Yay for California!

CCR said:
How many have you asked?
Click to expand...

Well I've been around the block a few times. :D
I considered marrying a duck but unfortunately I live in Michigan.

Perhaps I should petition the courts to allow that duck I was in love with to be covered under my health insurance. After all it should be an level playing field. No matter how much of a sexual deviant I am.

So if I'm a convicted murderer should I also receive the same rights as everyone else? Sodomy is still a crime so by law all ^^^^sexual men are committing a crime. Granted its an antiquated law but it is there.
 
Kraken said:
Well I've been around the block a few times. :D
I considered marrying a duck but unfortunately I live in Michigan.

Perhaps I should petition the courts to allow that duck I was in love with to be covered under my health insurance. After all it should be an level playing field. No matter how much of a sexual deviant I am.

So if I'm a convicted murderer should I also receive the same rights as everyone else? Sodomy is still a crime so by law all ^^^^sexual men are committing a crime. Granted its an antiquated law but it is there.
Click to expand...

I LOL'd at that.
 
The argument that allowing same sex partners to marry will result in people marrying animals is an insulting and very inappropriate statement.

The sacred love between two human beings, whatever their gender, should not be compared to loving an animal. I think treating an attraction to the same sex like it is something "wrong" or it's a "condition" that must be taken care of is just plain wrong. Like others have said it doesn't matter if it's genetic or environmental, the vast majority of gay people know that it was not "lifestyle choice" or any of that nonsense.

I see this decision as not just bout marriage, but about the greater acceptance of a huge part of our society that I think many people are afraid to acknowledge for fear of being perceived of as gay themselves.
 
Last edited:
Woodt said:
Exactly. Animals have sex just for reproduction, and yes, dolphins and humans are the only ones who do it for pleasure (maybe a few others).
Click to expand...

I think they found out by sending BigTom around the world with a notepad and pen to try and shag as many species as he could. Everytime he got knocked back he'd tick the 'frigid' box. The only other species with low enough standards to shag him was the Dolphin, and even then he had to drop a pill in it's water
 
Last edited:
There is nothing sacred about ^^^^sexuality. Thats where I draw the line You cannot go against the very laws of nature and call it a sacrament.

I find the tolerance of ^^^^sexuality offensive and insulting. I also find your view of anyone who is against it is a ^^^^phobe equally offensive and insulting. So basically what you're saying is entire conservative population of this country is afraid of being perceived as gay. Your view of gay marriage being sacred goes against the very core of all major religions in the world.

To post such a contraversial topic you should expect to get reaction from people with varying views on this. To make a blanket statement and call everyone who disagrees with you a ^^^^phobe is unacceptable. This is a typical liberal tactic. Steer clear of the original issue by making attacks on anyone who does not share your views.
 
Kraken said:
So if I'm a convicted murderer should I also receive the same rights as everyone else? Sodomy is still a crime so by law all ^^^^sexual men are committing a crime. Granted its an antiquated law but it is there.
Click to expand...

Well then I guess a very large number of straight and lesbian couples are breaking the law as well. That sodomy law is one of the most ridiculous pieces of legislation I've ever heard of. Giving pleasure to a partner in a way that some select few people see as inappropriate is NOT the equivalent of murder and neither is being gay.
 
spicypumpkin said:
The argument that allowing same sex partners to marry will result in people marrying animals is an insulting and very inappropriate statement.

The sacred love between two human beings, whatever their gender, should not be compared to loving an animal. I think treating an attraction to the same sex like it is something "wrong" or it's a "condition" that must be taken care of is just plain wrong. Like others have said it doesn't matter if it's genetic or environmental, the vast majority of gay people know that it was not "lifestyle choice" or any of that nonsense.

I see this decision as not just bout marriage, but about the greater acceptance of a huge part of our society that I think many people are afraid to acknowledge for fear of being perceived of as gay themselves.
Click to expand...

Sorry. I'm assuming this was directed at me as Kraken was being so sarcastic it would be obvious to a cat. Otherwise my point isn't so valid. Nevertheless, I believe you are completely misunderstanding the point. I was addressing it to Kraken regarding why I believe human beings are born/naturally gay. The reason being that animal instinct, which we all have, shows that nature can make beings want to have sex with others of their own sex. Love and sex are naturally unrelated. Only human beings relate the two. Human love is a completely different aspect that I don't want to bring into this.

Like others have said it doesn't matter if it's genetic or environmental, the vast majority of gay people know that it was not "lifestyle choice" or any of that nonsense.
Click to expand...

Here you have even acknowledged what I said previously. Please read responses to your own thread before trying to debate points to which you have not taken time to read. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Kraken said:
Sodomy is still a crime so by law all ^^^^sexual men are committing a crime. Granted its an antiquated law but it is there.
Click to expand...

"Sodomy laws in the United States were largely a matter of state rather than federal jurisdiction. By the last quarter of the 20th century, 47 out of 50 states had repealed any specifically anti-^^^^sexual-conduct laws, and 37 had repealed all sodomy laws. The remaining anti-^^^^sexual sodomy laws have been invalidated by the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision Lawrence v. Texas (see above). It is not clear whether or how sodomy laws that apply to both ^^^^sexual and heterosexual sex are affected by Lawrence. The United States Supreme Court also implied that the age of consent must be the same for heterosexuals and ^^^^sexuals when it ordered the Kansas courts to review the constitutionality of the state's Romeo and Juliet Law."
 
gotfit said:
"Sodomy laws in the United States were largely a matter of state rather than federal jurisdiction. By the last quarter of the 20th century, 47 out of 50 states had repealed any specifically anti-^^^^sexual-conduct laws, and 37 had repealed all sodomy laws. The remaining anti-^^^^sexual sodomy laws have been invalidated by the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision Lawrence v. Texas (see above). It is not clear whether or how sodomy laws that apply to both ^^^^sexual and heterosexual sex are affected by Lawrence. The United States Supreme Court also implied that the age of consent must be the same for heterosexuals and ^^^^sexuals when it ordered the Kansas courts to review the constitutionality of the state's Romeo and Juliet Law."
Click to expand...


A voice of reason. LOL

Actually I'm pretty sure the sodomy law is solely for tacking on extra charges in rape and molestation cases. Same with the law stating oral sex is illegal.
 
Why does the site block the word hom0? I'll never be able to write about ^^^^sapians or ^^^^genus

p.s. That's not mean as a joke, hom0 isn't an offensive word in itself so blocking it seems silly
 
Last edited:
CCR said:
Why does the site block the word hom0? I'll never be able to write about ^^^^sapians or ^^^^genus

p.s. That's not mean as a joke, hom0 isn't an offensive word in itself so blocking it seems silly
Click to expand...

A lot of words seemed to be blocked that shouldn't be.

I think there should be a lift on nearly all censored words as the mods seem to even be getting the ^^^^ nowadays.
 
I must agree ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top