EdmondWA Profile

Gay/Lesbian

Rihanna Offers To Make Out With Miley Cyrus...Yawn

QUOTE who="Luigi "]I'd like to see them eat each other out.[/QUOTE] So, homosexuality turns you on?  (5 hrs ago | post #3)

Gay/Lesbian

One Million Moms Targets 'Gay Days' at Disney

So DO you or DON'T you visit heterosexual websites to complain to heterosexuals about all the heterosexual crimes in the world? Be honest now, since honesty is clearly so important to you. The truth could surely never sound so good as when comes from its truest advocate. Give us some soundbytes of the harsh and condemning things you say to your fellow heterosexuals.  (10 hrs ago | post #198)

Gay/Lesbian

One Million Moms Targets 'Gay Days' at Disney

Why don't you just SAY whether you are or not, instead of dodging the issue by making people guess? We all know you're not. People like you have a one-track mind. It's ALL the gays fault. We'll never see you on heterosexual marriage sites complaining about divorce, we'll never see you on parenting sites berating straight parents for being negligent, cruel or incompetent. We'll never see you on military sites, bemoaning the state of sexual assaults against women. In issues of marriage, parenting, military service and more, the only complaints we ever see are about how the icky gays are ruining EVERYTHING. It never matters if the accusations are against the wrong people, people who have committed no crimes at all. It never matters if heterosexuals have been trashing the subject at hand for decades or centuries. ALL gay people are to take the blame, ALL gay people need to hear your grievances, ALL gay people are members of NAMBLA. "How do you know I'm not?" Please. Because we've seen it all before, again and again and again. You are not original.  (15 hrs ago | post #193)

Gay/Lesbian

Mob terrorises gay protesters in Georgia

I like this part: "Many were not able to overcome their nature" Uh, Isn't that what they keep saying WE need to do? Overcome our nature? Now THEY can't do it. Except that THEIR "nature" appears to involve violence and attack.  (15 hrs ago | post #4)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

I don't see why "presumption " of anything is necessary. You couldn't make that presumption for my parents, I was adopted. Plenty of families have the same lack of presumption. Marriages and civil unions aren't any different beyond how you WANT them to differ. You're applying labels which aren't necessary. A change of labels doesn't change the function. If a straight couple got a civil union, couldn't they still call themselves husband and wife? If a straight couple got married, couldn't they give themselves titles OTHER than husband and wife, without changing the function of their marriageWhy couldn't opposite sex couples use a civil union? What function of civil unions would fail to serve opposite sex couples? It has to be deeper than simply the labels you want to apply to the spouses, they can apply whatever labels they want for themselves. Beyond that, what specific areas of their lives will not be served by choosing one "legal relationship structure" over another? Specifically? Why is it like pulling teeth to ask for SPECIFICS in this argumentI've known plenty of straight couples who have not, cannot, or will not procreate. This is not a necessity. A couple may be married and not have children. A couple may have children and not be married. Having children does not change the terms of the marriage. You are not naming NECESSARY components of marriage which would make spell out a need for civil unions. If a straight couple got a civil union, couldn't they still procreate? Don't civil unions provide for the needs of people who are parents, in the same way that marriages do? If not, then civil unions would be inadequate anyway, as plenty of gay couples are raising children. How do the differences in marriages and civil unions serve these couples differentlyBut if they DON'T procreate, their marriage is not invalidated. You are STILL not naming anything that is a necessary part of marriage, which cannot be served by a civil union (or vice versaA "husband " is any man who is married. A "wife" is any woman who is married. These labels are really NOT the important functions of marriage which gay couples seek. If a man takes a woman as his wife, do you really think that this title is ALL he seeks, and NOTHING more? This is all you've argued for, titles. Aren't there OTHER functional components of marriage that are just slightly more important? Doesn't a man seek to PROTECT his chosen partner? Doesn't he seek to declare their unassailable partnership, ensuring for their mutual futures and mutual legal representation? We seek that alsoI understand that specifics are difficult to come up with for your argument (though I don't understand WHY), but try. Try to fill in this blank for me: In the states where marriage has been granted to same-sex couples, those states and/or couples are going to run into problems in the area of __________________ ____, because of the fact that they did not impliment civil unions instead.  (Sunday | post #4211)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Talk about "spam", I could've read that with my eyes closed. You never say anything different, you broken record. When and where was I "exposed "? Was it printed somewhere? Did I miss the announcement on CNN? You haven't exposed anything or anyone. And I still have no idea how you're "disenfranchi sed". Have you lost your ability to build a wall of division between yourself and the icky gays? That's not a right you truly ever had. You haven't been disenfranchised. You're just cuckoo. If you like marriage, go get married. Don't presume to steal it away from anyone else that wants to enjoy it. Go destroy your own family, keep your mitts off of other people's families.  (Friday May 17 | post #4181)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Never heard of anyone like that. Where are the MILLIONS of people like that, fighting for their rights? Where is their advocacy headquarters located? What is the URL of their website? When do they hold their parades? How do I get a bumper sticker or a T-shirt? If you have to invent "scare scenarios", to make your point, then you don't have a valid one. The rare incestuous situation that some individuals might find themselves in has nothing to do with the world-wide movement of same-sex oriented people fighting for their rights. No one is "incestuously oriented". You won't find people who are only capable of expressing love when there's a relative around. All people are still oriented toward either male or female (or both). They should have the right to bond with a partner for life, with all the legal protections that make them into family. People who are ALREADY family have no need of this. Besides, take 2 minutes and go Google the current incest marriage laws in this country. They're remarkably laxIf you have a brain, a sense of compassion, and an understanding of human beings, then yesI know all about boundaries. Why are you making assumptions? Do you think people are gay because they didn't learn boundaries? Do you know nothing of consent? What do boundaries have to do with anything? And I don't see how this is "simply about children". Children may be one consideration, but they are not the only one. And the children being raised by gay couples should be taken into account also. The focus of marriage is the couple who actually gets married. Children's names do not appear on the marriage license, they are not involved. The absence of children do not invalidate a marriage, and the presence of children do not mandate one. Some children are going to grow up and realize that they're gay, and they're going to want to participate in the full social experience. You don't simply get to DECLARE who you want this to be about, just so you can exclude whomever you choose. This is about a LOT of people, not simply children.  (Friday May 17 | post #4179)

Gay/Lesbian

Linda Harvey Claims Gay Websites Lead Kits To Gay Pornogr...

Aren't you being a little redundant? Those are all the same book.  (Thursday May 16 | post #22)

Gay/Lesbian

Linda Harvey Claims Gay Websites Lead Kits To Gay Pornogr...

These people seem to think that heterosexuality is delicately frail, and that homosexuality is an irresistable temptation to everyone.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #9)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Then why bring it up? What solution does it provide? Many of those marriages end in divorce, tooWhyWHY?? Can you offer some specificsYet they're identical! Explain in SPECIFICS how civil unions would differ from marriage. You have never done this (you are remarkably reticent whenever asked for ANY specifics). If the two are not different, then there is no point in HAVING two. Name a scenario, ANY scenario, in which a "marriage " does not provide a "solution " for a same-sex couple, while a civil union does. Explain to me how this works, through a cogent exampleSoYou could say the same thing about dating, or roller-skating, or holding hands. "Exclusion " is the "old constructWe areDefine "need". From my point of view, it seems that all we "need" to do is keep fighting the good fight, because it's working. The traditions I start with my partner will differ from those that you celebrate with yours. But "traditions " won't get me in to see him in the hospital. "Traditions " won't ensure that his Social Security is transfered to me when he dies. "Traditions " aren't legally binding. Marriage is. I'd consider your argument if you could give ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE as to how a civil union would differ from a marriage, but you have yet to do that. If these two institutions are functionally identical in every way, then I see no reason not to just use the one in place. What will marriage do for you that it won't do for me? What will civil unions do for me, that they won't do for you? EXPLAIN yourself.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #4171)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Yet it happened (and happens). It doesn't matter what labels you put on people. The fact is that it has long been acceptable, in decades past, to treat homosexual people (under whatever label of the day) with scorn and exclusion. That has changed. Many things will change with itNo, we most certainly do NOT. "Legal terms"? They may have legal DEFINITIONS, but they have no legal connection to "man and wife". There's no reason they can't be applied to same-sex couples, or even unmarried couples. They're just "terms". They are not legal pre-requisites for marriage, and a marriage that chooses not to use them (or a marriage where they don't apply) is no less valid than any other marriage. And no one will be forced to drop them. If you like them, then use themWake me when it happens. Excuse me if I don't get excited when it's only ANOTHER conservative building a polygamist strawmanNo one will prosecute you if you choose to use the words "husband " and "wifeI'm not going over this YET AGAIN for you. See my post #4152, paragraph 2Now"? I think the issue of polygamy was settled about 150 years ago. Still, see my previous postBecause if the people INVOLVED don't choose to undertake any contract, then what does the state have to enforceThe reason people NEED marriage is that it makes them into family when they were not. Blood relatives don't need that. Besides, go Google current incest laws in this countryI don't know that the state DOES "need" to. The people involved DO need to, and the state enforces such contracts. If anyone breaks any contract with you, who do you turn to? Bartenders? Veterinarians? Or do you go to your state judiciary for them to enforce a solution? This is why the state is involved. Two people contract together to be each other's permanent and only represenatives. If any outside party tries to intervene, or if one of the spouses does not live up to their obligations, then the state is needed to enforce the contract.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #4170)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Because human beings fall in love and want to spend their lives together, and they want that bond to be legally protected so that no outside forces may infringe on itBut same-sex partners falling in love and wanting to spend their lives together is NOT a modern western invention. Same-sex couples have been doing this throughout history. Recognizing those relationships as "marriage " is relatively new, but so is allowing gay people to serve in the military, or to be open in any employment situation, or simply to walk down the street holding hands. When a society realizes it's been treating a minority badly, MANY things change to correct that. There is no reason NOT to have legal protection for same-sex relationships, and there is no reason to have a SEPARATE arrangement for that other than the one which already exists to do the very same job.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #4168)

Gay/Lesbian

Linda Harvey Claims Gay Websites Lead Kits To Gay Pornogr...

They didn't even HAVE an internet when I realized I was gay. And why didn't all the straight porn I've seen have any effect? I saw plenty of that, long before I saw anything gay. Hateful morons.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #4)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

But, what if they don't CONSUMMATE such a marriage? Then what? Previously, you've made it sound like this is the most important requirement to make a marriage valid. Now it sounds like, as long as gay people are willing to contort their happiness and live a completely unsuitable life, you don't CARE if they don't consummate their marriages. Make up your mind.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #4166)

Gay/Lesbian

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

How is that a "requirement "? Please describeThe damage from ANY divorce is the crumbling of a family. That's hard no matter what the legal arrangement is. What are these negative consequences, exactly? Can you be more specific? Why SHOULDN'T the opposite sex requirement be dropped? Gay couples have the same needs that straight couples do, as provided by marriageTo say that you don't care if gay people have the exact same rights, but your only issue is that we shouldn't have the exact same title... This is segregation for segregation's sake. If there is no difference between the functions of marriages and civil unions, then why HAVE a difference? Let a single institution provide that single functionConsummati on is NOT a function of marriage. It MIGHT happen, it might NOT. A marriage is not dissolved if consummation doesn't happen. You can't possibly care who is consummating their marriages and who isn't. I will accept my spouse as my spouse. You can call your spouse whatever you like. This is also not a function of marriage.  (Wednesday May 15 | post #4165)