Well the bad news is that you're wrong: there is such a thing. The good news is that there's more than one tradition....

True. I more meant in the sense of the idiots yammering about it. "Marriage between a man and woman has been a thing for thousands of years!" Why yes. Sure. But so has same sex marriage. Even in the eyes of your god, they used to do marriages for the same sex in the Middle Ages.

*Grumble* This really pissed me off. Mostly because they fucking brought up Russia, and considering all of the LGBT people getting murdered day in and day out and this idjit bringing up a hypothetical priest that probably never existed.

*nods* I know I know, didn't mean to razz ya. And you don't want to KNOW what Russia used to do to its gays. True, I haven't verified it, but they supposedly used to force them to get counseling whereupon their 'affliction' would be corrected using aversion therapy. Again, I'm not sure how true this is, but it's certainly believable.

I just got this wonderful little book at the library, called Biological Exuberance. It's all about the countless instances of homosexuality, bisexuality, gender variance, intersexuality, and so on among wild animals. It's far from complete, doesn't represent the most current findings in terms of occurrences in nature, and it's still as thick as your average college course textbook.

It's also a wonderfully satisfying read in terms of "fuck those idiots, because this goes on throughout nature". If anything, they're the ones going against what's natural.

XD but then the idiots argue that we are not animals so that dont apply to humans

Sometimes even right after having claimed that nonhuman animals don't do that :p

yeah...it is kinda funny just how dumb people like that can be

Thanks for the watch :3

Momentai

Kind of reminds me of this cracked article
especially these quotes
"If someone's reaction to an equality problem is "not this shit again," it's currently unequal in their favor, whether they understand that or not. Usually "not" when they're dumb enough to say "I can't see a problem whose entire definition is that it affects people other than me. So it's over!""

"Apparently, being a straight white male is actually the hardest difficulty because of political correctness. People can't mock anyone else, so they mock the poor straight white man! Listen: If the people victimizing you are affected by political correctness, you have never been victimized.

Political correctness only stops the kind of people who use a thesaurus to get away with being snide. "Political correctness gone mad!" is how you announce to the world that you have no real problems but don't appreciate the fact and should be harvested for organs as soon as possible. Because people will notice that your stupid loud ass has gone missing, but they'll breathe a sigh of relief instead of calling the police."

& the grand summary!!!
"If your life is hard, you have my sympathy and support. If you think it's because you're a straight white male, I guarantee it's because you're an asshole."

Id personally disagree with the "If someone's reaction to an equality problem is "not this shit again," it's currently unequal in their favor, whether they understand that or not." quote. Whenever anyone for or against gay marriage or equality brings up the subject, my general reaction is "not this shit again", simply because if everyone on both sides would shut up, we could probably all just live in peace. :c

Besides, i tend to get the notion that all activists for or against tend to be a little bit.... too active? Just my own opinions on the matter.

Your opinion that people need to sit down and shut up will not stop one side (the fundamentalists of any stripe) from trying to steamroll other people's rights.

It's not going to happen. We're fighting for the right to be equal in the eyes of the law, not second class citizens.

Yesh, but if everyone would sit down and shut up, things could actually be peaceful. I dont hold high opinions of activists in general, i much prefer people that hold civil discussions, things that dont annoy me to hell and back. We dont need parades or months for us or this or that, we just need everyone to sit down, talk and compromise. o-o

There is no compromise. Religious people cannot use their religion as a hammer. Sitting down and "talking" is impossible because one side wants to believe that all LGBT people are sinful and are less than human.

Compromise; marriage is still referred to as a union between a man and women.

Civil unions now hold all the same legal rights as marriage in the eyes of courts, and are to be accepted as family within schools, hospitals, etc.

Religious people keep their sanctity of marriage, i can still be with my bf with pretty much what marriage is. All thats left is to throw a big party.


Then in 10 years or so when things trend more and gays arent frowned upon as much, you can revisit the marriage portion and get it to encompass all forms of marriage.


Take things one step at a time and compromise, everyone leaves happy o-o Things are already trending towards this, trying to get it all at once will only make it slower.

Marriage isn't a christian institution. They don't get to own it. No compromise. If I go to a Justice of the Peace, then I'm going to get fucking married, not civil unioned. "Separate but equal" doesn't work, we've seen that.

They don't get to decide. No compromise, ever. Religious people do not get to dictate secular laws.

Well, they have as much say as you, or anyone, actually. Thats how a democracy works o-o Thats why the objective is to compromise. Pissing off half the population wont get you anywhere. Coming to a solution that a large majority of the population is okay with and everyone gets pretty much what they want will work better and faster. Blacks and women werent equal in a day, or one law change. It takes some time, and endurance. Annoying the people you want to have help you achieve the goal only makes achieving the goal more difficult.

That's like saying people have the right to teach Creationalism in schools DURING SCIENCE class because heeeey, it's a democracy. Sorry, when they can provide evidence based on facts that Creationalism is as valid as evolution, THEN they can petition for it.

They can petition for it now if they want. Theyd have to win a majority. You cant preach equal rights then take someone else's right away just because you think your opinion matters more, regardless of anything. If we want to be taken seriously, then we should probably respect other people's rights before claiming we deserve equal rights <_<

...you are totally clueless aren't you? CREATIONALISM IS NOT SCIENCE. Two plus two is NOT 22 despite how many people vote to make it so! And here's a tip about legislating morality, which you seem to be in favor of; what happens when it's your morals being legislated against?

Then you vote, like normal people, the way you want things to be. You vote for your beliefs. Its not THAT complicated. You cant preach equal rights while taking away everyone else's rights just because you think your opinion on what rights are matters more. It doesnt matter if youre right or not, you dont have the right to tell everyone what to think, nor do you have the right to take away the rights of others. Being a hypocrite just makes whatever you want seem silly.

Except you champion the right of others to take away people's rights. Sorry, I'm with LokiLover -- there is no argument here. Now go away and champion the right to practice female circumcision, since you obviously think that should be discussed rationally as well.

<_< last i checked, there is currently no right to same sex marriage nationally. Until that is agreed upon, it is an opinion. The other side has feelings and opinions just as strong and valid as ours. Taking away their right of validation over an opinion on the definition of a word is just as bad as anything else, if not worse. If you want your views to be taken seriously, you should validate the rights of others before claiming to want rights yourself.

And i should say sit down and hut up refers to both sides, since they both have activists :s

In 'traditional' marriage, the wife was not considered an equal partner, but literally a piece of property owned by the husband. That is what that bible passage saying that a man shall not lie with another man as he does a woman actually means. It has nothing to do with homosexuality, but with slavery. A traditional marriage was all about the right to procreate and procure finances and titles.

So yeah, there was traditional marriage, it is just hard to find an example of it today that is not completely dysfunctional. Human beings aren't even biologically destined for monogamy.

As for the instance they mentioned to you, if it did happen it only proves that some things, like murderers, transcend sexual identity -_-