For those against gay marriage...

hedave

There will always be a separation of church and state. The separation is precisely why the Federal government has passed the vote on gay marriage to the states. That's what "separation" defines. The states wield that "separated" power at times. Hence, the legality of abortion in some states. But listen: It comes down to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" for every American. However, people misconstrue happiness with expectation. It's not "life, liberty" and expectation. Just because you want it doesn't mean you'll get it. Suck it up. Somehow, I think Americans have forgotten that. Pursuit is not a guarantee. You can't always get what you want (Those are words from a song. Why can't I remember what song?).

Cosmo

I'm against gay marriage because I don't like marrying a guy.
But, I really don't give a shit if other people prefer to... I mean, who am I to say who gets to marry whom? No one put me in charge of the definition of marriage. If you want to have sex with that one person... forever and ever... until it kills you... er, I mean, until you die... fine. That's your gig and I hope you're happy with it. If the two of you love each other and make each other happy... why is that any of my business?

Cosmo

he still stands wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

good grief.......re-read my post, :roll:

Godfather.

I did... it clearly implies that you think gay marriage was the fall of the Roman Empire. This is a thread about gay marriage... the context of the discussion was gay marriage... then you say "you might want to look at what events and social flaws led up to the fall of the roman empire, from what little I know those guys went off the charts with thing's that led them to a path of distruction" which is incredibly ambiguous, but in this context it means that acts of homosexuality caused the fall of the Roman Empire. If that isn't what you meant, you should use the english language to clear things up rather than smugly saying that isn't what you meant.

...
But you have to give him credit on this:

Godfather. wrote:

"I not real informed on roman history..."

he was 100% correct on this point

WaveCameCrashin

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i just do not think it is right to keep an entire section of the population from enjoying the same freedoms as those of us that are heterosexual. i say let them get married. many of those people are in committed relationships that last a lifetime and when the partner dies they have no legal right to make decisions and can not have next of kin status. i think that is wrong also.

+1 but I still prefer camel toes...

OutOfBreath

Godfather. wrote:

I not real informed on roman history but I think you might want to look at what events and social flaws led up to the fall of the roman empire, from what little I know those guys went off the charts with thing's that led them to a path of distruction. as I say not real sure but worth a look.

Godfather.

Well, read up some further on greek and roman history. They were doing that stuff right through their golden ages as well. Old respectable men having young boy "proteges" were pretty regular, at least in high society. Hell the greeks even thought male on male sex purer since it involved two intelligent people. (Yup, they really had a nice view of women)

So, since this was definitely going on since ever, I hardly think it had much to do with the fall of the empire. It had a damned good run as empires go, and they all "fall" at some point. I'd like to quote my history teacher at university "The question is not why the roman empire fell, but why it lasted as long as it did." And even after "the fall" of the western part in the 4-700s, the eastern part of it went on as the Byzantine empire up until the 1400s, stretching it across almost 2 millennia. In fact the empire didn't start to come apart until after christianity settled as state religion (300s). Does that mean christianity is to blame for the fall of the western empire? The wandering tribes set off by the nomadic barbarians to the east is a much more likely contributor to the collapse of the western roman empire.

The relevance in regards to allowing gay marriage in this time and age seems non-existant.

Peace
Dan

Godfather.

he still stands wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

good grief.......re-read my post, :roll:

Godfather.

I did... it clearly implies that you think gay marriage was the fall of the Roman Empire. This is a thread about gay marriage... the context of the discussion was gay marriage... then you say "you might want to look at what events and social flaws led up to the fall of the roman empire, from what little I know those guys went off the charts with thing's that led them to a path of distruction" which is incredibly ambiguous, but in this context it means that acts of homosexuality caused the fall of the Roman Empire. If that isn't what you meant, you should use the english language to clear things up rather than smugly saying that isn't what you meant.

dam...your right, some people believe that the roman empire became so powerful and complacent they became ..well a little to fat and happy and yes homosexuality and sex with young boys,partying till they puked kinda lowered their defences.

Godfather.

OutOfBreath

Godfather. wrote:

dam...your right, some people believe that the roman empire became so powerful and complacent they became ..well a little to fat and happy and yes homosexuality and sex with young boys,partying till they puked kinda lowered their defences.

Godfather.

To which the counter argument is that the boy/homosexuality was not an invention of the late roman empire, but rather something that they inherited from the greeks before them.

As for what caused the western part of the empire to fall, it had likely a lot more to do with the huns sending entire peoples on the move as they rampaged into Europe from the east in the late 300s. At this time the capital of the empire had moved to Constantinople as well, and as I said, this part of the empire lasted a further 1000 years as the Byzantine empire.

Moral decline played a very minor role in this, and what is mentioned here was part of the culture throughout, not an addition at the end. Homosexuality didn't get such a bad rap until Christianity rose to prominence denouncing it. Before, it was a practice that although not flaunted much publicly, was quietly accepted.

Peace
Dan

he still stands

Godfather. wrote:

dam...your right, some people believe that the roman empire became so powerful and complacent they became ..well a little to fat and happy and yes homosexuality and sex with young boys,partying till they puked kinda lowered their defences.

Godfather.

so, you admit that IS what you were saying? That homosexual acts caused the decline of the Roman Empire?

What really confuses me is this; what in the hell does gay marriage have to do with the rape of children and "partying till (you) puke"???

Are you inferring that all gay people have sex with children? That all gay people party too much and their capability to marry will cause the collapse of Western Civilization?

If so, methinks that is quite a bit of hate and ignorance piled into one post.

Godfather.

OutOfBreath wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

dam...your right, some people believe that the roman empire became so powerful and complacent they became ..well a little to fat and happy and yes homosexuality and sex with young boys,partying till they puked kinda lowered their defences.

Godfather.

To which the counter argument is that the boy/homosexuality was not an invention of the late roman empire, but rather something that they inherited from the greeks before them.

As for what caused the western part of the empire to fall, it had likely a lot more to do with the huns sending entire peoples on the move as they rampaged into Europe from the east in the late 300s. At this time the capital of the empire had moved to Constantinople as well, and as I said, this part of the empire lasted a further 1000 years as the Byzantine empire.


Moral decline played a very minor role in this, and what is mentioned here was part of the culture throughout, not an addition at the end. Homosexuality didn't get such a bad rap until Christianity rose to prominence denouncing it. Before, it was a practice that although not flaunted much publicly, was quietly accepted.

Peace
Dan

WOW !!thanks Dan,very cool.

Godfather.

Godfather.

he still stands wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

dam...your right, some people believe that the roman empire became so powerful and complacent they became ..well a little to fat and happy and yes homosexuality and sex with young boys,partying till they puked kinda lowered their defenses.

Godfather.

so, you admit that IS what you were saying? That homosexual acts caused the decline of the Roman Empire?

What really confuses me is this; what in the hell does gay marriage have to do with the rape of children and "partying till (you) puke"???

Are you inferring that all gay people have sex with children? That all gay people party too much and their capability to marry will cause the collapse of Western Civilization?

If so, methinks that is quite a bit of hate and ignorance piled into one post.

don't over think it, nope ! just saying that homosexual acts where or might have been part of the daily sin that was going on leading up to the fall of the roman empire.

Godfather.

gimmesometruth27

i did some looking around and reading about the decline of the roman empire yesterday. some of the sites said the "decline of morals" had a major impact on the decline, while some said if had an insignificant impact, so apparently it depends on who you ask and who you read. most of them stated other reasons like rapid expansion and some of the other things listed by above posters.

i do not feel that allowing gays to marry in america will suddenly spell the death blow for our country, and to argue that it would with no evidence at all is just assinine..

he still stands

In regards to morality, I am reminded of one of my favorite quotes by one of my favorite authors ...

"As for "morality" -- or "moralic acid" as Nietzsche called it -- I consider it the major cause of almost all the major atrocities not caused by "ideology." This wonderful invention, "morality," allows people -- normal, ordinary people -- to do things so cruel and violent that they could never bring themselves to do them for selfish reasons. What the sociopath and sadist do for fun, the "moralist" does on behalf of "duty" or "justice." "Morality," today, allows Moslems to stone women to death, as it once fuelled the Christian witch-hunts. "Morality" has excused every war, and glorified some of them. "Morality" constantly plots to subvert the Constitutional guarantee of free speech. "Morality" inspires gay-bashing and the bombing of women's clinics. Why, without "morality" we might all suddenly go stark staring sane.

My vision of Utopia would include a hell of a lot more kindness and mercy than we have now, and a hell of a lot less 'morality.'" - RA Wilson

ForceofNature101

Drew263 wrote:

I'm a southern, christian, conservative, white male from Alabama.

I do not care one bit if gays can marry. If they want to marry, let them. It does not affect my life whatsoever. I have gay couples as neighbors, my parents do as well and are good friends with them(they throw a great neighborhood Halloween party every year ).

Who is it hurting?

Exactly! I agree with you 100%. All in all, we are all human, and if two people want to get married, why should that affect your own life?