PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Now for something different...
August 6th 2003, 02:03 CEST by Matt Perkins

As you can see in this article and from numerous other (interesting read) sources, gay marriages are the current 'hot topic'.  Why?

Because Canada passed some laws in some places that make them ok and the Supreme Court said you can't put a man in jail for sodomizing a consenting adult in the privacy of his own home.  And not only did they say that, but the court said what you do in your home in the pursuit of love and companionship, is yours to say (to paraphrase).  To many this is seen as a battle cry and to others a warning of the decline of our society.

My question is this...  Not including the religious fanatics out there, is this truly a big deal?  Does it matter if man marries man or woman marries woman?  If so, why?  

Including the religious fanatics that say the bible says gay = bad, I say, the lord likes the smell of burning meat wafting towards the heavens (the bible tells me so)…sacrificed a lamb recently?


And on somewhat separate note, many people have brought up the idea of gay marriages as only a step from polygamy and incest relations being approved next.  Is this as out there as it sounds?  Am I missing something where this logic applies?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Now for something different...

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by E-ph0nk
2003-08-06 02:03:54
http://www.electrophonk.be
topic = ghey

*sigh*
#2 by bago
2003-08-06 02:19:59
manga_Rando@hotmail.com
Not that there's anything wrong with that...

#3 by Qmanol
2003-08-06 02:30:38
And on somewhat separate note, many people have brought up the idea of gay marriages as only a step from polygamy and incest relations being approved next.  Is this as out there as it sounds?  Am I missing something where this logic applies?


I think the thing is that in the gay marriage issue, the big point on the pro- side is that of consent. They seem to want to extend the idea that whatever two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is fine, to allowing the recognition of a comittment between those two adults, (with concomitant civil rights accorded by law) irregardless of whether they fit the traditional definition of marriage. Now, the logic goes, if there is no problem with the two consenting adults being of the same sex, why should there be a problem with them being of the same family, or of there being more than two of them, so long as they all are of legal age and consent to the arrangement?

At least, that's the most logical derivation I can come up with.

"Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life."
 -- (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)
#4 by ProStyle
2003-08-06 02:33:29
http://prostyle.deviantart.com
"Hot Topic" he says...

I'm like a quote out of context...
#5 by Desiato
2003-08-06 02:36:14
desiato_hotblack@hotmail.com http://www.spew2.com/
Wonder how the insurance industry will react. Men are higher risks, after all, in most categories.
#6 by Sgt Hulka
2003-08-06 02:49:41
Why stop there? I'm marrying my Gamecube this weekend and you're all invited.  Bring a game as a gift, please organize. I don't want duplicates.. Now, onto plans for the honeymoon. Where do I put this thing?

Doomed! the Movie - Videogames Turn Deadly...
#7 by Quicken
2003-08-06 02:50:30
gdunn@backmeup.net.au
There's a wedding night I don't want to imagine
#8 by Gabe
2003-08-06 03:00:18
http://www.dartpublishing.com
God dammit, I voted no! My opinion used to count for something around here...
#9 by bago
2003-08-06 03:19:50
manga_Rando@hotmail.com
You know, the world would be a whole lot better off if people just stopped caring.

Why should I care who timmy is or isn't married to? I mean honestly.

Why should the DEA care if Bailey wants a toke?

Why should Nancy Reagan care if a citizen wants to go to a bar?

#10 by Warren Marshall
2003-08-06 03:23:21
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
Because gay sex leads to communism, which we know is tied into the downloading of MP3's.  It's all intertwined in an evil web of terrorism.

#11 by Russ
2003-08-06 03:59:25
What a huge tragedy.

This won't hurt a bit.
#12 by Warren Marshall
2003-08-06 04:11:21
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
Emergency officials said a small amount of bourbon found its way into a creek that runs near the charred warehouse, but the environmental effects were expected to be minimal.

Fish were reported to be surly and yelling at their offspring.

#13 by Quicken
2003-08-06 04:17:15
gdunn@backmeup.net.au
Technically if people stopped caring there would be no changes made and no call for homosexual marriages.

The real question is what does marriage mean? After all it's not like they've got a whole lot of christian virgin gays in Canada that don't want to become sinners. And on a legal level it's already acceptable for a defacto partner to be same-sex. If the sybolisim of marriage is already losing it's real significance with sex before marriage and divorces is gay marriages just another blow?
#14 by BobJustBob
2003-08-06 04:25:19
I was going to comment on the public opinion around here, but then I saw the "religious fanatics" exception. Therefore I have nothing to offer.

Voices tell me I'm the shit.
<Whisp> BJB is a troll. <Whisp> Troll I say!
#15 by bago
2003-08-06 04:36:54
manga_Rando@hotmail.com
Perhaps that should be phrased to "Caring about things that do not affect you".


The marital status of billy and/or timmy, Bailey's sudden attack of the munchies, and Archie watching his favorite band at a bar do not affect me in the slightest. So I don't care. And unless you have to deal with timmy, billy, bailey, or archie... You really have no business to try and change their behavior with that blunt instrument known as the law.

These are constitutionally coded precepts.

#16 by G-Man
2003-08-06 05:35:02
/Reaches for his Constitutional Law textbooks.

/Thinks better of it.

/Reaches for the remote control.
#17 by Desiato
2003-08-06 05:37:51
desiato_hotblack@hotmail.com http://www.spew2.com/
And, for no reason, a deleted clip from Outlaw Volleyball.

.mov format
#18 by G-Man
2003-08-06 05:42:38
But I will comment that an interesting alternative to marriage for same-sex (or even heterosexual) couples is to simply incorporate together as a general partnership or LLC. This can actually be superior to the covenant marriages offered by some states.
#19 by Quicken
2003-08-06 05:49:35
gdunn@backmeup.net.au
The marital status of billy and/or timmy, Bailey's sudden attack of the munchies, and Archie watching his favorite band at a bar do not affect me in the slightest. So I don't care. And unless you have to deal with timmy, billy, bailey, or archie... You really have no business to try and change their behavior with that blunt instrument known as the law.


I think the way the logic works is this:
If billy killed timmy it doesn't effect me directly. However it needs to be dealt with by law or what's to discourage archie from shooting me.
Therefore if billy married timmy it doesn't effect me directly. However it needs to be dealt with by law or what's to discourage archie from marrying me.

I think that sums it up as to why people are calling for it to be outlawed
#20 by None-1a
2003-08-06 05:59:38
And on somewhat separate note, many people have brought up the idea of gay marriages as only a step from polygamy and incest relations being approved next.  Is this as out there as it sounds?  Am I missing something where this logic applies?


It wasn't gay marriages it was the sodomy laws being over turned on privacy grounds that kicked that off. The logic was that if the court set up a zone of privacy in the home that was above this law no law that takes place with in that zone would be valid. This logic is a reason for the clause requiring the states to show public harm by the actions being included in the opinion (preventing someone from taking that logic to the extreme and saying a murder was included, and gives the states an argue point for incest/polygamy laws*).

*Frankly I'd like to see the logic apply on those two. Let polygamy/bigamy factor into a divorce and other laws handle the sticky consent situation incest can cause.
#21 by yotsuya
2003-08-06 06:00:38
Man, I have to get Jerry Maguire on DVD.

"YES!!  You see people, THAT'S why he's the Vice-President of A/V Services here at Respawn Games.  Yotsuya ALWAYS unleashes the fucking fury!" - Warren Marshall
#22 by Matt Perkins
2003-08-06 06:07:56
wizardque@yahoo.com http://whatwouldmattdo.com/
Ok, maybe I am missing something.  How does the logic go like this?

Gay marriage allowed = polygmany/etc allowed?

We're not talking about allowing everything.  We're not talking about your religious beliefs because that should be seperate from state.  We're talking about allowing to people that love each to commit to each in the eyes of the law (and God, if they so choose to).  I'm not saying marriage is needed for that, it's not.  But to a lot of people, it's something they are being denied because of their sexual preference.

Just as weed is not a gateway drug, gay marriage is not a gateway to incest/etc.  The whole idea that it is could be is total propaganda.  The logic does not follow.

I was just over posting on QT3.  Did you know they talk about games?  What an interesting idea.
#23 by Quicken
2003-08-06 06:18:18
gdunn@backmeup.net.au
Twisted logic number 2:

Gay marriages = marry whoever you want male or female
Gay marriages = marry whoever you want
Gay marriages = marry as much as you want
Gay marriages = polygamy

But that's stretching it even for me. It's far easier if I started with divorce
#24 by Sgt Hulka
2003-08-06 06:26:35
Twisted Logic Number 3:

I get my new GameCube bride pregnant, and we give birth to charming twin Monkey Balls, then put them up for adoption, but only albino midgets can adopt them.  Who's to say that they won't make good, albino midget parents?

Doomed! the Movie - Videogames Turn Deadly...
#25 by Greg
2003-08-06 06:39:41
Matt Perkins:

Maybe if you read what None-1a said, you'd realize he mentioned in his first line he was talking about the sodomy law. That the striking down of that law paved the way for incest to be unprosecutable. Though I don't see how it relates to polygamy.

We are OK in a misguided, sadist way.
We are OK in a disabled veteran's way.
We are OK.
#26 by Quicken
2003-08-06 06:41:03
gdunn@backmeup.net.au
Image of Sgt Hulka impregnating a GameCube spins through Quicken's mind

Quicken flees screaming
#27 by Your Friend
2003-08-06 08:00:18
Why Do All These Homosexuals Keep Sucking My Cock?

EOD.

"Take Two needs to STFU imo." - G30rg3 Br0uzz4rd
#28 by Darkseid-D
2003-08-06 09:49:43
rogerboal@hotmail.com
And now for something completely different.

http://fa.xmunkki.org/


kind of like dance dance revolution, only manipulating ... well .. breasts.



(ps, you can rename/delete a certain jpg in the folder to uhm .. increase the adult content)


Ganked from Ars Forum.

Do not go gently into that good night.
Old age should burn and rage at the close of day.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
#29 by Squeaky
2003-08-06 10:06:57
#28 Darkseid-D
And now for something completely different.

http://fa.xmunkki.org/


kind of like dance dance revolution, only manipulating ... well .. breasts.



(ps, you can rename/delete a certain jpg in the folder to uhm .. increase the adult content)


Ganked from Ars Forum.

That was posted in IRC a few minutes ago.

Dip me in chocolate and throw me to the lesbians.
DVDs
#30 by Your Friend
2003-08-06 10:08:06
You guys need to get out more.

"Take Two needs to STFU imo." - G30rg3 Br0uzz4rd
#31 by lwf
2003-08-06 10:15:00
Foodbunny linked that like last week. Live in the now, man.

I wish that you would move to the sun.
#32 by Gunp01nt
2003-08-06 11:19:17
supersimon33@hotmail.com
My question is this...  Not including the religious fanatics out there, is this truly a big deal?  Does it matter if man marries man or woman marries woman?  If so, why?


I think that, besides the religious fanatics, not many people have such strong objections against gay marriages. It's the whole 'we believe god said he hates homosexuals' thing that makes people strongly opposed against gay marriages, and caused gay sex to be outlawed to begin with.

The Netherlands was the first country in the world to allow gay marriages, and we have yet to see the four plagues come down upon us. The problem is that religious fanatics are, by definition, a little too convinced of their own opinions. IMHO a religion is an opinion. IMHO any opinion is allowed, but when you force your opinion on others, you're a bad man.

"You know what happens to schoolgirls in Japanese cartoons? Hmm, tentacles!"
#33 by Darkseid-D
2003-08-06 12:19:52
rogerboal@hotmail.com
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,6848227^661,00.html

John 'youre the voice' Farnham fronting Queen?


the horror.....

Do not go gently into that good night.
Old age should burn and rage at the close of day.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
#34 by LPMiller
2003-08-06 15:03:23
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
I read the whole article, and I still have no idea who John Farnham is.

I believe I can fly......urk.
#35 by ...an ethereal being...
2003-08-06 15:50:17
But I will comment that an interesting alternative to marriage for same-sex (or even heterosexual) couples is to simply incorporate together as a general partnership or LLC. This can actually be superior to the covenant marriages offered by some states.


Would this handle the health care and probate issues that gay/lesbian couples encounter?

"PlanetCrap, your #1 source of handy tips on how to use household detritus and Barbie analogues to make you completely unattractive to the opposite sex." - m0nty
#36 by Ashiran
2003-08-06 15:53:14
Bago:
You know, the world would be a whole lot better off if people just stopped caring.

Some things would be better, some things would be worse.

Anyway this whole gay marriage thing doesn't play here anyway. As a matter of fact, 82% of the dutch population said the Vatican can stuff it.

"Your beam weapons are just a thinly-veiled analogy for giant throbbing plasma cocks violating new orifices in enemy ships." - Bailey
#37 by Desiato
2003-08-06 15:54:13
desiato_hotblack@hotmail.com http://www.spew2.com/
That's a lawn-burning consensus!
#38 by Warren Marshall
2003-08-06 15:54:47
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
Well, they're all high, so ...

#39 by Caryn
2003-08-06 17:15:17
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
I'm convinced that the majority of people don't care if two people of the same sex get married. But as gunpoint said, the people who believe it should be illegal are fanatic about it, and fanatics are intense, driven people who are loud enough to appear to represent the majority, and they have the drive and ambition to get laws passed against it, whereas those who couldn't care less who marries who won't take action either way.

I myself think gay marriage should be legal and I think the Pope wailing on about the sanctity of marriage while he's protecting child-diddling priests is disgusting and abominable.

SNIKT!
#40 by Dawn Keedik
2003-08-06 17:46:39
http://www.thedonkeyshow.com
If the church can approve of a gay bishop, it'll soon allow gay unions.

Putting Yours to Shame Daily!
#41 by """Balderama"""
2003-08-06 17:46:41
support@real.com www.planetcrap.com
Gunp01nt is clearly gay. What else would he need those rights for?
#42 by Chunkstyle
2003-08-06 17:55:31
Dawn-

Different church.

There's joy in repetition.
#43 by Hieronymus
2003-08-06 17:58:29
There is a reason why slippery slope arguments are a logical fallicy.  If the government feels that polygamy is bad while gay marriage is good, they can easily pass a law saying that.  The constitution (in Canada, I can't speak for American or Dutch law) states that "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."   The question is, where do these "reasonable limits" lie?  Myself, the courts, and just over half the population believe that gay marriage fall well within these limits.  That being said, I remember a CBC report some time ago (well before the gay marriage rulings) that there was a small religous community in BC that practised polygamy.  Nobody was charged because the crown felt that they would lose a constitutional challenge to the law.

The pope has also brought up the separation of church and state.  An Albertan bishop has stated that Prime Minister Chretien, who is catholic, was in danger of eternal damnation.  Chretien, to his credit, politely told him to piss off.  There is a real disconnect between rural, religous conservative folks and urban, secular liberal folks.  It would appear that the secular humanists will win.  Good.

Hieronymus
#44 by Dawn Keedik
2003-08-06 17:59:15
http://www.thedonkeyshow.com
The church has been bending over for years, literally and figuratively.  It doesn't matter which congregation or denomination, they all have a tolerance for deviant fornication.

They can't alienate their clergy.  In many aspects it sickens and disgusts me.  I see more traditional values in countries outside the US when it comes to religion and the church.

This country (The divided states of America) has adopted a monoculture sense of worth and is driven by pure greed.  I do not like green eggs and ham.

Putting Yours to Shame Daily!
#45 by Dawn Keedik
2003-08-06 18:02:01
http://www.thedonkeyshow.com
As a matter of fact, 82% of the dutch population said the Vatican can stuff it.


And 1% of them look like Buster Brown, that 1% being you.

Putting Yours to Shame Daily!
#46 by m0nty
2003-08-06 18:13:58
http://tinfinger.blogspot.com
John Farnham fronting Queen would be like John Tesh joining Metallica.
#47 by """Balderama"""
2003-08-06 18:14:39
support@real.com www.planetcrap.com
Leviticus 18:6 None of you shall approach to any that are near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness.


From Here.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: 1:27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.


From Here.

Like Joker said, the church and most religions these days are worthless. They don't even follow their own rules.
#48 by Trolly McTroll
2003-08-06 18:16:03
quit trying to justify your gay marriage and get a job

"..and Trolly McTroll is the best name EVER. I laugh every time I see it."  - ZEP
" If i ever have a daughter, I'm going to name her Trolly. - The_Joker
#49 by Bailey
2003-08-06 18:18:39
Pick one troll identity and stick with it.

Scotch makes you good at a lot of things, like yelling at your wife, but it’s terrible for hand-eye coordination.
#50 by """Balderama"""
2003-08-06 18:23:32
support@real.com www.planetcrap.com
#48 Well if it isn't Mr. Fuckmeuptheass. Long time no see, bitch. Been hanging out in the gay bars? It sure got you dumber you stupid fuck, because otherwise you'd realize my post wasn't justifying gay marriages.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Now for something different...

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]