(September 25, 2012 at 11:53 pm)Blackrook Wrote: Will you sign my petition to stop abortion?

You think you can just petition away the Supreme Court upheld, Constitutionally enshrined Right to Privacy? Well aren't you a silly little person!

(September 26, 2012 at 6:36 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(September 26, 2012 at 6:32 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Minorities sometimes have different rights than "everyone", friend.
But they have the rights that the majority gives to them.
Asking for same rights and privilages...Well, whatever the constitution gives to the citizens of that country, with minorities being citizens aswell, they too have access to these rights, obviously.
But dealing with minorities is a very risky business, especially if you have many different minorities, ethnic, religious or otherwise, for homosexuals...Well, they are both a minority, and none at the same time. For they also constitute the part of a majority or another minority somewhere, but form a "minority" of their own somewhere else. So what kind of minority rights or privilages do they deserve for just being homosexual? I believe they deserve none whatsoever.

Very true, they don't deserve special minority rights.

But they're not asking for special rights are they?

They're just asking for the same rights that the majority enjoy.

They are. It is like this, friend.
An ethnic minority is asking for rights to education. He can have education in the language that is the common and official langauge of the said country. But he wants education in his own language. But at the end, he asks for education. At the end, it's only specific to that group of people. Similarly, privilages and rights relating to marriage are to be "specified" to fit the needs of the homosexuals.

As homosexuals never were in the picture of marriage in society for hundreds of years, they do not have any significant say over to whom this privilage should be made available to. The majority, who are normal people, have used marriage as the primary tool to lay the foundation of the family. And the family is the foundation of society. With homosexuals never having much of a place in normal society with their homosexual identities, how can they really ask for such things?

They already have things that everyone is entited to, things that are not related to their sexual identities. Marriage on the other hand is directly interwoven with this, and therefore, is off limits, in my opinion.

(September 26, 2012 at 6:50 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: They are. It is like this, friend.
An ethnic minority is asking for rights to education. He can have education in the language that is the common and official langauge of the said country. But he wants education in his own language. But at the end, he asks for education. At the end, it's only specific to that group of people. Similarly, privilages and rights relating to marriage are to be "specified" to fit the needs of the homosexuals.

As homosexuals never were in the picture of marriage in society for hundreds of years, they do not have any significant say over to whom this privilage should be made available to. The majority, who are normal people, have used marriage as the primary tool to lay the foundation of the family. And the family is the foundation of society. With homosexuals never having much of a place in normal society with their homosexual identities, how can they really ask for such things?

They already have things that everyone is entited to, things that are not related to their sexual identities. Marriage on the other hand is directly interwoven with this, and therefore, is off limits, in my opinion.

Ahh, so you are demanding special rights for yourself are you??

(September 26, 2012 at 7:02 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(September 26, 2012 at 6:50 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: They are. It is like this, friend.
An ethnic minority is asking for rights to education. He can have education in the language that is the common and official langauge of the said country. But he wants education in his own language. But at the end, he asks for education. At the end, it's only specific to that group of people. Similarly, privilages and rights relating to marriage are to be "specified" to fit the needs of the homosexuals.

As homosexuals never were in the picture of marriage in society for hundreds of years, they do not have any significant say over to whom this privilage should be made available to. The majority, who are normal people, have used marriage as the primary tool to lay the foundation of the family. And the family is the foundation of society. With homosexuals never having much of a place in normal society with their homosexual identities, how can they really ask for such things?

They already have things that everyone is entited to, things that are not related to their sexual identities. Marriage on the other hand is directly interwoven with this, and therefore, is off limits, in my opinion.

Ahh, so you are demanding special rights for yourself are you??

If you'd elaborate your words a little bit further, I might reply to you properly. But I'm sure I've had this before already, heard them from the mouth of someone else, and will probably give the same reply.
I do not demand anything from anyone. I already have everything which I deem to be a "right" that I ought to have. If I lack something which I deem to be my right, I go and take it by blood. Not by mewling like a little baby, asking for assistance from others.

(September 26, 2012 at 7:09 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote:

(September 26, 2012 at 7:02 am)Zen Badger Wrote: Ahh, so you are demanding special rights for yourself are you??

If you'd elaborate your words a little bit further, I might reply to you properly. But I'm sure I've had this before already, heard them from the mouth of someone else, and will probably give the same reply.
I do not demand anything from anyone. I already have everything which I deem to be a "right" that I ought to have. If I lack something which I deem to be my right, I go and take it by blood. Not by mewling like a little baby, asking for assistance from others.

But you are reserving the right to marry the person you love whilst denying that right to homosexuals.

Ergo it is a special right because it does not apply to everyone.

"take it by blood"

(September 26, 2012 at 7:13 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(September 26, 2012 at 7:09 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: If you'd elaborate your words a little bit further, I might reply to you properly. But I'm sure I've had this before already, heard them from the mouth of someone else, and will probably give the same reply.
I do not demand anything from anyone. I already have everything which I deem to be a "right" that I ought to have. If I lack something which I deem to be my right, I go and take it by blood. Not by mewling like a little baby, asking for assistance from others.

But you are reserving the right to marry the person you love whilst denying that right to homosexuals.

Ergo it is a special right because it does not apply to everyone.

"take it by blood"

I'm not reserving anything to myself. I already have these rights due to being someone that is able to bring forth a child from a marriage.
Homosexuals have no such abilities, their marriage is nothing but a simple contract. As such, their union does not represent what marriage stands for. Love? It's not love. You can have all the love you want without marriage.
Homosexuals never had the right to marry, for they were not really relevant to what marriage stands for.
If they demand marriage, they demand for special considerations to made available to them. Because without such things, they would never even be able to bring forth this issue up, friend.
Thankfully, such stupid things are not made a point of discussion where I live, and I can go through the day without thinking of homosexuals, and their supposed right to a "marriage", and how it will affect the next elections.

(September 26, 2012 at 7:19 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote:

(September 26, 2012 at 7:13 am)Zen Badger Wrote: But you are reserving the right to marry the person you love whilst denying that right to homosexuals.

Ergo it is a special right because it does not apply to everyone.

"take it by blood"

I'm not reserving anything to myself. I already have these rights due to being someone that is able to bring forth a child from a marriage.
Homosexuals have no such abilities, their marriage is nothing but a simple contract. As such, their union does not represent what marriage stands for. Love? It's not love. You can have all the love you want without marriage.
Homosexuals never had the right to marry, for they were not really relevant to what marriage stands for.
If they demand marriage, they demand for special considerations to made available to them. Because without such things, they would never even be able to bring forth this issue up, friend.
Thankfully, such stupid things are not made a point of discussion where I live, and I can go through the day without thinking of homosexuals, and their supposed right to a "marriage", and how it will affect the next elections.

So because they can't have children they can't marry. Is that what you're saying?

(September 26, 2012 at 7:23 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(September 26, 2012 at 7:19 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: I'm not reserving anything to myself. I already have these rights due to being someone that is able to bring forth a child from a marriage.
Homosexuals have no such abilities, their marriage is nothing but a simple contract. As such, their union does not represent what marriage stands for. Love? It's not love. You can have all the love you want without marriage.
Homosexuals never had the right to marry, for they were not really relevant to what marriage stands for.
If they demand marriage, they demand for special considerations to made available to them. Because without such things, they would never even be able to bring forth this issue up, friend.
Thankfully, such stupid things are not made a point of discussion where I live, and I can go through the day without thinking of homosexuals, and their supposed right to a "marriage", and how it will affect the next elections.

So because they can't have children they can't marry. Is that what you're saying?

Not just that. There is a lot more. However I've already said this a lot of times until now. I really hate to repeat myself in front of the same people. Let us end this discussion here. Besides, it's not that they "can't" marry. With laws, you can even make a man marry a cardboard box if you wanted to. But whether it would constitute a marriage by definition and deed.....

Don't stop now Mehmet.

I enjoy watching you try to justify your homophobic bigotry.

So we've established that gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't have children. ( Kichi and I are marrying soon and because of our age we can't have children. So we shouldn't be allowed to marry by your definition).

What other reasons do you have?

(September 26, 2012 at 7:34 am)Zen Badger Wrote: Don't stop now Mehmet.

I enjoy watching you try to justify your homophobic bigotry.

So we've established that gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't have children. ( Kichi and I are marrying soon and because of our age we can't have children. So we shouldn't be allowed to marry by your definition).

What other reasons do you have?

I am through, friend. If you are really that eager to listen to me talking about this issue for about three or four more pages, fine, but I really should get back to doing more important things.