Why homosexuality should be banned

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterBorn
  • Start date Start date
no, I asked you WHY it should be changed....that you want it isn't enough to convince me....

And I gave you my answer. You chose to cut it down to that one line, but there was more to it than that one line. The other lines were part and parcel of the answer.

And I doubt that you will be convinced. I think all the talk about them not "earning" the right, or about people not being able to practice law like you can, or whatever, is just smoke and mirrors for you being uncomfortable with people having sex with people of the same gender.

And the sad part is, they probably have more in common with you than you think. And their sexual habits are only a small part of who they are.
 
When they wanted to end slavery, the conservative fought it and lost.
When they wanted to give women the right to vote, the conservative fought it and lost.
When they wanted desegregate schools, the conservative fought it and lost.
When they wanted to end Jim Crow, the conservative fought it and lost.
When they wanted to allow women the ability to seek contraception, the conservative fought it and lost.
When they wanted to make abortion safe and legal, the conservative fought it and lost.
When they wanted to make homosexual sex legal, the conservative fought it, and after a long battle lost,
Conservatives have been on the wrong side of individual liberty much more often than not. Eventually people will see this is a human rights issue and it will go the way of Jim Crow and people will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about. The way we do with interracial marriages now.

yet it was conservative movements like the Quakers who began the fight for the end of slavery, it was conservative movements like the Women's Temperance League who began the fight for suffrage, it was the conservatives in Congress who pushed through the Civil Rights Act......true, conservatives fought against and still fight against killing unborn children....you have me there.....liberals have always been and will always be on the wrong side of every issue.....
 
Last edited:
permitting women to vote was a positive change, permitting blacks to vote was a positive change.....killing unborn children was a negative change.....gay marriage is a negative change......why do you promote negative change?......simply because it's change?.......

You think gay marriage is a negative change. I think its a positive change, because it promotes equality.

Beyond the sexual activities, how is gay marriage a negative change?
 
yet it was conservative movements like the Quakers who began the fight for the end of slavery, it was conservative movements like the Women's Temperance League who began the fight for suffrage, it was the conservatives in Congress who pushed through the Civil Rights Act......true conservatives fought against and still fight against killing unborn children....you have me there.....

And conservative democrats who fought against the Civil Rights Act.
 
Conservatives or republicans. They have not always been synonymous. So much so that when the Dem party of the north started to support issues like deseg and civil rights conservatives like Strom Thurmond left the party.
self serving.....anyone who wants what is "bad" is conservative and anyone who wants what is "good" is a liberal?.....lol.....
 
And the sad part is, they probably have more in common with you than you think. And their sexual habits are only a small part of who they are.

my mistake....I forgot that this was all about me and my bigotry instead of larger philosophical issues like liberals forcing their ideas down everyone's throat.....
 
You think gay marriage is a negative change. I think its a positive change, because it promotes equality.

now, tell me what all of society has to change to accommodate your idea of what is positive.....why not be content with just being able to believe it....why do the rest of us have to be required to as well?......
 
now, tell me what all of society has to change to accommodate your idea of what is positive.....why not be content with just being able to believe it....why do the rest of us have to be required to as well?......

Why won't you answer my question?

It is obvious that it will be positive for all the gays that will marry.

In order to balance that, tell me what makes it a negative? Besides the sexual activities, what is negative about gay marriage?
 
they are "conservative" because you don't like what they stood for.... they weren't the conservative side of politics at the time......

That is ridiculous. George Wallace was certainly not a liberal democrat.

You want to project that I dislike things based solely on whether they are liberal or conservative, and anything I dislike must be conservative.

I guess that makes it easier for you. Easier than arguing with facts.

But I have argued against increased taxes, against the bailouts, against the gov't medical system, and against increases in gov't size and spending.

I have argued for the 2nd amendment, for the Fair Tax Act, for more individual liberties, and for the balanced budget amendments.

So take that "they are "conservative" because you don't like what they stood for" and shove it up your ass.

I know what Wallace stood for and what he did in this state. He was damn sure not a liberal.
 
Why won't you answer my question?

It is obvious that it will be positive for all the gays that will marry.

In order to balance that, tell me what makes it a negative? Besides the sexual activities, what is negative about gay marriage?

leaningright spelled it out a couple pages ago.....raising a whole new generation thinking that gay marriage is normal......just like we've done since '72 when we began raising kids to think it's normal to kill your children.....
 
That is ridiculous. George Wallace was certainly not a liberal democrat.

he was a member of the more liberal of the two political parties at the time....by today's standards he wasn't a liberal democrat....but then, by today's standards Kennedy wasn't a liberal democrat......
 
must be getting close to Halloween, Yurt's masquerading as a liberal again....

did we have to change the definition of 'marriage' so a black man could marry a white woman?.....no.....does your parallel therefore fail?....yes.....

yeah, it was amazing how they were successful in changing the definition of "school" so black kids could attend.....

you're such a poor debater...if i don't agree with YOU, i must be a liberal...instead of debate the issue, you label

what is so amusing about your sad attempt to diminish the analogy between interracial marriage is that we DO NOT have to change the definition of marriage to allow homosexuals to marry....it is not defined in the constitution and when an amendment to try and define it in the constitution (FMA) came up for vote.....it FAILED....:)

they did in fact change the definition of schools.....instead of white schools and black schools, they became simply schools....
 
you're such a poor debater...if i don't agree with YOU, i must be a liberal...instead of debate the issue, you label
I didn't call you a liberal because you disagreed with me, I called you a liberal because you came up with such a piss poor argument.......your latest contribution is no better.....
 
leaningright spelled it out a couple pages ago.....raising a whole new generation thinking that gay marriage is normal......just like we've done since '72 when we began raising kids to think it's normal to kill your children.....

And??? So what if a generation (or the rest of the generations) thinks that gay marriage is ok?

What will happen then? Will they turn gay? You have already said that you believe its something you are born with.

So what will happen then? Will they grow up thinking that the fact that two people love each other is more important than what genitalia they have?

What is wrong with people thinking gay marriage is normal?
 
Back
Top