While watching a debate show called “Pros e Contras” (which I hate) in the theme of homosexual marriage I thought:
This is a (very poor) show, with (really bad) actual themes, with a crappie presenter. It usually has two spokesmen/women in each side where one defends one idea and the other defends the opposite, they talk rubbish from both sides for twenty minutes until the worst presenter of the world, stops the discussion and introduces someone from the crow sitting in the auditory to contest and attack one of the sides and say rubbish once again, and so on. This TV-rubbish, starts at half past nine and goes through the night until… I don’t know (I really never stayed to the end).
Either way, the theme this time is the homosexual marriage; I start to say I’m against it, for many reasons, but mainly because, marriage is the oldest institution in the history, and homosexuality is also an old story.
It is known in history that the Greek had a bisexual culture meaning that it was social accepted homosexual relationships. But there is not registry of a gay marriage. In the past there was respect for institutions, people respected the marriage institution and knew that it was something that was be on man’s will, the idea of marring someone comes from the sentiment that the two parts feel, love. It is not rational, nor spontaneous, it just happens. It is something sent by the gods.
This been said, it is easily accomplished that I believe that marriage is an religious institution (not meaning that atheists cannot get married, just that is not a social, nor legislation thing), meaning with this that God created man and woman to be together, and he is a lazy bastard, he would not think twice if creating only one gender would be enough, but it isn’t. There’s the need for both and its union.
You may now argue that this is just an homophobic ideal. Call it whatever you want but I have my mind closed.
John Kramer
11 comments:
Ok, You have your point of view and you are not going to change it so... I´ll just say that if God loves us all, he should be happy and not resentful of our sexual choices. I´m in favour, when it´s marriage we are talking about. Having children is another discussion. And by the way, love the greeks, but we have come a long, long way from their time, haven´t we? It´s a shame if we just stop there. But again, it´s just one opinion in several possible.
You don't get it.
I said that God created women and men to be together, as a pair. And since there are laws there has been a celebration of that union called MARRIAGE. That been said it is obvious that the union of two men or two women it is not considered holy matrimony, so it has nothing to do with the idea of marriage.
And about the Greeks, long time has passed, that is true, but we still look amazed at their society and democracy, that’s why I choose them, has an example. But either way you may look to the past and find that this is just a trend, it has not happen before or it has been erased from history books. Gay people have to be denied the entrance in the marriage institution there has to be boundaries even in a Free country such as our own. Respect should come first to wilfulness, you know.
Hopping to enlighten you,
John Kramer
lolol Enlighten me? I´m sorry, I appreciate your effort, but I still think that thinking like that is very «close minded».
Gay people are not different from straight peolple intrinsecly. They just do a different option, that´s all. And as equal human beeings they deserve equal rights.
Marriage is one of those rights. God is all about understanding and forgiving. I bet He wouldn´t care, as long as the couple is happy together. Church would. But church is not God, is a bad representation of Him, if I may say so.
Different is not bad or good. It´s just different.
And by that line of thought, you too believe that contraceptive methods are evil, do you? They do prevent us from our job here: that is to procriate. Is that what you think? I´m curious...
Go sin...go sin...Go go go sin!
Sorry John, you're wrong!
Thanks Milady. It´s refreashing being at the same side as you in this polemic discussion ;)
Let me begin by saying your last paragraph is just sad, John.
It's because of close-minded-people that society doesn't move forward as often as it should.
It will not take you anywhere to think like that. And you can't even say your arguments are etical because eticality demands (contstant) thought, and if you're just listenning to other people's ideas and calling them your own, your not really thinking...
On topic now: you can call it whatever you want, but homossexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals.
Period.
If, to acomplish that, you have to recognize them as "married" people, so be it.
You can't say "I believe that marriage is an religious institution (not meaning that atheists cannot get married, just that is not a social, nor legislation thing)", because that doesn't make sense! If marriage is, indeed, a religious institution then atheists SHOULDN'T be allowed to marry... You realize there are laws and regulations that include reference to marital status, in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges. So it IS social and legislational. We live in a laic society so the church does not have anything to do with the laws. ANYTHING!
Then you come with "the marriage institution" thing... I admit I never really understood what's an institution :/
Who says what marriage is and by whom it is to be defined? The married? The marriable? Isn't that kind of like allowing a banker to decide who is going to own the money stored in his vaults?
And how can allowing people to marry threat the institution of marriage? Isn't that contradictory?
Is it just because gay people can't acomplish the "marriages are for procreation and ensuring the continuation of the species" doutrine? Should infertile couples be allowed to marry then? Should your post-menopausal mother or impotent father be allowed? Try telling them that!
You know what? I say RUBBISH!!!
That's all just fear... of god knows what.
And yes it's homophobic.
And sad!
That they are recruiting? Is that what you fear?
But hey, your mind's closed right? So I'm just wasting my time here...
Bravo Jack! You are not wasting your time. Once again you did a great exercise of retoric. Congrats! I bet we won´t change John´s mind about this subject, but it´s good for all of us to see different perspectives. I just wished they didn´t come along with stereotypes. Mean ones unfortunalety.
To Jack;
My dear friend consider my post whatever you wish. You may be right by saying that my last paragraph is sad, and that my closed minded attitude is making the world stop, and you should know best to call me unethical. Because I simply don’t care what is ethical and what it’s not. I don’t care you think I’m closed minded in this subject and that this way of thinking won’t take me anywhere.
I really think that Gay marriage is a monstrosity, to history, to our culture and to what (maybe) is god wish.
Homosexuals have no right to demand the change of the law, in this matter being marriage the celebration of the UNION BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN. This should be crystal clear. The union between two men or two women, is not called marriage, it doesn’t even have a name, but one thing is for certain it isn’t Marriage, call it whatever you want just respect the existence of the noun marriage has a right to be exclusive to heterosexual people.
If you recall I never wrote or said that, the union of homosexuals should be abolish, or called a crime. I just argued against it being a marriage. The union of two people should be a right, whatever their sexual option is, but there is a right to demand that traditions be kept.
And I would like to add, that I feel insulted by the idea that you think that I don’t think, and don’t have ideas of my own.
Fuck you,
John Scar Kramer
Dear Sin,
Just to say one thing;
After reading your comments with more attention, I’ve come to the conclusion that between you and me, you are the most closed minded.
For not admitting that two people of the same sex to take care of child, and for the idea that in order to be equal to the next we have to have the same rights, when it is quite the opposite.
A child has every right to a family, being it gay or straight it doesn’t matter, the important thing is the well fare of the child and the possibility to the couple to take care of the child in question.
Being equal to the next, means that everyone has to be treated differently, that’s why “all equal but all different”. Everyone is a different case.
And just so I don’t forget anything
Fuck You too,
John Scar Kramer
P.S.: to Lady deWinter
If you wanted to see me pissed off here it is.
So Fuck you
John Scar Kramer
P.S.(2): Everything stays the same even after this post/comment
You know what is a monstruosity? That you think gay people don't have the right to demand the change of the law! It is outrageous!
EVERYONE has the right to demand the change of the law, not just this one but of every law! And I mean, literally, everyone!
Again, I state that we live in a laic society, and no religion should have any influence neither in the legislative, executive or judicial processes. None at all. So don't talk about god's wishes... Who on earth has the right to say what god's wishes are? Who on earth has the right to say, undoubtedly, that god exists and that his "will" should be considered to rule our society?
And don't say the bible, you know that doesn't stick with me.
I don't recall reading Sin saying she didn't admit that two people of the same sex can take care of children. And I'm surprised about your liberal aproach on this matter, that, in my view, raises much more difficult questions then the marriage one.
Oh and yes, to be different means everyone should be treated differently AND everyone should have the same rights! You made a little confusion here.
Not really caring to enlighten you,
Jack
This is hot!! lol
I´ll do things in reverse, to be more creative. Meaning I´ll start to say FUCK YOU Jonhn!
Done that?
Ok, back to the subject.
Jack is right, once more. And I bet you wouldn´t think the same way if you were part of some kind of minority group. But you aren´t, so you can have the privilege to say such nonsense. We are all different and yet we act quite the same. Our difference should NEVER dictate that we have different rights. Never, whatsoever!!
Our ministers have great cars and they are caught excedding the speed limit. Do you think it´s fare they don´t pay for their infraction?! Why should the rest of us respect the same speed limit if they are allowed to overlook? It would be caotic! We, as human beings, have rights and duties. ALL OF US! And gay people deserve the same rights when it comes to marriage. They are just like us! Or people with blue eyes and blond should have more privileges than tanned ones with dark hair?! Ok, this might be fun! Let´s punish shy people cause they are bad at parties, and because of that they don´t get partners. meening they can´t procriate at the end of the evening!! Shall we?
Let´s make a lot of babies! Even if we can´t feed them! But who cares?! We are here to procriate! Not to fuck like rabbits John! So pick a good, nice girl and make babys!! But please, make sure she didn´t never, ever, whatsoever kissed another girl. Cause who Knows... it might be contageous! lololol
Who cares????
He loves me...
Post a Comment