California takes a step backwards!

[ocean_jet]

I don't really know where I'm going, but I'm sure enough going to try it, it's going to be fast, I'll worry about the direction and landing later. I call it the rocket dog philosophy.

Haha... good one.

Poor pup.

 

[DrMoab]

why does this bother people so much? why is it any of your buisness? if you are not gay this does not affect you at all.

people act like they made straight marriage illegal in favor of gay marriage.

I could care less what people do with their own lives in their own bedrooms.

The problem with the gay movement is they want the whole damn world to know what goes in in their private lives and in their bedrooms.

When was the last time you saw straight people throwing a parade? Or how many straight pride stickers do you see.

The way I look at it is the gay movement has brought the hatred and disgust onto them selfs. If they would just shut up and live their lives quietly like the rest of the world no one would care what they do.

Personally the louder they get, the more rights I hope they never have.

 

[kristuphir]

Just Google mapped Lake Elizabeth. Nevermind.

You coming over for a visit? Because I've got an XJ up on jackstands, boxes of new suspension parts, an impact wrench, and a whole hell of a lot of beer.

 

[Darky]

For every closeted child molester spewing fire and brimstone on the radio at night, there are thousands of people living everyday lives who just happen to believe in a certain path to rightness, salvation, goodness, morality - whatever - and choose to follow a certain set of rules and guidelines to get there.

Why are you so quick to refer to radio evangelists as pedos? That's nothing but the same rhetoric being thrown out by so many liberal religion bashers. Yes, some priests have been known to molest kids, but so have some police or fathers who most people thought were great, etc. Things like that can get you labelled as a "rabble-rouser" (I just like that word) who's only posting out of a desire to rile those crazy right wing loud-mouth bunghole Christians...

(and I KNOW some of you are into butt sex, so don't feed me any of that bull#@!%)

ewww gross! No matter what the genders involved are...

But: has been known to use the word "darkie,"

That's it, I hate 'im. He called me a darky!

And beastiality, and incest? Seriously, folks? Let's toss out a little word here - just for shits and giggles, let's call it "consent" - and see where that gets that argument. Last I checked, rape was in no danger of becoming legal...

Ummm...animals can't consent. Therefore everytime you had sex with your goat, it was rape. :gag: Not to mention the fact that it can be very damaging to the animal. I seem to recall a case a little while back of a guy who had been caught in the act and they ended up having to put the animal down because of the internal damage caused by his having sex with a...uh..."unprepared" partner. As far as incest goes, lets think about this for a moment. The perceived right that it seems you believe in to have kids with your sister comes into direct conflict with my right to not pay for the care for your handicapped, disabled children caused by mixing genes from too close in the gene pool...Look at the British royal family, in the past they were inbred (or so the legend goes) and had all kinds of illnesses and problems. If you research it and I'm wrong, oh well, the point stands that incest is caused by and leads to retardation.
Also, before you attack for using the word retard, my mom and dad both have worked with or are still working with mentally handicapped clients. Dad's been at it for 30 some odd years, Mom did for a good 15-20 yrs. I grew up hanging out with them at the group home, spending holidays there, had a real good friend who was 18 at the time but had the mental capacity of a 10 yr old, which was convenient since I was right around 10 at the time...

None of this is meant as a direct attack, I just like a good debate/argument. A lot is somewhat tongue in cheek (not like that!) although generally aligned with my thoughts and beliefs:cheers: :cheers:

8) Jesus, it takes FOREVER to write a post like this! I'd never be able to even do it if I wasn't off work today. Maybe there's another reason for the limited post count, eh?

Stop oversimplifying, folks, OK? It's a complicated world.[/QUOTE]

 

[Darky]

As far a civil rights goes, sure sounds good on paper and actually just and fair. But realistically it seems to have polarized the races more than ever.

I gotta say, unless this is just a matter of mixing up words as English is no longer your main language, you're way wrong. Way way way way wrong. Yes I agree, there is still plenty of prejudice going back and forth across both sides of the aisle, but I'd have to say the polarization is less pronounced now that the races are allowed to mix rather than being forced to sit at opposite ends of the bus, school, town, etc. Would you prefer we went back to all us darkies having to be separate so the races could be closer?:wave: :doh:

they made straight marriage illegal in favor of gay marriage.

They did what?!?!?

 

[Bent]

I wish california would hurry up and fall off into the ocean. The only place that would miss it is mexico.

 

[Darky]

I wish california would hurry up and fall off into the ocean. The only place that would miss it is mexico.

Too true, let's hope it warns us first though so I can buy up some property in Yuma before prices sky-rocket...

 

[Bent]

Too true, let's hope it warns us first though so I can buy up some property in Yuma before prices sky-rocket...

I figured I'd buy some scuba gear and just stay put.

 

[scottmcneal]

I saw a sign at palm spring vistor center..... It said come to plam springs an have friends up the ass....:rtm: ...Leave it to the desert to come up with this.....Thats my 2 cents today

 

[Darky]

I saw a sign at palm spring vistor center..... It said come to plam springs an have friends up the ass....:rtm: ...Leave it to the desert to come up with this.....Thats my 2 cents today

I left my Bump stop plates at your place didn't I?

 

[kristuphir]

Ummm...animals can't consent. Therefore everytime you had sex with your goat, it was rape. :gag: Not to mention the fact that it can be very damaging to the animal. I seem to recall a case a little while back of a guy who had been caught in the act and they ended up having to put the animal down because of the internal damage caused by his having sex with a...uh..."unprepared" partner. As far as incest goes, lets think about this for a moment. The perceived right that it seems you believe in to have kids with your sister comes into direct conflict with my right to not pay for the care for your handicapped, disabled children caused by mixing genes from too close in the gene pool...Look at the British royal family, in the past they were inbred (or so the legend goes) and had all kinds of illnesses and problems. If you research it and I'm wrong, oh well, the point stands that incest is caused by and leads to retardation.
Also, before you attack for using the word retard, my mom and dad both have worked with or are still working with mentally handicapped clients. Dad's been at it for 30 some odd years, Mom did for a good 15-20 yrs. I grew up hanging out with them at the group home, spending holidays there, had a real good friend who was 18 at the time but had the mental capacity of a 10 yr old, which was convenient since I was right around 10 at the time...

Sorry, I wasn't clear on the "consent" thing. What I meant was, things like incest and beastiality will never be legal, slippery slope or not, precisely because parties involved in those things CANNOT consent, whereas gay people can most certainly consent to the activities in which they participate, including marriage. So I was saying that there's no way one could lead to the other.

Yeah, the child-molesting radio personality...that was over the line, you're right.

 

[5-90]

Sorry, I wasn't clear on the "consent" thing. What I meant was, things like incest and beastiality will never be legal, slippery slope or not, precisely because parties involved in those things CANNOT consent, whereas gay people can most certainly consent to the activities in which they participate, including marriage. So I was saying that there's no way one could lead to the other.

Yeah, the child-molesting radio personality...that was over the line, you're right.

[DEVIL'S ADVOCATE]

When you say "cannot consent" WRT incest, how exactly do you mean that? Are you referring to informed consent, or consent in general?

Yes, an animal cannot intelligbly consent to sexual acts perpetrated upon it the first time - but if it's coming around for more, I think it had fun. However, that's not specifically germane to the topic at hand - just throwing it out there.

What, precisely, do you mean by "consent" in cases of incest? Adults (who happen to be related to each other) can certainly give informed consent for sexual acts, so that argument is out.

Incest upon minors? The jury is still out on "age of consent" - check various state laws, and you'll find that the age at which an individual can give informed consent ranges from somewhere around twelve to eighteen or nineteen. That's for legal informed consent - considering that there are wildly varying rates at which individuals mature, there really should not be a fixed "age of consent" - some people get there a lot faster, and some people never really do get there. So, there's a flaw in that argument as well.

If you're referring to "informed consent" WRT flawed offspring, there can be arguments made both in favour of and against inbreeding - on genetic ground. It largely depends upon the amount of harmful recessive genes in that germ line - a germ line with no harmful recessives will only have flawed offspring in the case of an individual mutation, and not due to inbreeding. Note that I say "harmful" recessives - eye or hair colour other than brown is technically a "recessive" gene, but it's not harmful to the race as a whole. I have crooked fingers (genetic, symmetric and bilateral, manifests alternate generations) but it's not harmful - as it hasn't impaired my physical ability or function in any way. It's recessive, but it isn't harmful. Recessives which do not impair the physical or mental function of the individual cannot be considered "harmful" in that case, and I'm sure that just about everyone here has some sort of benign recessive physical trait that can be readily seen unassisted.

Even then, mutations aren't necessarily harmful. There are cases in my own germ line of individuals born without unneeded organs - vermiform appendix, tonsils, adenoids, and the like. That doesn't cause any harm - and, in fact, it can remove a risk to the individual and become a favourable modification to the genome over time. No, it wasn't due to inbreeding - just individual mutations that have occasionally manifest over several generations.

WRT the inbreeding of various royal lines - that wasn't caused by retardation per se. It's the old rule of "royalty must marry royalty to keep the bloodlines pure," so they have a limited gene pool to draw upon. Thus, harmful recessives are more often reinforced, and become more reinforced in the germ lines over time. Haemophilia was once known as "blue-blood's disease," as it was a harmful recessive gene reinforced by the semi-inbreeding of royalty. It was not common in the "commoner" simply because he was under no such restriction when selecting a mate, and therefore the gene pool was much broader and deeper - he was more likely to pick a carrier of a harmful recessive, but it was less likely to manifest, and could actually become bred out of the gene line (in a less controlled fashion than that exercised by, say, a dog breeder.) (And it wasn't limited to the Britons - Eurpoean royalty in general had that self-imposed societal handicap.)

[/DEVIL'S ADVOCATE]

For the record, I'm not into bestiality, pederasty, incest, or any of another of a batch of "deviant sexual behaviours" - although I do know a great deal about them. My term paper for SOC100 was a comparison and contract of "primitive" sexual practises and "modern" practises. I thought it would make for interesting research -and I was right. I try to pick odd topics for research papers - to expand my own knowledge, to present a challenge in research, and to present the intructor with a new something to read over the "same old crappola."

 

[in2fords]

It may have been over the line but atleast it puts things into perspective. saying all preist are child molestors is like saying all gay people are obnoxious.

I like how people say "If they would just keep to themselves and be quite like everyone else" Ever see the commercials for "Girls Gone Wild"? many people would say there is a percentage of straight people who flaunt it themselves!

If guys want to get marreid GOOD, their knocking out the BEST of the competition 2 at a time for us straight guys! them lesbos are fun to watch but come on, there killing me, we keep promoting lesbian behavior and we will only beable to watch, their wont be any left for us!

 

[5-90]

It may have been over the line but atleast it puts things into perspective. saying all preist are child molectors is like saying all gay people are obnoxious.

I like how people say "If they would just keep to themselves and be quite like everyone else" Ever see the commercials for "Girls Gone Wild"? many people would say there is a percentage of straight people who flaunt it themselves!

If guys want to get marreid GOOD, their knocking out the BEST of the competition 2 at a time for us straight guys! them lesbos are fun to watch but come on, there killing me, we keep promoting lesbian behavior and we will only beable to watch, their wont be any left for us!

Probably the best line I've heard on gay behaviour came from my wife former (and gay) hairstylist...

"If you want to be gay, be gay. Just don't be a f****n' fag about it."

No, he didn't like the "Fag Shows" either - got tired of them being goofy about it. He didn't like ACT UP, either. (I don't like the Fag Shows mainly because they always happen on days when I end up having to work up in SF, and they shut the damned city down.)

As far as "Straight Pride" parades, I'm minded of in incident from a dozen or so years ago. Apparently, someone wanted to have a parade and applied for a permit - the theme? "It's Great to be Straight."

He was denied the permit. Grounds? "Someone might find it offensive."

How's that work again?

 

[Bent]

...is like saying all gay people are obnoxious

Just that those that engage in it have made a wrong choice.

 

[Trail-Axe]

7) Fifty years from now, 17-year-old students will wonder at the history books that tell of historic decisions to allow same-sex marriages, just as I wondered about an actual law having to be passed to allow women to vote, or allow interracial marriages, or enforce civil rights. Stop oversimplifying, folks, OK? It's a complicated world.

Fifty years from now? Fifty years from now there will not be a United States of America if we keep defiling our land with this kind of garbage!

It is interesting how the gay propaganda has deceived somewhat intelligent people into thinking that a perverted act somehow deserve the same respect as another persons un-chosen skin color, sex (male or female), or ethnic background.

And before anyone uses they gay genetic argument ("I was born this way"), please understand that no research has ever proven a physical basis for homosexuality. Dr. Le Vay's own chart, published in Science magazine, revealed there were flaws in his hypothesis. It even contradicted his theory.

Homosexuality is a learned preference, and it is treatable. The idea that homosexuals are "Born that way" and can never change is a myth. Since homosexuality can be a learned behavior, it also means that if we keep our heads in the sand, the homosexual activist will have it taught in our public school as a social option for our children. I do not want my child being taught that a perverted act like homosexuality is OK. Our children are confused enough, we do not need a homosexual minority teaching our kids that it is OK to do something so perverted. That is why I care if they can marry or not.

 

[DrMoab]

You remind me of Stumpy...you start off good. Then your religious righteous anger gets the better of you and you just come off sounding stupid. There has been no proof...ever that Homosexuality is a learned preference and a lot of pretty good studies showing just the opposite. If you are afraid of gays...thats OK. If you don't like them because it doesn't fit into your small minded little view of the world...thats OK too. Just don't make arguments you can't back up.

Homosexuality is a learned preference, and it is treatable. The idea that homosexuals are "Born that way" and can never change is a myth. Since homosexuality can be a learned behavior, it also means that if we keep our heads in the sand, the homosexual activist will have it taught in our public school as a social option for our children. I do not want my child being taught that a perverted act like homosexuality is OK. Our children are confused enough, we do not need a homosexual minority teaching our kids that it is OK to do something so perverted. That is why I care if they can marry or not.

 

[jeepboy381]

You remind me of Stumpy...you start off good. Then your religious righteous anger gets the better of you and you just come off sounding stupid. There has been no proof...ever that Homosexuality is a learned preference and a lot of pretty good studies showing just the opposite. If you are afraid of gays...thats OK. If you don't like them because it doesn't fit into your small minded little view of the world...thats OK too. Just don't make arguments you can't back up.

X2!!! What harm are gay's doing to you personally or anyone else? What harm is done to you if same sex marriages are legal?

 

[kristuphir]

[DEVIL'S ADVOCATE]

When you say "cannot consent" WRT incest, how exactly do you mean that? Are you referring to informed consent, or consent in general?

Yes, an animal cannot intelligbly consent to sexual acts perpetrated upon it the first time - but if it's coming around for more, I think it had fun. However, that's not specifically germane to the topic at hand - just throwing it out there.

What, precisely, do you mean by "consent" in cases of incest? Adults (who happen to be related to each other) can certainly give informed consent for sexual acts, so that argument is out.

Incest upon minors? The jury is still out on "age of consent" - check various state laws, and you'll find that the age at which an individual can give informed consent ranges from somewhere around twelve to eighteen or nineteen. That's for legal informed consent - considering that there are wildly varying rates at which individuals mature, there really should not be a fixed "age of consent" - some people get there a lot faster, and some people never really do get there. So, there's a flaw in that argument as well.

If you're referring to "informed consent" WRT flawed offspring, there can be arguments made both in favour of and against inbreeding - on genetic ground. It largely depends upon the amount of harmful recessive genes in that germ line - a germ line with no harmful recessives will only have flawed offspring in the case of an individual mutation, and not due to inbreeding. Note that I say "harmful" recessives - eye or hair colour other than brown is technically a "recessive" gene, but it's not harmful to the race as a whole. I have crooked fingers (genetic, symmetric and bilateral, manifests alternate generations) but it's not harmful - as it hasn't impaired my physical ability or function in any way. It's recessive, but it isn't harmful. Recessives which do not impair the physical or mental function of the individual cannot be considered "harmful" in that case, and I'm sure that just about everyone here has some sort of benign recessive physical trait that can be readily seen unassisted.

Even then, mutations aren't necessarily harmful. There are cases in my own germ line of individuals born without unneeded organs - vermiform appendix, tonsils, adenoids, and the like. That doesn't cause any harm - and, in fact, it can remove a risk to the individual and become a favourable modification to the genome over time. No, it wasn't due to inbreeding - just individual mutations that have occasionally manifest over several generations.

WRT the inbreeding of various royal lines - that wasn't caused by retardation per se. It's the old rule of "royalty must marry royalty to keep the bloodlines pure," so they have a limited gene pool to draw upon. Thus, harmful recessives are more often reinforced, and become more reinforced in the germ lines over time. Haemophilia was once known as "blue-blood's disease," as it was a harmful recessive gene reinforced by the semi-inbreeding of royalty. It was not common in the "commoner" simply because he was under no such restriction when selecting a mate, and therefore the gene pool was much broader and deeper - he was more likely to pick a carrier of a harmful recessive, but it was less likely to manifest, and could actually become bred out of the gene line (in a less controlled fashion than that exercised by, say, a dog breeder.) (And it wasn't limited to the Britons - Eurpoean royalty in general had that self-imposed societal handicap.)

[/DEVIL'S ADVOCATE]

For the record, I'm not into bestiality, pederasty, incest, or any of another of a batch of "deviant sexual behaviours" - although I do know a great deal about them. My term paper for SOC100 was a comparison and contract of "primitive" sexual practises and "modern" practises. I thought it would make for interesting research -and I was right. I try to pick odd topics for research papers - to expand my own knowledge, to present a challenge in research, and to present the intructor with a new something to read over the "same old crappola."

That's what I get for answering while on the phone. See, if you don't bother to think your answer through, you see what happens?

So...yeah, what he said.

If everyone involved can consent and it's not hurting anyone else, fine. Go for it. If it's hurting someone else is where the problem comes in. So I guess (now referring to another poster) that if you honestly believe that schools are going to turn your kids into perverts and that the country will cease to exist inside 50 years if we "allow" gay folks to marry each other and live normal lives, then well, keep on votin'. By all means.

 

[Bent]

X2!!! What harm are gay's doing to you personally or anyone else? What harm is done to you if same sex marriages are legal?

That's swell.