Gay Marriage Legalized in Iowa

[OmegaAlpha]

The many camera's are there, mainly in London for obvious reasons, due to the British citizens requesting them. Britain is a small, democratic nation so the people make the rules and the requests. Those camera's are also there to prevent people breaching other peoples' human rights, which is why we have talking cameras for the police to speak through when someone causing trouble comes along. A lot of people pleaded for these camera's to their local MP, and they got them. All is free and fair with that.

Anyway, the cemera's are only in the most populated cities such as London and Manchester for police purposes. When something bad happens police are on the scene within seconds. As I am an honest and active citizen that causes no problems to socirty I would never complain at such a thing.

Safety is not "freedom". For an example that stays on topic

(sorry OP, if you start threads like this they are going to turn into an overall discussion of the issue-" Civil Rights + Gay rights" and disagreements are going to happen.)

If 99% of people in America asked for our government to install cameras it would still be an infringement of that 1% of people's rights to walk around without being on camera.

If 99% of Americans wanted gays to be barred from getting married it would still be a civil rights infringement to the other 1%. Just because the majority wants something does not mean they vote in the direction of freedom and civil rights.

You can democratically give up your civil liberties. That's exactly what happened in California with prop 8 actually. (And when England's major cities citizens allowed themselves to be on Camera 24/7 in public)

That said, I believe it's only a matter of time until the rest of the country catches on to Iowa and the other couple of states that have gay marriage.

[-akichan-]

I'm sorry, Capernicus. But usually these kinds of topics start flamewars anyway because of the vast number of differing opinions. My intention was not to flame, but to point out to strumpet, perhaps not in the most mature way I guess, that homosexuals deserve the same rights. But, he doesn't seem to understand anyway, so oh well. :[

Yes, exactly. People that starts sensitive threads would always include pleasing for not flaming. But the idea of starting threads about gays or politics ALWAYS lead to a fight, with no doubt. People are very sensitive to what they sitck with when others sticks with different things. For instant, people fight over the religion threads, people fights because of different opinions, they get all frustrated. Same goes with sexual orientation, people say they disagree with gay marriage because they are in a discussion of either it is fine or not. People answers the question with different opinion cause a war is something I don't appreciate. People get mad easily just doesn't show the spirits ><;

It wasn't so that Maru or any of the other misc mods could close it down for flame baiting and other miscellaneous rule-breaking.

Let say that if the arguments gets worst, then I'm sure this thread would be closed.

you're sick. You are the equivalent of stubborn white supremacist in the deep south during the 50s.

Eww...That's so unnessesary...

And for the record, gays are just like everyone else. Most are not going to hit on you if you obviously don't want the attention. Also, most do not like public displays of affection (ie making out). It's amazing how some people are ignorant enough to think these things. We're human, not a whole other species.

Well, I think the main reason why people disagrees is because either they feel uncomfortable (which one effect me) or because they care how other countries would look at us (Americans).

Marriage had nothing to do with religion until the Church wanted control over in like the 14th or 15th century, and although it is often overseen by religious officials, it does not, technically, have anything to do with religion. It is a pledge between two individuals that is recognized legally.

I think so~but I'm a Christian, and my church is not suppose to marry the same sex. Anyway, I'm still straight xD For me, marriage is between one male and one female, and it is set by God (the one I'm faithful to).

Last time I checked, love had no sexual orientation. That means homosexuals can feel obviously, the same emotions that straight couples do, and want to be married for the same reasons. Cause you know, they're all human and stuff.

I understand what you mean. Love can exist in any relationships, such as friends, boyfriend and girlfriend, and family. As long as people feel love then they can be together. But I'm pretty sure the feelings are different.

Why should we be hated? Because same sex marriage isn't natural in our view?

I guess you can say that gays were used to be a taboo, but nowadays in this society, people look at gays as "love". I know I gotta face the truth without complains as well.

~*~*~*~*~*~*
Seriously guys, threads about opened for fair discussions. I'm not a mod, which I'm not suppose to say all these. But I understand that some people are already tired of arguing over different opinions. I respect those that states something against me, even though we support the opposite side. It's a discussion, not even a debate would go this far. If people can't fairly accept peoples' different opinions, then joining the discussion wouldn't be a good idea.

[Mmmmmmmmmm]

If 99% of people in America asked for our government to install cameras it would still be an infringement of that 1% of people's rights to walk around without being on camera.

Sounds like people are hiding something then.

And let me guess,

If 99% of people in America asked for our government to keep the jail system, it would still be an infringement of that 1% of peoples' rights?

[Eris]

Sounds like people are hiding something then.

They are hiding from the prying eyes of the government. In a just society, there must be cause for an investigation to take place. The same way the government can't rifle through your bag or search your car without cause, it should not be able to film your movements without cause.

And in the same way you don't have to motivate to the police why you don't want them tot search your home without a warrant, you should not have to motivate why you don't want them to spy on you with cameras.


The main problem with widespread surveillance is how prone to abuse it is. Any information gathered may lead to extortion from less than honest cops. Because who watches the watchers?

[OmegaAlpha]

Sounds like people are hiding something then.

And let me guess,

If 99% of people in America asked for our government to keep the jail system, it would still be an infringement of that 1% of peoples' rights?

Are you intentionally missing the point?

I will give you that having cameras on the streets would probably make things safer. That someone has nothing to hide is not the issue. You're probably a fan of the patriot act too. If the idea of government watching your every move is cool with you, so be it. It's not with me. But you know what's really getting old? People trying to label potential social stability as "freedom".

Your little attempt at wit with the prison thing is cute too. Too bad that it's not comparable. Jails are are not an infringement of civil rights. Unless you advocate complete anarchy, you need a jail/prison system.

Simply put, you don't put civil rights to a vote. There was a time when if you took a vote, most people would say slavery was fine and dandy. Sadly, Liberty is usually a cutting edge idea. In a few decades gays getting married won't even be a big deal and will be part of the culture. Until then, we're going to have to debate why you care if two people in love get married even though it's not your business. (and it does not harm you in any way)

[Miss Moonlight]

...THIS THREAD DOES NOT SOLICIT OPINIONS!

Threads are opened for discussion, and usually this includes opinions.

I do realize that this thread was not meant to become the "great gay debate", and that's not what was supposed to be discussed, but it's an unwritten rule of the internet that whenever any controversial topic is opened -- homosexuality/gay marriage, racism, or any other kind of controversial topic, it can become heated and flame wars can erupt simply because it's a topic most people feel strongly about.

It matters not what the topic was originally supposed to be about at that point, because misunderstandings are very common. It's unfortunate, but in any topic discussing homosexuality, it's inevitably going to happen. That's not to say that people can be civil, of course.

But i've already stated what I think and feel -- homosexuals, bisexuals and lesbians deserve to get married and have the same rights. I have no problems with them at all. I am happy when I see a bill being passed in any state for gay marriage.

If people are able to do what they want, do you realize where we would be right now?

This is an irrational fear. I'm not exactly sure where it comes from, but usually it's founded in ignorance. If allowing homosexuals to marry leads us to become a more accepting country, i'm not sure why that is a bad thing. I do realize it creates certain legal issues, but really, it's more than that.

It sounds as if you believe allowing homosexuals to marry will lead us to a bad place; and i'm not sure why. Where exactly will it lead us?

If it's your sensibilities that you are worried about, well those are usually going to end up dashed anyway.

It does seem that people are simply worried about their tradtional views and sensibilities and what's going to happen to them.

And for the record, gays are just like everyone else. Most are not going to hit on you if you obviously don't want the attention. Also, most do not like public displays of affection (ie making out). It's amazing how some people are ignorant enough to think these things. We're human, not a whole other species.

And I completely agree, just wish others saw it the same way.

[Miss Moonlight]

I think they meant that if people had more or even unlimited freedom, the world would be a disaster. People would kill each other and commit crime because there were no rules of any kind. The world then would clearly be a worse and chaotic place.

I understand, I just don't see how or why gay marriage would open up a pandora's box of chaos. I can understand it from a legal standpoint, maybe -- but not so much a moral one. Either way, it sounds ridiculous to me.

[Capernicus]

If 99% of Americans wanted gays to be barred from getting married it would still be a civil rights infringement to the other 1%. Just because the majority wants something does not mean they vote in the direction of freedom and civil rights.

Okay, you are way off here. If 99% of America banned gay marriage it would in no way affect their civil liberties unless some portion of those people happen to be bi/gay. It's completely different! They are not giving anything up because they can still get married. (Btw, no hard feelings.)

Sounds like people are hiding something then.

And let me guess,

If 99% of people in America asked for our government to keep the jail system, it would still be an infringement of that 1% of peoples' rights?

I thought you were dropping out of the discussion. Silly child.

Miss Moonlight, you're right. I must have forgotten the stupidity of the interwebs. Next time I'll remember to explicitly state "No opinions and flaming please" in the OP.

Aki-chan, what do you mean by "Eww...That's so unnessesary..."? My analogy was unnecessary? I think it was, but young strumpet just missed the point entirely.

[Mmmmmmmmmm]

Okay, you are way off here. If 99% of America banned gay marriage it would in no way affect their civil liberties unless some portion of those people happen to be bi/gay. It's completely different! They are not giving anything up because they can still get married. (Btw, no hard feelings.)



I thought you were dropping out of the discussion. Silly child.

Miss Moonlight, you're right. I must have forgotten the stupidity of the interwebs. Next time I'll remember to explicitly state "No opinions and flaming please" in the OP.

Aki-chan, what do you mean by "Eww...That's so unnessesary..."? My analogy was unnecessary? I think it was, but young strumpet just missed the point entirely.

I was until he feels like posting that crap.

[Diocletian]

It's funny how this thread is about legalization. Something that ALREADY HAPPENED! It isn't about homosexuality being moral or immoral. Whether you believe homosexuality is immoral should not have even been brought up.


There is a difference between gays and blacks though, Caps. Blacks were murdered, forced to work in terrible conditions, hung, etc. while the worst thing for gays at the moment is intolerance. Plus, you can't automatically tell homosexuality. You can tell (often) if a person is black.

[Jose]

Threads are opened for discussion, and usually this includes opinions.

Normally, yes. However, you missy, are taking this entire thread out of context. It would be the same as someone opening a birthday day for a black person, and then three pages later, we have a debate whether black people should even have birthdays. D:

Yes, exactly. People that starts sensitive threads would always include pleasing for not flaming. But the idea of starting threads about gays or politics ALWAYS lead to a fight, with no doubt. People are very sensitive to what they sitck with when others sticks with different things. For instant, people fight over the religion threads, people fights because of different opinions, they get all frustrated. Same goes with sexual orientation, people say they disagree with gay marriage because they are in a discussion of either it is fine or not. People answers the question with different opinion cause a war is something I don't appreciate. People get mad easily just doesn't show the spirits ><;

Well...they can get over it.

Eww...That's so unnessesary...

In what way? We use literary devices in post all the time, why is wrong or unnecessary? I used a metaphor today, does that me wrong?

Well, I think the main reason why people disagrees is because either they feel uncomfortable (which one effect me) or because they care how other countries would look at us (Americans).

Uncomfortable? That's ridiculous! I hear this argument all the time, just because you are attracted to one sex doesn't mean you'll hit everyone who is of that sex. Don't worry aki, I am sure that NOT every lesbian will hit on you, just as every man doesn't hit on you.

As for your other point, we are already the most hated country in the world, we should just get over it. The rest of the world views us as a big fat rich stupid bully(not rich anymore) , we don't really concern ourself with our countries appearance, we have nuclear weapons, we don't care, make fun of us and we'll bomb you XD

I understand what you mean. Love can exist in any relationships, such as friends, boyfriend and girlfriend, and family. As long as people feel love then they can be together. But I'm pretty sure the feelings are different.

I can firmly assure the feelings aren't at all different, that's just stupid. When I dated Destiny my feelings for her weren't at all different as when I dated Colby....

Seriously guys, threads about opened for fair discussions. I'm not a mod, which I'm not suppose to say all these. But I understand that some people are already tired of arguing over different opinions. I respect those that states something against me, even though we support the opposite side. It's a discussion, not even a debate would go this far. If people can't fairly accept peoples' different opinions, then joining the discussion wouldn't be a good idea.

Hmm, think framer's intent, Caps did this as an update, not as a debate.

I was until he feels like posting that crap.

...but he's right. >.>; ugh.

[Eris]

It's funny how this thread is about legalization. Something that ALREADY HAPPENED! It isn't about homosexuality being moral or immoral. Whether you believe homosexuality is immoral should not have even been brought up.

The discussion itself, as far as I see it, is valid (all discussion is valid). The actual arguments are lacking, though. Lots of irrelevant and unfounded arguments being thrown about.

[Miss Moonlight]

Normally, yes. However, you missy, are taking this entire thread out of context. It would be the same as someone opening a birthday day for a black person, and then three pages later, we have a debate whether black people should even have birthdays. D:

I knew this thread was not a "debate" thread. I understand the original purpose of it. But I was only responding mostly to strumpet's posts declaring homosexuality as "sick", and so I don't think i'm the one derailed the topic. Or, as much. Sorry, though.

[Diocletian]

The discussion itself, as far as I see it, is valid (all discussion is valid). The actual arguments are lacking, though. Lots of irrelevant and unfounded arguments being thrown about.

Then get in there champ. We can't have Rocky without Balboa.

[Mmmmmmmmmm]

...but he's right. >.>; ugh.

Uhm, no he's not. If the 99% voted for whatever, but the 1% gets offended, and they do whatever the 1% voted for, than the 99% will be unhappy. Which ones the bigger part of the group/country/whatever?

[Eris]

Then get in there champ. We can't have Rocky without Balboa.

I did make a bunch of replies, but nobody bit. Besides, this really isn't my avenue. Sure, I have opinions, but it isn't something I really crusade for.

[-akichan-]

Jose, I think you should look at the posts that I quoted for better definition. I said I think the main reason why PEOPLE are disagreeing is because of blah blah blah, not saying that lesbian would hit me someday. From the very beginning, I never said a word about how I look at homosexual, OKAY?! Read carefully, I said that this is a discussion but it is not fairly going anywhere, NOT EVEN a debate should go this far, so I never said that this is a debate.

Don't worry aki, I am sure that NOT every lesbian will hit on you, just as every man doesn't hit on you.

That's one thing I DID NOT include in my previous post. But yeah, I'm shocked that you actually said that.

Read and think carefully!

[Jose]

Uhm, no he's not. If the 99% voted for whatever, but the 1% gets offended, and they do whatever the 1% voted for, than the 99% will be unhappy. Which ones the bigger part of the group/country/whatever?

Majority rules, unless it interfere or in any way shape or form violates minority rights, that was actually on the AP government exam...

Aki, I was simply replying to your comments, you don't have to get so angry. XD

[-akichan-]

Majority rules, unless it interfere or in any way shape or form violates minority rights, that was actually on the AP government exam...

Aki, I was simply replying to your comments, you don't have to get so angry. XD

I'm glad that you said lesbian won't hit on me, as a respond to something I did not talk about, as every men doesn't hit on me, I'm glad that you won't hit on me. To write the best reply according to what the person said is to read carefully and think about what the person was trying to say. Simply commenting, no that's not it. =P

make fun of us and we'll bomb you XD

Just do it! I know you wanted to bomb me since last century!

[Jose]

I'm glad that you said lesbian won't hit on me, as a respond to something I did not talk about, as every men doesn't hit on me, I'm glad that you won't hit on me. To write the best reply according to what the person said is to read carefully and think about what the person was trying to say. Simply commenting, no that's not it. =P



Just do it! I know you wanted to bomb me since last century!

lol and I QUOTE

Well, I think the main reason why people disagrees is because either they feel uncomfortable (which one effect me) or because they care how other countries would look at us (Americans).

You just said there that gay people make you uncomfortable, why? o_O; if it's not because they hit on you, then why?

Either way, one thing was about this thread being about gay marriage...now it's just about he said she said. Ugh, lol Moonlight was right, you can't say anything on this site without someone getting angry.

[Sagat]

Don't worry aki, I am sure that NOT every lesbian will hit on you, just as every man doesn't hit on you.

I'm sure she gets far more guys hitting on her than you wish you did.

[Lola Granola]

I like pictures.







Attached are some wedding pictures. I love the happiness in these photos. Don't feel uncomfortable at the slightest looking at these. They're beautiful.

[-akichan-]

Jose, I just saw that I made a typo and I wanted to type "does not" but made a mistake. But you can see, "which one effect me" doesn't make sense but sound more like a question =]

I'm sure she gets far more guys hitting on her than you wish you did.

Hey you know me so well! Are you one of those guys? xDDDD

[Memento Mori]

Attached are some wedding pictures. I love the happiness in these photos. Don't feel uncomfortable at the slightest looking at these. They're beautiful.

Oh, look how disgusting it is, two people expressing their love for one another in such a beautiful way, it's absolutely criminal.

[Cless Alvein]

Just to pick nits, Marriage is a religious ceremony, not a human right. If any religion wants to withhold that ceremony from certain people they have that authority.

Having said that however, withholding civil rights and benefits based on a religious ceremony is completely, utterly stupid and for it to be one that excludes any competent adult of legal age is inexcusable.

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...ogId=480219183