Thread: Anti-Gay Marriage Crusader changes His Tune

Originally Posted by compote_tom

Interesting story, a guy spends five years fighting gay marriage, ends up having a conversation with a gay man, and changes his attitude.

Many years ago I read about a former Klansman who had a conversation with a black woman, through the conversation he realized she wasn't really that different and completely changed his attitude. Seems the same thing happened to this guy.

There was a time in my own life where I would have been repulsed by the idea of Gay Marriage. But after having gay friends, relatives, I just see them as people not a whole different.

Why can't we just let people be what they are?

The underlying message is that we all need to conform, to think alike. Political correctness boasts of diversity while imposing conformity.

Homosexual marriage is largely a myth. SF State U observed hundreds of so-called committed homosexual partners in their Gay Couples Study. Half of them were not couples at all, but multiple sexual partner relationships. The vast majority thought multiple sexual partner relationships were good. That's not marriage no matter how you disguise it.

The underlying message is that we all need to conform, to think alike. Political correctness boasts of diversity while imposing conformity.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Neither I nor the link I posted said anything about PC. In this forum there are people of all political stripes that support Gay Marriage. Just curious, did you go to the link and read the story?

Homosexual marriage is largely a myth. SF State U observed hundreds of so-called committed homosexual partners in their Gay Couples Study. Half of them were not couples at all, but multiple sexual partner relationships. The vast majority thought multiple sexual partner relationships were good. That's not marriage no matter how you disguise it.

I've read about this study, but never read it, however, I don't see the connection. First of all, we don't do so well with heterosexual marriage. I can't remember the numbers, but they aren't good. Furthermore, I don't see how such a study could be used to deny someone the right to marry whomever they chose (of course if the other party agrees). I personally know of one couple that stayed together as a couple from their 20's to their death in their 70's, but I think my example is no more significant that the study you quote.

The question I posed was "Why can't we let people be who they are?"

Originally Posted by LJ2

The underlying message is that we all need to conform, to think alike.

Really?

How many people have told you that you should marry a man (I'm assuming you're one)?

Conversely, though, it's those narrow-minded folks on the right; people like yourself, who seem to insist that everyone, in fact, should think alike...

Originally Posted by Steve

Really?

How many people have told you that you should marry a man (I'm assuming you're one)?

Conversely, though, it's those narrow-minded folks on the right; people like yourself, who seem to insist that everyone, in fact, should think alike...

Exactly... There's something truly hilarious about claims of conformity coming from someone who is advocating the prohibition of something different from themselves.

Originally Posted by LJ2

The underlying message is that we all need to conform, to think alike. Political correctness boasts of diversity while imposing conformity.

Homosexual marriage is largely a myth. SF State U observed hundreds of so-called committed homosexual partners in their Gay Couples Study. Half of them were not couples at all, but multiple sexual partner relationships. The vast majority thought multiple sexual partner relationships were good. That's not marriage no matter how you disguise it.

That's not really an argument, at least half of heterosexual married couples have one (or both) of the spouses who have had an extra-marital affair, and yet the vast majority of married heterosexual couples would think that multiple sexual partner relationships are bad.

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

That's not really an argument, at least half of heterosexual married couples have one (or both) of the spouses who have had an extra-marital affair, and yet the vast majority of married heterosexual couples would think that multiple sexual partner relationships are bad.

I think it's funny that there are people who rail against gays, when some of the most deviant sexual practices are committed by heterosexuals...

Originally Posted by Steve

I think it's funny that there are people who rail against gays, when some of the most deviant sexual practices are committed by heterosexuals...

I think its similar to the psychology which occurs when white trash are racist. Its like "yeah, we're fucked up losers, but at least we're not THEM!"

Originally Posted by compote_tom

There was a time in my own life where I would have been repulsed by the idea of Gay Marriage. But after having gay friends, relatives, I just see them as people not a whole different.

I'm in the same boat.

When I was a kid growing up, in the wrestling team locker room, or the basic training platoon bay, or the construction site putting roofs on new condos, I could never have fathomed the idea of gay marriage. The whole thing would have struck me as silly faggotry.

Then I grew up, learned to think for myself, and lost a lot of interest in the "wisdom" of the crowd.

I learned that there's really nothing wrong with homosexuals, that black people really aren't all lazy criminals, that women could actually do as good a job as men, that Mexicans aren't really "stealing" our jobs, and that Indian food, despite its smell, was really, really fucking good.

But not everyone takes the blinders off and steps out of their insular and provencial little corner of the world. In my opinion there are far too many who never do.

It works out in the end though I guess. I have to compete with all those corn-bred idiots for jobs and by-and-large I seem to be winning that race. So all you racist, homophobic, misogynistic fucktards hold that banner of "traditional family values" high. I'm going to need to walk under it so I can pass you on the evolutionary food chain.

I know gay people who have been in committed monogamous relationships far longer than a lot of straight people I know. I honestly can't say I know of any homosexuals, who've been in long-term relationships, who have split up. I can't say the same thing about heterosexuals, though...

Originally Posted by soot

I'm in the same boat.

When I was a kid growing up, in the wrestling team locker room, or the basic training platoon bay, or the construction site putting roofs on new condos, I could never have fathomed the idea of gay marriage. The whole thing would have struck me as silly faggotry.

Then I grew up, learned to think for myself, and lost a lot of interest in the "wisdom" of the crowd.

I learned that there's really nothing wrong with homosexuals, that black people really aren't all lazy criminals, that women could actually do as good a job as men, that Mexicans aren't really "stealing" our jobs, and that Indian food, despite its smell, was really, really fucking good.

But not everyone takes the blinders off and steps out of their insular and provencial little corner of the world. In my opinion there are far too many who never do.

It works out in the end though I guess. I have to compete with all those corn-bred idiots for jobs and by-and-large I seem to be winning that race. So all you racist, homophobic, misogynistic fucktards hold that banner of "traditional family values" high. I'm going to need to walk under it so I can pass you on the evolutionary food chain.

"Traditional Family Values" is basically the abolitionism of democracy. Democracy really has no place in Christian thought, is not found anywhere in the Bible, and is a troublesome holdover from pagan systems Christianity destroyed. Democracy permits diversity and invention for individuals and cultures. Expansion of ideas is forbidden by Traditional Family Values, for all we need know is in the Bible. School boards must be controlled so wrong ideas like birth control, evolution, and the solving of problems without supernatural intervention do not get into students heads or text books. Democracy prohibits this control. Democracy encourages independence of thought and seeking of new ways for believing and doing. New ideas and different ways are bad -- democracy must go. Despite attempts by the righteous to establish a government controlled by their religion, our founders gave us a democracy. Democracy has tolerated thoughts and actions that are properly forbidden, and the sooner we get rid of it the faster everyone will get back to right thinking.

Originally Posted by RSN_2011

"Traditional Family Values" is basically the abolitionism of democracy. Democracy really has no place in Christian thought, is not found anywhere in the Bible, and is a troublesome holdover from pagan systems Christianity destroyed. Democracy permits diversity and invention for individuals and cultures. Expansion of ideas is forbidden by Traditional Family Values, for all we need know is in the Bible. School boards must be controlled so wrong ideas like birth control, evolution, and the solving of problems without supernatural intervention do not get into students heads or text books. Democracy prohibits this control. Democracy encourages independence of thought and seeking of new ways for believing and doing. New ideas and different ways are bad -- democracy must go. Despite attempts by the righteous to establish a government controlled by their religion, our founders gave us a democracy. Democracy has tolerated thoughts and actions that are properly forbidden, and the sooner we get rid of it the faster everyone will get back to right thinking.

I'm no fan of religion, but I know plenty of Christians that are open-minded and respectful of the rights of minorities.

It's like Islam. It's not that the religion itself is the problem overall -- it's certain interpretations.

Fred Phelps obviously doesn't represent the way most Christians think. Neither does Pat Robertson or even John Hagee.

Originally Posted by LJ2

The underlying message is that we all need to conform, to think alike. Political correctness boasts of diversity while imposing conformity.

Homosexual marriage is largely a myth. SF State U observed hundreds of so-called committed homosexual partners in their Gay Couples Study. Half of them were not couples at all, but multiple sexual partner relationships. The vast majority thought multiple sexual partner relationships were good. That's not marriage no matter how you disguise it.

Cool, so now I'm a mythical being. My partner and I have been together for many, many years, in a totally monogomous r'ship. I'm a professional, he's a small business owner. We both pay taxes. I know heterosexuals who have engaged in r'ships with multiple sexual partners - I guess using them as genarl examples then straight marriage myust be a myth too huh, especially since half of them end in divorce anyway?

Originally Posted by noahath

Cool, so now I'm a mythical being. My partner and I have been together for many, many years, in a totally monogomous r'ship. I'm a professional, he's a small business owner. We both pay taxes. I know heterosexuals who have engaged in r'ships with multiple sexual partners - I guess using them as genarl examples then straight marriage myust be a myth too huh, especially since half of them end in divorce anyway?

So, you're like a unicorn?

Awesome!