Homosexuality is an anomaly

[ScottSA]

Hint to CB: "Tolerance" is not something that applies to the forcible backdoor entry (excuse the punnishness) to heterosexual institutions like marriage. The tolerance myth flew out the window a long time ago, except in the case of folks stuck in the 80s and 90s.

So its considered tolerance to exclude people from marriage then?

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

[M.Dancer]

Hint to CB: "Tolerance" is not something that applies to the forcible backdoor entry (excuse the punnishness) to heterosexual institutions like marriage. The tolerance myth flew out the window a long time ago, except in the case of folks stuck in the 80s and 90s.

So its considered tolerance to exclude people from marriage then?

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

Is dog owning an institution? How about driving?

Marriage may be an institution to some, but legally it is a contractual arrangement.

[Figleaf]

Animals don't know any better but man does know the difference between right and wrong relating to abnormal perversions.

The sad thing is you have no idea how silly that statement is. You are probably totally impervious to the knowledge that your comment there is illogical and self-contradictory.

[Canadian Blue]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

What I demand is equal rights for everyone. As far as I can tell if a heterosexual couple wants to get married they still can, nobodies being forced to become gay. The institution of marriage has changed several times over history, why not allow people who want their relationship to be recognized as marriage the right to do so.

Don't worry the fag lobby isn't trying to make your son gay.

[ScottSA]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

What I demand is equal rights for everyone.

Again, marriage is not a "right".

[Canadian Blue]

If thats the case, marriage shouldn't even be any business of the state. Why should the state sanction heterosexual marriage if it excludes people based on sexual orientation.

[Figleaf]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

What I demand is equal rights for everyone.

Again, marriage is not a "right".

Equality (as per s.15 of the Charter) is the relevant 'right'.

Statutory marriage is a government legislated matter to which everyone has an equal right.

[ScottSA]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

What I demand is equal rights for everyone.

Again, marriage is not a "right".

Equality (as per s.15 of the Charter) is the relevant 'right'.

Statutory marriage is a government legislated matter to which everyone has an equal right.

No, it's not a "right". That's like arguing that you can marry your sister, because "everyone" is inclusive of both you and your sister.

[Figleaf]

Equality (as per s.15 of the Charter) is the relevant 'right'.

Statutory marriage is a government legislated matter to which everyone has an equal right.

No, it's not a "right".

What do you imagine you are saying?

If you are saying equality is not a right, I don't understand.

It's in the Charter and the courts enforce it -- sounds like a 'right', don't you think?

That's like arguing that you can marry your sister, because "everyone" is inclusive of both you and your sister.

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

[ScottSA]

No, it's not a "right".

That's like arguing that you can marry your sister, because "everyone" is inclusive of both you and your sister.

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

Well why don't you try anyway?

[Black Dog]

Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

And who wants to live in an institution?

Ba-dum-ching!

But seriously, folks, we all know how bankrupt most of the anti-SSM arguments are: we've been over them enough. Either they are rooted in religious nonsense which has nowt do do with the law, or argumentum ad antiquitatem fallacies like the one above. The only one that makes a lick of sense is the "government has no business defining marriage at all" which is really little more than impractical wishful thinking: "If we can't have it our way, then no one should."

[Figleaf]

No, it's not a "right".

That's like arguing that you can marry your sister, because "everyone" is inclusive of both you and your sister.

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

Well why don't you try anyway?

Because ...

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

Do you need it repeated a few more times before it sinks in?

[Leafless]

Animals don't know any better but man does know the difference between right and wrong relating to abnormal perversions.

The sad thing is you have no idea how silly that statement is. You are probably totally impervious to the knowledge that your comment there is illogical and self-contradictory.

The only reason gays are recognized as being 'equal' is that we live in a police state controlled by judicial rule, who live in a Liberal fantasy land invented by Pierre Elliot Trudeau.

[Canadian Blue]

The only reason gays are recognized as being 'equal' is that we live in a police state controlled by judicial rule

Do you know what a police state is?

who live in a Liberal fantasy land invented by Pierre Elliot Trudeau.

Yeah, goddamn fascist with his Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[guyser]

What a dysfunctional thread. In effect, it's a rehash of the pro-normalization sad, tired, and nonsensical propaganda.

Any thread that teaches is not dysfunctional. If you want to apply that to WTC is Bush's fault thread, go ahead-no arguement.

Hint to guyser: Sure, I have a disdain for fags, but not a hatred, and certainly not a fear.

If true why use it as a put down in posts having nothing to do with homosexuality?

I don't even particularly care about the sexuality of folks like Liam, who doesn't shove his pudenda in anyone's face and gyrate.

Like most gays do shove it in ones face and gyrate? That is not my experience at all.That goes right back to your feelings on gays.

Just as I dont go for the "scary scary scary" thing on Harper, one should not invoke the "scary scary" notion pertaining to gays.

Hint # 2: there is far more than adequate research out there to ascertain that homosexuality is by far the greatest sexual spread of the HIV virus in North America, and pointing at drug paraphenalia as being just as bad is hardly a stirling endorsement of bumbuggery. Stop perpetuating the myth that AIDs is a heterosexual disease. In north america it's not.

Gays make up a little less than half the new cases. (US cases state "probably infected by male to male contact) The rest can be traced to IV drug use, heterosex , blood transfusions (diminishing daily) and so on.

Red Cross is responsible for 10's of thousands of cases dating back to pretesting of blood days.

I never pointed at drug paraphenalia as being just as bad. I merely was suggesting that there are other causes that contribute to AIDS infection.

The spread of AIDS can be attributed to the faith based teachings of sex in our schools. Although I should add that pertains more to the US than Canada, but we still have our fair share of stupid school boards who perpetuate the same tired old myths.

Stop perpetuating the myth that AIDS is a hetero disease. Except that you did not say that, you inferred it. So perhaps I inferred it too. I will let that slide but correct it to say that it is a disease that every Canadian could get if they are not careful , gay or straight .

[Leafless]

Do you know what a police state is?

" A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

Yeah, goddamn fascist with his Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

You got it!

And you forgot to throw in a little Marxism, that could also be in the cards.

[ScottSA]

No, it's not a "right".

That's like arguing that you can marry your sister, because "everyone" is inclusive of both you and your sister.

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

Well why don't you try anyway?

Because ...

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

What you really mean is that you can't, so you're going to mock it instead of addressing it. Hey, that's fine by me dude, but it's fairly transparent. God save us from little minds...

[Figleaf]

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

What you really mean is that you can't, [blah blah passive-aggressive insult blah]...

No, no, I really mean it was too ludicrous to even bother refuting. Even before you get to the content fallacies, structurally/conceptually it's a mismatch to the thing you're trying to analogize with.

[Canadian Blue]

" A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive."

Which doesn't describe Canada at all. You're still free to spout your nonsense, same with ScottSA. This is a mockery, and an insult to people who actually live in a police state.

You got it!

And you forgot to throw in a little Marxism, that could also be in the cards.

Who else is a Marxist, I'm guessing that would include Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. Since it seems that anyone promoting government assistance for the poor, and enshrining rights and freedoms is considered a Marxist nowadays.

[ScottSA]

That statement is too ludicrous to even bother refuting.

What you really mean is that you can't, [blah blah passive-aggressive insult blah]...

No, no, I really mean it was too ludicrous to even bother refuting. Even before you get to the content fallacies, structurally/conceptually it's a mismatch to the thing you're trying to analogize with.

Yup. Right. Lotsa bluster, no backup. Carry on...

[Liam]

This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

Excuse me, but I have a life, not a "lifestyle". I work, I pay taxes, I shop at the grocery store, I support local charities, and volunteer my efforts on national political issues. I send my kids off to school each morning after making breakfast and picking out shirts and pants and jumpers. I fold laundry while I watch "Desperate Housewives". I've buried both a parent and a spouse. I worry about inflation and the economy, I wonder if I should get four yards of mulch delivered this summer or five yards. I have to fix one of the downspouts from my gutters. I arrange play dates and sleep overs and birthday parties for my kids. I worry about their future. I'm concerned about Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder if I'm saving enought for retirement. I have a dozen projects to finish at the office before my kids and I go on vacation next week. I have a car battery to jump this weekend and about four or five things to pick up at Home Depot tomorrow afternoon. I have to aerate and fertilize my lawn. I've soccer practice this weekend. And my kids have sewing lessons. I absolutely have to take my recyclables to the town dump this weekend. I make an effort every day to be a good role model for my kids. If you did half the things I do each day as a single parent, I would be impressed. But you probably have a wife at home who handles 70% of this stuff while you drink beer and slovenly moan against gays and how their "fag" agenda is demeaning your existence. Cripes. Have some honor. Gain some self respect. Develop a sense of self worth on your own time, I've got enough on my plate to do it for you.

Yes, I've got a fag agenda. It's called getting through each day. It's called just being seen as a person and being treated no different by the government I fund than someone who did nothing to earn a a place in life where he can call me "abnormal". Just who in the h*ll do you think you are? What have you done to earn your special status as "normal"? Being born straight? Spare me - there are more abnormal freaks who are straight than you'd ever find in a gay bar on sake and karoake night.

I think it's pretty clear that I'm the normal one. If anything, I think it's up to you to show you're even equal to someone like me.

[Figleaf]

Yup. Right. Lotsa bluster, no backup. Carry on...

Back up? No. None required.

[Canadian Blue]

Liam great post.

[sharkman]

Excuse me, but I have a life, not a "lifestyle". I work, I pay taxes, I shop at the grocery store, I support local charities, and volunteer my efforts on national political issues. I send my kids off to school each morning after making breakfast and picking out shirts and pants and jumpers. I fold laundry while I watch "Desperate Housewives". I've buried a parent and a spouse. I worry about inflation and the economy, I wonder if I should get four yards of mulch delivered this summer or five yards. I have to fix one of the downspouts from my gutters. I arrange play dates and sleep overs and birthday parties for my kids. I worry about their future. I'm concerned about Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder if I'm saving enought for retirement. I have a dozen projects to finish at the office before my kids and I go on vacation next week. I have a car battery to jump this weekend and about four or five things to pick up at Home Depot tomorrow afternoon. I have to aerate and fertilize my lawn. I've soccer practice this weekend. And my kids have sewing lessons. I absolutely have to take my recyclables to the town dump this weekend. I make an effort every day to be a good role model for my kids. If you did half the things I do each day as a single parent, I would be impressed. But you probably have a wife at home who handles 70% of this stuff while you drink beer and slovenly moan against gays and how their "fag" agenda is demeaning your existence. Cripes. Have some honor. Gain some self respect. Develop a sense of self worth on your own time, I've got enough on my plate to do it for you.

Yes, I've got a fag agenda. It's called getting through each day. It's called just being seen as a person and being treated no different by the government I fund than someone who did nothing to earn a a place in life where he can call me "abnormal". Just who in the h*ll do you think you are? What have you done to earn your special status as "normal"? Being born straight? Spare me - there are more abnormal freaks who are straight than you'd ever find in a gay bar on saki and karoake night.

I think it's pretty clear that I'm the normal one. If anything, I think it's up to you to show you're even equal to someone like me.

With respect, the bone of contention I have with the gay agenda is it's insistance (and can be read quite plainly in your post) that it be given special status, as if one is better than another simply because of sexual orientation. This is no better than the homophobes who think the same.

There has always been hatred at others, be they gay, Jewish, Arabic, Black, White or whatever. Big deal. It doesn't make you better than anyone.

[Canadian Blue]

He's not asking for special status, he is taking issue with ScottSA's insistance that he is abnormal.