|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,774
|
Quote:
dk: I agree gay culture’s promiscuous values and pornographic landscapes (pvpl) don’t describe all gay people anymore than neon lights describe all people that live in Los Vegas.
We spent a page discussing PP, I reviewed the page and found no substantive reply. SIECUS and PP have adismal performance record by any measure, and PP has a history checkered with scandals that begin with using Puerto Rico women as lab rats, to fraudulently marketing of Enron. If you can find one national leader PGM and critical of PP then I concede. That should be easy, except there aren’t any
Jinto: And none of this addresses what I said in that paragraph. So you have conceded the point.
|
dk: You can say what you want. I have not idea what “this addresses” because all see standing is my comment.
Quote:
dk: We agree, everyone is obliged to respect the public square. I never said gays tried to destroy youth, so your response is a non sequitur. You’re arguing with yourself, not anything I said.
Jinto: dk said: The point is gays culture is destructive, and gays are decimating themselves, and their youthful protégés. These people don’t need marriage they need to clean up their act.
Don't lie dk, it only makes you look worse.
|
dk: Gay people and gay culture are two distinct things, your comment remains a non-sequitur, even when you talk out of the other side of your face, two face.
Quote:
dk: Argue amongst yourselves, or with yourself, about anything you want, but it has nothing to with the case I put forward. non sequitur.
Jinto: Personally I think if the gay community sincerely wants to promote a monogamous lifestyle, then they need to clean up gay culture to overcome the promiscuous and pornographic values it promulgates within the gay community
|
dk: You have every right to your personal opinion and I’m happy to hear it. I see no evidence that gays culture supports monogamy, and a great deal of evidence that shows gay culture promotes anonymous promiscuity. Unless gays make some effort to clean up their culture I don’t see any reason to think them sincere, and their scandalous history leaves me skeptical. But I’d love to see a honest effort by gays to clean up their communities and culture.
Quote:
dk: Each of these sub items shows Gay leaders routinely scandalize children and families in the public square to promote themselves.
Jinto: Fine, but even if we stipulate to the truth of these assertations, my objection remains. How is this relevant to the issue?
|
dk: The conduct, history, values, tactics and intentions of the gay leadership reflect the gay communities they represent.
Quote:
dk: An ad hominem attacks are fallacious, not substantial, whether you like me or not.
Jinto: A good point dk, because a large part of your argument has been an ad hominem attack against "gay leaders" (whatever those are). The previous paragraph being an example.
|
dk: In a democratic society gay leadership speaks for their constituency, therefore directly reflects upon the character of gay communities.
Quote:
dk: I’ve made my case, If you refute it, I’m obliged to capitulate. When you talk about something else,, non sequitur
Jinto: I believe I speak for all present when I say: what case?
|
dk: You’re responding to a summary of the case I presented.
Quote:
dk: You certainly keep saying you’ve completed refuted me.
Jinto: We have. Check the thread, dude, every one of your arguments has been either irrelevant or refuted, and frequently both.
|
dk: I have reviewed the thread, and you guys spend most of your ink denying gay leadership culture exist, and the rest rationalizing gay marriage on the basis of dysfunction.
Quote:
dk: Correction, saying gays couples are stable doesn’t prove squat. For every 2 married couples with children, 1 gay man died from an MSM incident, and 1 gay man waits to die from an MSM incident. That’s not very stable.
Jinto: Can you please provide for me: - the statistics proving this assertation
- how long a time period you are referring to
- the statistics proving that this assertation applies to monogamous gay relationships
- the statistics proving this assertation applies outside of LA
- links to the original sites so that we can verify you're not just pulling numbers out of your ass.
- some indication of why the hell this should even be an issue given that the adoption agency would filter out people who have incurable diseases ANYWAY.
and finally:
|
dk: I already provided statistics and sources. PGMers haven’t, and I’m not obliged to support PGM, don’t be so lazy. If adoption agency’s screen gays for hiv/aids you need to support it (not me), and given the privacy mask gays adoption activists hide behind, and the privacy rights the foster care system hides behind, good luck. .
Quote:
dk: I challenge your claim, offer some evidence. Most children adopted domestically are from foster care, kept as the wards of the state after being taken away from their biological parents. The biological parent[s] hope to be reunite with their kid[s]. The claim is insubstantial without evidence, and you got zilch.
Jinto: Offer evidence of what? That all gay couples are infertile? That's YOUR assertation. That people will not usually consider adopting children if they can have their own? Good God, just go to any infertility clinic and you'll find evidence of that. And what the hell does where they are adopted from have to do with anything? The point is that the children EXIST, and need parents.
|
dk: Do you really challenge the sterility of gay unions, hehhehe? You know zilch about the foster care and adoption, so you can’t make an intelligible comment one way or the other. I would encourage you to investigate, it’ll make you sick to your stomach.
Quote:
dk: I’ve never mentioned an ideal world, non sequitur. Gays Marriage would aggravate the problem by severing the bonds that hold together the nuclear family
Jinto: How? You have asserted this, and asserted this, but you have never told me how the hell gay marriage is going to sever anything. Is anyone here saying that heterosexuals can't get married? Is anyone proclaiming that we should do away with marriage entirely? Are the voices in your head telling you that if we allow gay marriage that millions of adults will suddenly divorce their sopouses to marry others of the same sex? Someone explain this guy's reasoning to me here, I can't figure it out.
|
dk: Duh? Daddy and co-Daddy sever the maternal bond, Mommy and co-Mommy sever the paternal bond.
Quote:
|
Jinto: Every time I have brought this up, you say "but adoption creates more problems than it solves, we don't need to create more families, we need to fix the nuclear family." Let us constrain ourselves to workable solutions here: one solution is to increase the number of committed couples that are available and willing to adopt children. Gay marriage will accomplish that. You seem to have some huge problem with the idea of adoption, yet you propolse no alternative. You seem to blame adopting parents for ripping the child away from their birthparents. Get it through your head: the person adopting is not the cause of the child being up for adoption in the first place.
|
dk: I said gays can’t to anything to fix the adoptions system, because the problem of adoption stems from a foster care system, and the foster care system hides behind a mask of privacy put up by government bureaucrats and lawyers to cover their asses. Get it through your head finding married couples that want to adapt is not a problem, its finding kids lost in the foster care system that’s the problem. I don’t know what else to say Jinto, go look into the matter.
Quote:
dk: I challenge this statement, you can’t possibly show, know or imagine who gets hurt under circumstances beyond your own nose. Most kids are kept in foster care waiting in limbo to be reunited with their biological parent[s]
jinto: Actually I can, because unlike you I have emapthy for other human beings. You on the ohter hand, would rather see children kept with parents who don't want them, are unable physically and emotionally to parent them, or maybe happen to be dead. There are a myriad of reasons why a child might be up for adoption, but if adoption is even an option (as you say, in many foster care cases it isn't because the courts are still trying to rehabilitate their bio-parents), then it's a virtual guarantee that returning them to their bio-parents isn't.
|
dk: If you had empathy you’d get off your lazy ass and investigate the black hole they call a foster care system. Kids get thrown into it, and are lost until they turn 18. I think 90% of the adoptions are made by foster parents, but when a foster parent adopts the kid the government stops paying them, so the foster care system deters adoption. Parent[s] with children taken away are slow to relinquish their parental rights, and the family courts have to cut them. The system plays both ends against the middle, and that’s what turns foster care into a black hole, where kids are placed and forgotten.
Jinto: And dk, if the best argument that you can put forth is to accuse your opponent of having no empathy, when your own words show that to be more descriptive of yourself, then you really ought to just shut up.
dk: I submit, empathy hemorrhages from the guilt people feel when they commit themselves to a lie.
Quote:
dk: Any evidence you’ve offered was weak at best. There’s reason to believe, “If pigs had wings they could fly?”. The problem is pigs don’t wings. All “reason” can establish is plausibility, and all things considered plausibility doesn’t stand up to scrutiny in the face of so many public scandals. If there was an outcry from the Gay Community about the Sex Museum gays opened in NYC 5th Ave. to promote pvpl, you would have a point, but gays leaders, publishers and artisans just don’t care. You climb out on limb to back the gay community, while gay leaders, intellectuals, artisans and patrons start up a buzz saw to cut the tree down
jinto: to paraphrase you: Any evidence you could have offered was weak at best. There's reason to believe "If the nuclear family was stable adoption would be unnessecary." The problem is, the nuclear family isn't stable
|
dk: The nuclear family is an archetype that cuts gay marriage out by definition. So you’d have to paraphrase, “There's reason to believe "If the family was stable adoption would be unnecessary." The problem is, the family isn't stable”
Quote:
|
Jinto: I climb out on a limb to defend Amendment XIV of the United States constitution: "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." You try to deny the gay community their rights based on their political views - political views that are hel not by the majority, but by the vocal minority. You are denying their rights because they don't stand up and hate the same displays you hate. This is a clear violation of the constitution. Damnit dk, haven't you ever read the same document that allows you to disagree with the U.S. government without being arrested?
|
dk: Agree that would be a substantial PGM argument, if you could support it. But I’d respond with stare decisis, abuse of judicial review, judicial legislation, violation of triad checks and balances, and ill defined penumbra. Until the Supreme Courts actually violates the constitution to order gay marriage your argument can’t be supported. This has already been touched upon with Hawaii and Vermont G&L unions.
Quote:
dk: I have no idea what you’re talking about. If I had a clue “what red hearing” or “what slippery slope” you were talking about I would respond. The ball’s in your court. What “red hearing” and what “slippery slope”?
jinto: Read
|
dk: Read what, my palm or a crystal ball, or do you think I can read your mind?
Quote:
dk: I’m happy to hear the nuclear family is not universal, but I said, “the nuclear family forms the universal archetype...“
Jinto: If you want to get technical, then it's really the "alpha male" polygamous structure that is the archetype of civilization. But we don't use it any more. Why? Because we have better ideas.
|
dk: Archetype 1 : the original pattern or model of which all things of the same type are representations or copies : ----- © 2003 by Merriam-Webster Dictionary.
Jinto: And please, look up the definition of the word "archetype" before you use it again.
dk: Take your own advice.
Quote:
|
dk: Gay marriage dissolves the bonds that hold the nuclear family together, and the family archetype becomes the Xfamily archetype. To me, and a lot of people like me, everything familiar about civilization changes. I really don’t think you grasp the scope and magnitude of what I’ve said.
|
- Jinto:In other words, this is your own personal fear of change talking. Well let me tell you what it's like from my perspective: this represents absolutely nothing.
dk: The archetype of Western and Eastern Civilization is the nuclear family. All the other civilizations that ever existed are ruined. Either offer evidence to contradict my statement, or accept it. After you’ve accepted it, then consider its weight, scope magnitude and implications. All the are other civilizations are dead, reduced to relics and ruins. It’s plausible that Western Civilization will be the first and only exception, otherwise we are talking Armageddon. So by the numbers.
- Jinto: All it means is that instead of the bonding of two people under the law being restricted to opposite sex couples, you now have same sex couples as well.
dk: Fallacious Illicit Major. Gay marriage means a changes in criminal , family courts, and civil law, billions in 401K plans,,,, etc,,,,
- Jinto: Same sex couples have been around for a while -
dk: I have no idea what a while means.
- Jinto:the fact is, many gay people already "marry," even though their marriage is not legally recognized.
dk: Many gays mock marriage.
- Jinto:But all the constants of civilization - human stupidity, blind faith in our leaders, people's willingness to conform and not make waves - it's all the same.
dk: So its your position that gay marriage will cure human stupidity, blind faith and conformity. Can you present any evidence?
Jinto: People's desire to have children, their acceptance of a life where more than half of it is spent with no real freedom whatsoever - first because of parents, then because of children - that will remain.
dk: People desire all kinds of things, and gays are free to marry like everyone else. Gays don’t want children, they want to take other people’s children. Gays want marriage to legitimize gay culture laden with pvpl. .
- Jinto: Hell, even when human cloning becomes possible, people will still make babies the old-fashioned way. That's human nature.
dk: Cloning’s illegal and immoral. Gays can’t make babies.
- Jinto: What is also human nature is the fact that humans are often afraid of change.
dk: Really, not just change you mind on gay marriage, are you afraid?
- Jinto:
- Go back 75 years and tell me what you hear about interracial marriage.
-The same things were said: "The universal archetype of civilization is to have the races remain seperate." "Interracial marriage dissolves the bonds that hold family together, and what was once known as the family becomes the Xfamily" "Interracial families cannot possibly be legitimate because all the children will be mongrels".
Well guess what? We're here today, interracial marriage is accepted,
and civilization hasn't collapsed.
dk: First the universal archetype of Civilization has no connection with interracial marriage. Second, Fallacy of the undistributed middle: what people thought about interracial marriage, inter religious marriage, x-national marriage,,,, 75 years ago has no connection to the case (for or) against gay marriage today.
- Jinto: What is astounding to me is that every time some minor rule of civilization changes, there are those who say that it will become unrecognizable, that it will mean the end of all things, that that rule has formed the foundation of civilization and humans can't survive without it. And EVERY SINGLE TIME, those predictions have been wrong. You'd think by now that humanity would have developed some sense of pattern recognition. Believe me, there is about as much chance of Gay marriage collapsing civilization as there is of the moon turning into green spinach.
dk: What astonishes me is the number of fallacious statements you packed into a single paragraph.
Quote:
dk: non sequitur, in the nuclear family archetype marriages are consummated by an act of procreation, in the xfamily archetype acts of procreation become superfluous.
Jinto: And what have you to say to the infertile couples? Oh yeah, "but they're okay because they're of the right orientation." Your special pleading illustrates that whether or not a couple bears children isn't your concern.
|
dk: I have nothing to say about infertility, except the number one cause is stds spread by promiscuous sex.
Quote:
dk: Sorry, the Census Bureau says many lesbians hide their sexual orientation, and perjure themselves in family court to take and keep custody from the father.
Jinto: Uh yeah. Tell you what: when you can respond to what I actually said, I'll listen to your argument. What I said was that it does not alter the standing of nuclear families before the court. Now, when you can show me how the rules governing nuclear families are changed because of the existence of gay marriages... you still won't have an argument, but at least you'll be making sense.
|
dk: I’ve told you several times, gays take other people’s children because gay’s are sterile. Every law that empowers the courts to break the bonds between a mother, father, husband, wife and children without a finding of guilt weakens the nuclear family. Gay marriage fundamentally changes the nuclear family archetype to the xfamily archetype, thus the nuclear family archetype ceases to exist as the basis of law, and the xfamily archetype becomes the basic unit of the nation.
Quote:
dk: Tell you what pops, if you want to teach your little boy and girl that MSM or WSW constitutes an act of procreative, you’re not only a liar but a fool. .But mark my words, the day PGM impose, by an act of law, this lie upon my children, is the day I start thinking about killing the enemy. Truth told, I can’t help it, that’s just how I am. I know you probably don’t understand this, but you need to understand for your sake and mine that there’s a lot of men like me. You and I don’t want go there, its a very bad place.
Jinto: Explicit argumentum ad baculum. Proof that you have no case. Please check yourself into a mental hospital, you are clearly a threat to both yourself and others.
|
dk: Call it what you want, but keep your hands off my family. You, gays leaders, State & Federal Government have no legitimate power to dissolve the nuclear family. I have a duty to protect the sanctity of my family by any and all means necessary.
Quote:
dk: Ok fine, scope and magnitude exist as scalars, context gives direction. I’m putting the scope and magnitude into context. Don’t turn family into an excuse to mess with kids, it is a very bad place to go, for all of us.
Jinto: More implied death threats.
|
dk: I didn’t imply anything, except whatever is necessary.
Quote:
dk: I don’t live in Europe. I want my country safe for my family and kids. It has nothing to do with Europe because I don’t live in Europe. Gay marriage is a bad idea, because it takes us to a bad place beyond anyone’s control.
Jinto:
dk, it takes us NOWHERE. It is only a minor change in the law. What are you so afraid of?
|
dk: I’m afraid of my own rage, its not an emotion easily controlled or directed.
Quote:
dk: Sorry Jinto but homosexuals can’t consummate their marriage with an act of procreation. gay marriage makes a mockery of family. There’s nothing you or I can do or say to change what it means to be a human being. I’m not going to lie about. You do what you want
Jinto: Homosexuals marry because the WANT to marry, not to mock anything. Ask any homosexual.
|
dk: Homosexuals mock marriage.
Jinto: P.S. - that's all we are asking for, the right to do what we want without homophobes trying to tell us what we can and cannot do.
dk: I understand what you want, you want the children of other people, and you want whatever benefits for yourself marriage can bring.
Quote:
dk: I understand. For a decent person to commit themselves to a lie, they must dehumanize anyone that fails to go along with the charade. You want to hate me for the lie you’ve committed yourself. That’s why it feels good to call me a mindless bigot, that’s why the people call fetuses stds, and hitler called jews parasites. I know the drill, and I know the bad place it leads too, you don’t want go there with me.
Jinto: I have never heard of anyone who called a fetus an std. And frankly, you are suffering from a mental disorder. But this is a case of a pot calling the kettle black: you are the one who has dehumanized anyone who disagrees with you as "the enemy" and threatened to kill us (or homosexuals, I'm not quite sure who your threat was being directed against.) But your post is right: you do know the drill, you practice it on a daily basis.
|
dk: I have, Margaret Sanger for one, also a cancerous growth, glob of cells, and a parasite. Dehumanization is nothing more than cutting a group out of one’s moral universe. I can’t understand homosexuality anymore than I can understand someone that sexually abuses a child. I don’t have a problem with homosexuality until they as a group mess with kids. I know this, a father wants his son to be like him in everything he loves where love does no harm.
Quote:
dk: Whatever positive affects you’ve imagined are implausibility. Gay marriage literally treats the nuclear family with contempt and ridicule. Unless gays muster the character to reform Gay Culture the imaginary “gay stable family” has no substance. Since G&Ls deprive their children of a father and/or mother even your reason lacks plausibility
Jinto: Argumentum ad nauseum. BTW, Gay marriage has only the utmost respect for the nuclear family: why do you think they're trying to imitate it (or, from my perspective, simply apply it in a new way)?
|
dk: Its not evident in the public square in any of the symbolism that’s been popularized by gay culture.
Quote:
dk: That’s no red herring. When a gay man copulates with a post pubescent kid he intends to make the kid a homosexual, the intent being consonant with the act. Suppose I’m the 12 kid that copulates with the gay man. My orgasms were absolutely real, and the experience bent to a homosexual orientation. As I matured I’d have to figure out what the experience meant. It a very substantial issue that there's no answer for, and lays a heavy burdon on PGMers
jinto: Again, no relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia, and this story if true would explain part of your homophobia: you're afraid you might have to admit that you actually did enjoy that, dispite how evil everyone else tells you it is.
|
dk: I specifically reference post pubescent kids to avoid the pedophilia. . The stories hypothetical, and important to emphasize as hypothetical because such stories breed homophobia. That said it happen more frequently than anyone likes to admit.
|
04-18-2003, 06:38 PM
Please.
