California Overturns Gay Marriage

[MontyB]

What, dont you even shake hands? lol

Yeah shaking hands is fine and contact on the sports field is fine but outside that I really don't like it.
I am very much a product of rural New Zealand, men shake hands, tackle on the rugby field and beat the crap out of each other outside that its gay.

Social conditioning is a very powerful thing and it a very hard attitude to break.

Now this truly is the pot calling the kettle black, Mr. I'm Right, Even if I'm Wrong.

Well that should really affect you since you are no longer listening to anyone but yourself, at least the arguments and subsequent fight will be fun to watch.

 

[Chukpike]

Then what did you mean by That seems rather cut and dry as far as saying "small number"....

What I said:
"From the data you did give I found where the population in 2000 was 281.4 million people. The number of gay and lesbians was estimated at 4.3 million. That works out to 1.53% of the population.

I was surprised at such a small percentage of the population being gay."

Try to read the above slowly. It means what I said. It means that I expected the percentage to be higher.

I was surprised when it wasn't.

It's written in the section of the article I posted, same as the other figures, if you read it, then you know it... I didn't cut and paste....

"in the section of the article I posted"

Meaning you cut and pasted .

Again, I did NOT leave out anything as seen HERE AKA that figure could be COMPLETELY INACCURATE. But as there is NO official data on the subject until 2072 because of the privacy laws of a census, we won't know for sure until then.

The census is a public record and the statistical data is published and won't change in 72 years. What cannot be retrieved until 2072 is names and specific data deemed private to the individual. Since the census did not ask questions that could have been used to more accurately determine sexual preference if will not magically appear in 72 years.

I thank you for responding to the question I ask in a previous post. I respect your opinion that the individual should have the right to decide, even if it may be a little unrealistic.

I reserve the right to believe that in a organized society, the rights of the individual or sometimes secondary to the rights of the general population. Our system may not be perfect, but the right of the majority to decide, is the best that we have come up with.

In the case of Gay and Lesbian marriage the people have spoken and the rule of the majority should stand. If it doesn't then the State is in control. You decide which you prefer.

 

[Chukpike]

You said they are different human beings... All human beings are the same. If I took a picture of a naked homosexual man and a heterosexual man, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference, would you?

I'l take a wild guess, and say the hom0sexual is the one bending over?:lol:

 

[senojekips]

To senojekips: I said they are human beings just like you and I.

I cannot say whether they are like you, as i do not know your sexual orientation, but they are certainly not like me, not even very slightly so.

On a basic level, they are the same as me. They're the same as you too, regardless of whether or not you want to admit it.

There you go again making assumptions and trying to make me what I am not, what you are saying is both mischievous, and otherwise completely untrue. Not to mention being incredibly rude!

Granted, once we start layering the cake, they start to spread out, but you cannot deny that they are the same on a few levels. Spike, I asked you And your responce was Now, how can you say you DIDN'T say they were different types of HUMANS? They are certainly different types of people, sure. But not HUMANS. Human beings are all the same.

They are the same "Type" of humans as were mother Theresa and Joseph Stalin, but my point being that you tried to put words in my mouth that you could build on, about me having said they were a different "species".

Just as poofs and straight people are the same "species", a horse drawn wagon and a Lamborghini Gallardo are both "vehicles", but they are not "the same".

 

[Rob Henderson]

What I said:
"From the data you did give I found where the population in 2000 was 281.4 million people. The number of gay and lesbians was estimated at 4.3 million. That works out to 1.53% of the population.

I was surprised at such a small percentage of the population being gay."

Try to read the above slowly. It means what I said. It means that I expected the percentage to be higher.

I was surprised when it wasn't.

I did read the above slowly... And unless you are misquoting yourself, you said "SMALL PERCENTAGE" which works out to be a small number by the same token.

"in the section of the article I posted"

Meaning you cut and pasted .

But I just took a chunk of the article, it's not like I edited out specific words to make my case... The information you posted was already there. You didn't highlight anything that wasn't already in the article... It just wasn't bold and underlined.

The census is a public record and the statistical data is published and won't change in 72 years. What cannot be retrieved until 2072 is names and specific data deemed private to the individual. Since the census did not ask questions that could have been used to more accurately determine sexual preference if will not magically appear in 72 years.

You're right, but we still don't know either way...

I thank you for responding to the question I ask in a previous post. I respect your opinion that the individual should have the right to decide, even if it may be a little unrealistic.

And I'm not saying the individual should be the ultimate authority ALL THE TIME. That would never work. What I'm saying is that in some cases, neither the government (on ANY level) nor the mass majority should be able to decide what is legal and what isn't. Like in this case, this is between two people who love each other deeply. Deeply enough to share something more special than "yeah, we're dating." They want a deeper connection than that. And I don't think ANYONE should be able to stop them from doing it. It's not fair. It doesn't harm you in any way, shape, or form, so why should we stop it just because we don't like it?

I reserve the right to believe that in a organized society, the rights of the individual or sometimes secondary to the rights of the general population. Our system may not be perfect, but the right of the majority to decide, is the best that we have come up with.

That's all well and good, in fact, I agree. Democracy is the best idea we've come up with to run a country, and I even agree that SOMETIMES the rights of the general population outweigh the wants of the minority, but if the want of the minority isn't going to affect the general population, why prevent it?

In the case of Gay and Lesbian marriage the people have spoken and the rule of the majority should stand. If it doesn't then the State is in control. You decide which you prefer.

The ruling should be to leave it up to the churches. If the churches want to marry them, then they can marry them, after all, marriage is a sacred union of two people, not a tax write off.

My point being that it shouldn't have been put up for vote. The State shouldn't even have allowed the petition to be brought up for a vote. It should remain up to the people it affects, the gay/lesbian couple and the church.




To senojekips:You're trying to make me seem like I am assuming this actually... Tell me where I said anything other than on a basic HUMAN BEING LEVEL. You say Mother Theresa and Joseph Stalin were the same... Actually, they were man and woman, so that's a fundamental difference, but yes, on a human being level, they were the same.


I don't think you're understanding me, I'm talking about on the most basic, primal level here... Human being A and human being B are both the same human being TYPE. There are no differences in human beings. There are different people, but not different humans. But when I asked if they were somehow a different type of human, you clearly stated "Without a doubt." Therefore, you SAID they are a different type of human. And the closest biological classification to homo sapien would be a different species. It's basic science really... So I'd appreciate it if you DIDN'T call me rude, and you DIDN't call me mischievous, just because you didn't understand my point. I put no words in your mouth... You said everything...


Yes, just as HOMOSEXUALS (no need for name-calling) and heterosexuals are the same, a horse and a Lamborghini Gallardo are both modes of transportation. But they are not the same thing... You're correct... But that doesn't change the fact that I'm not changing your words.

 

[Chukpike]

You're right,
And I'm not saying the individual should be the ultimate authority ALL THE TIME. That would never work. the mass majority should be able to decide what is legal and what isn't.
I agree. Democracy is the best idea we've come up with to run a country, and I even agree that SOMETIMES the rights of the general population outweigh the wants of the minority.

Thank You.

The ruling should be to leave it up to the churches. If the churches want to marry them, then they can marry them, after all, marriage is a sacred union of two people, not a tax write off.

Can't, legal marriage has been defined by laws since long before the colonies became States.
But if it was left to religions the outcome would be the same.

My point being that it shouldn't have been put up for vote. The State shouldn't even have allowed the petition to be brought up for a vote.

One more time, the State did not allow anything it was the peoples right to bring it up for a vote. I thought you could not argue with a petition?
The State had no authority to stop it.

 

[A Can of Man]

Well that should really affect you since you are no longer listening to anyone but yourself, at least the arguments and subsequent fight will be fun to watch.

Yeah it's what I intend to do.
There are about 6 billion closed minded people in the world who will listen to no one, including yourself, I think I'll be alright.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Can't, legal marriage has been defined by laws since long before the colonies became States.
But if it was left to religions the outcome would be the same.

But there isn't anything in our Constitution about it, so we can change the law.

One more time, the State did not allow anything it was the peoples right to bring it up for a vote. I thought you could not argue with a petition?
The State had no authority to stop it.

What I'm saying is, the people shouldn't have been able to say anything about it, and the State shouldn't be allowed to put it on the ballot anyway.

 

[senojekips]

To senojekips:You're trying to make me seem like I am assuming this actually... Tell me where I said anything other than on a basic HUMAN BEING LEVEL.

HERE!

To senojekips: Quite honestly, if you REALLY feel like homosexuals are somehow a different species, then maybe it's YOU with the mental problem... Homosexuals and heterosexuals, outside their sex lives, are the same type of people... They have the same needs, similar wants, the same basic humanistic traits... You cannot say that just because of a lifestyle choice that they are somehow different.

Don't start playing silly games, I'm too old and too smart to entertain clowns for very long.

You say Mother Theresa and Joseph Stalin were the same... Actually, they were man and woman, so that's a fundamental difference, but yes, on a human being level, they were the same.

No,... I used them to demonstrate that humans are NOT all the same. You don't even rememember the fact that it is you who is making the claim the we are all the same, I am the one showing that we are NOT.

I don't think you're understanding me, I'm talking about on the most basic, primal level here... Human being A and human being B are both the same human being TYPE. There are no differences in human beings. There are different people, but not different humans. But when I asked if they were somehow a different type of human, you clearly stated "Without a doubt." Therefore, you SAID they are a different type of human. And the closest biological classification to homo sapien would be a different species. It's basic science really... So I'd appreciate it if you DIDN'T call me rude, and you DIDN't call me mischievous, just because you didn't understand my point. I put no words in your mouth... You said everything...

I say again, is this your post or is it not?

To senojekips: Quite honestly, if you REALLY feel like homosexuals are somehow a different species, then maybe it's YOU with the mental problem... Homosexuals and heterosexuals, outside their sex lives, are the same type of people... They have the same needs, similar wants, the same basic humanistic traits... You cannot say that just because of a lifestyle choice that they are somehow different.

If it is your post, please cut and paste where I said they were a different species

Yes, just as HOMOSEXUALS (no need for name-calling) and heterosexuals are the same, a horse and a Lamborghini Gallardo are both modes of transportation. But they are not the same thing... You're correct... But that doesn't change the fact that I'm not changing your words.

Did you imply that I said they were a different SPECIES?... Yes you did, (see the quotes above) or are you going to accuse me of fabricating this quote I have posted.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Senojekips, you didn't even read the rest of my post did you? You said they were different types of humans, and under the classification of biology (Kingdom Phylum, Class, Order, Genus, and Species) the nearest thing to a different "type" of human would be a different species. I'm not playing silly games. I'm simply trying to help you understand that you did say what you said... There are no two TYPES of humans... There is only one TYPE of human, the species homo sapien. Any other TYPE of human would HAVE to be a different species.



How bout this, humor me and tell me what you meant by saying they are different "types" of humans.


Mother Theresa and Joseph Stalin were both human beings... The end... That's all... Nothing more.

 

[senojekips]

Senojekips, you didn't even read the rest of my post did you? You said they were different types of humans, and under the classification of biology (Kingdom Phylum, Class, Order, Genus, and Species) the nearest thing to a different "type" of human would be a different species. I'm not playing silly games. I'm simply trying to help you understand that you did say what you said... There are no two TYPES of humans... There is only one TYPE of human, the species homo sapien. Any other TYPE of human would HAVE to be a different species.

How bout this, humor me and tell me what you meant by saying they are different "types" of humans.

You are determined to be a fool aren't you? How about the example which you gave in your last post to me,... males and females, I could go on for a number of pages, but I feel you are already quite aware of that, and are just being a clown.

Mother Theresa and Joseph Stalin were both human beings... The end... That's all... Nothing more.

If I thought for a moment, that you were really that retarded I would humour you some more, but failing that, I will treat your reasoning with the contempt it justly deserves.

P.S. You still didn't answer whether it was you who posted the quotes I cut and pasted from your previous post? Not you,.... ?

 

[Rob Henderson]

You are determined to be a fool aren't you? How about the example which you gave in your last post to me,... males and females, I could go on for a number of pages, but I feel you are already quite aware of that, and are just being a clown.

If I thought for a moment, that you were really that retarded I would humour you some more, but failing that, I will treat your reasoning with the contempt it justly deserves.

P.S. You still didn't answer whether it was you who posted the quotes I cut and pasted from your previous post? Not you,.... ?

I thought it was a rhetorical question... Yes, it was me who posted those things.


LOOK, I've posted my point. I'm done. You can pull my posts apart all you want to. Call me retarded if you want, or treat my posts with contempt. Human beings are all the same, including you. You're no different from me, or my gay friend Justin, on a BASIC level. That's my point. Am I right or wrong?


PS, you never answered MY request to elaborate on your meaning of "different types of humans."

 

[senojekips]

LOOK, I've posted my point. I'm done. You can pull my posts apart all you want to. Call me retarded if you want, or treat my posts with contempt. Human beings are all the same, including you. You're no different from me, or my gay friend Justin, on a BASIC level. That's my point. Am I right or wrong?

You are wrong. If I even thought there was a possibility that I may be somewhat like a homo, I would do humanity a service and neck myself,... as many homos do. At least those who do, have the decency to admit that there is something basically wrong with them. I don't think that suicide is the answer, but that's their choice.

PS, you never answered MY request to elaborate on your meaning of "different types of humans."

Because it was only a diversion to get me off your tail regarding you putting words in my mouth, and had no bearing on the answer concerning the subject matter.

 

[Rob Henderson]

You are wrong. If I even thought there was a possibility that I may be somewhat like a homo, I would do humanity a service and neck myself,... as many homos do. At least those who do, have the decency to admit that there is something basically wrong with them. I don't think that suicide is the answer, but that's their choice.

So either you or the homosexuals are not human. That's what you're saying when you say they are not the same... Did you fail biology or has it really been THAT long? Humans are all the same on some level! THAT'S a RUDDY FACT!

Because it was only a diversion to get me off your tail regarding you putting words in my mouth, and had no bearing on the answer concerning the subject matter.

it's not a diversion, I want to know what the hell you meant by it. It's a simple question.



HUMANS ARE STILL HUMANS, NO MATTER THE LIFESTYLE. Am I right or wrong?

 

[senojekips]

So either you or the homosexuals are not human. That's what you're saying when you say they are not the same... Did you fail biology or has it really been THAT long? Humans are all the same on some level! THAT'S a RUDDY FACT!
it's not a diversion, I want to know what the hell you meant by it. It's a simple question.

I meant exactly as I said,... not one iota more or less and certainly not with the implied meaning that you are presuming. Just read what is said and don't go making your own assumptions. You'll get it right.... eventually....

HUMANS ARE STILL HUMANS, NO MATTER THE LIFESTYLE. Am I right or wrong?

That my friend is what is known in the trade as a "loaded question" such as, "Do you still beat your wife". It makes no allowance whereby it can be answered honestly. It makes the assumption of guilt prior to the answer being given and is a classic (but usually unsuccessful) ploy used by those attempting to derail a debate rather than get the truth. Try again!

Please cut and past my post where I actually said (not your interpretation of what I said) that some, or any humans are not actually humans. I merely said we are not the same, which in no way implies that they are not human, or not the same species. Interestingly enough that is your interpretation, which perhaps suggests that you have doubts in this direction???

Once again, you are trying to attribute something to me that I did not actually say. You are altogether too willing to read "what you wish to see" rather than what is said, into the posts of others.

 

[Rob Henderson]

That my friend is what is known in the trade as a "loaded question" such as, "Do you still beat your wife". It makes no allowance whereby it can be answered honestly. It makes the assumption of guilt prior to the answer being given and is a classic (but usually unsuccessful) ploy used by those attempting to derail a debate rather than get the truth. Try again!

Answer the question, Spike, it's not loaded... It's just trying to get you to understand what I meant.

Please cut and past my post where I actually said (not your interpretation of what I said) that some, or any humans are not actually humans. I merely said we are not the same, which in no way implies that they are not human, or not the same species. Interestingly enough that is your interpretation, which perhaps suggests that you have doubts in this direction???

Once again, you are trying to attribute something to me that I did not actually say. You are altogether too willing to read "what you wish to see" rather than what is said, into the posts of others.

So homosexuals are somehow a different type of human being than you or I?

Without a doubt

Right there... THAT'S where you said homosexuals are a different type of human. With hyperlinks to the posts themselves included.

 

[senojekips]

Answer the question, Spike, it's not loaded... It's just trying to get you to understand what I meant.

Are you a certifiable lunatic, or are you just so stupid, as to think that I am?. I told you why the question is not able to be answered. It is a classic loaded question that presumes the answer. It doesn't work,... nor will it on me.

Right there... THAT'S where you said homosexuals are a different type of human. With hyperlinks to the posts themselves included.

Yes, and if you READ THE ANSWER it says a different TYPE. That in no way says they are not human or a different species does it, it is you who made that presumption.

Here's another of your wild presumptions

So either you or the homosexuals are not human. That's what you're saying* when you say they are not the same...

* Don't presume to tell me what i am saying, I won't have your words put in my mouth. That's exactly how this whole argy bargy started.

So, I see a red car and a blue car,... I say they are not the same. You apparently say they are. I'm damned if I know how you find your car in a parking lot. But maybe that explains it,... you are blind, as well as being a complete waste of time.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Then what is a different type of human Spike? I clearly stated human being... I didn't say they were the same type of PEOPLE, I said the same type of HUMAN.


What is your definition of a different TYPE of HUMAN?




And quite calling me names.

 

[senojekips]

I'll tell the truth until you convince me otherwise.

If you can't see, that makes you blind by definition, and you've certainly wasted too much of my time.

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson
So homosexuals are somehow a different type of human being than you or I?

There's what you said "type" (shakes head) and i told you several times what type of difference, even you picked me up when I compared Mother Theresa and Joe Stalin, stating that they were different. You did that not me.

Goodbye....

 

[Rob Henderson]

They were fundamentally different because of their gender... Homosexuality does not make a man a different type of human... Simply a different type of human being... You're either reading way to much into what I'm saying, or just not grasping the concept.....


Cars are cars. They are different COLORS of car, but are still the same CAR. THAT'S my point!!! They can be different and still have similarities.