious, too openly.

Hmm.

Oh, and I don't hate gays. I don't have a problem with people doing whatever they want in the privacy of their own beds, or believing what they think is right... the problem is when you take your morals and apply them to everyone without stopping to think if your morality SHOULD apply to everyone (ie, all morality is not objectively right)... just keep your beliefs to yourself and believe whatever you want.

Thank you and good night.