This has been circulating on the internet as an e-mail, and I came across it via Ace Pryhill.
The Top Ten Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong
- Homosexuality is not natural. Real people always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
- Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
- Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
- Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still aren’t supposed to marry whites.
- Straight marriage will be less meaningful if homosexual marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
- Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Homosexual couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
- Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
- Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in North America.
- Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
- Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
Internet Forward
Hilarious post..!
* ColdForged applauds *
I love getting into arguments — doesn’t happen often IRL, but happens fairly frequently in forums I (used to) frequent — with people about gay marriage who get all uppity and say “I’m not bigoted, but…”. I’m sorry, do you have a different definition of the word “bigot” than I do?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me, Sparky.
Translation:
This from the same people who are worried that “the gays” are going to completely transform society into a gaggle of limp-wristed socialites… but they are so spineless that they won’t even admit to their own bigotry!
Now, everyone is a bigot to some extent. Even those who claim to be tolerant of every group of people are usually intolerant of people who are less tolerant than they. I’m intolerant of racists, communists, pedophiles and terrorists. I wear that bigotry with pride. Why do those who fear “the gay agenda” attempt to hide their true feelings? As much as I disagree with “9/11 happened because of abortion and homosexuals,” I have to admire the balls it takes to assert such a belief. Most people are only that confident of their bigotry when they are in the privacy of a voting booth and the latest “don’t let the queers pee in our marriage pool” law is on the ballot.
Honestly, gay marriage is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me. Yeah, feel free to take that quote out of context. 🙂 What I mean is: I’m a logical person, with a strong belief in personal freedoms, and the power of the individual over the power of the masses. Arguing this issue is so easy, it almost feels unfair. Part of me wants to add a twist to the whole thing to handicap myself. Ya know… something like “scientists today discovered that homosexuality is caused by an airborne virus…” or “metaphysicists are worried about the sudden exponential increase in the universe’s ‘dark matter,’ apparently brought on by homosexual promiscuity.”
This is so great. I’m, of course, going to copy and paste it on my site.
Thanks,
Patrick
This is so cool.
well, I DO believe that Gay marriage is gonna encourage people to have ploygamy. really. not kidding. that would suck.
By the way, I would pity the kid who has to grow up in a house with his two “Dads” sleeping together. Really. It would be as gross having to grow up in dump. jeez. why did I even think about it.
anyways, atleast the vaseline company is with you guys.
lol.
I pity the kid that has to grow up in a house with someone like “you”, whose best contribution to the dialog is a Vaseline joke.
You there is something wrong with who ever made this up. We never asked you to be gay so why don’t you just lay off?
Are we living in a society so immature that we have to post websites against gay marriges? Guess what? NOBODY ASKED YOU YOUR OPINION ON THIS!! Geeze I’m only 13 and I’m getting all worked up over this. It’s ridiculous.
Okay…..I figured it out…You have no life and want to bother gay people in your spare time. You guys are like Nazis…trying to get the arian race. Sorry! We live in America and we are all differnet. If this is the land of the free…why can’t people be gay?
hmm can you guys help me i have to do a debate against gay marriages with tina and we both hate it. maybe you can give us some ideas? that would be great! love you much Jillie!
uhm lesbians and homo’s are alright. you good in ma book(=
Who are you talking to? You do realize that this is satire, right?
It’s okay to be gay but why should America change the whole insitution of marriage to suit only 2% of the population(If you look at recent stats it isn’t 10% like it was previously believed). Why aren’t civil unions okay?
This issue is also not a human rights issue for all of those ppl who claim it is. The UN defines marriage as a union b/w a man and a women(How can you call the UN a violater of human rights). Also Britain, France, Australia, and the U.S.(to name a few) have not allowed gay marriage … are you calling those countries violators of human rights too? WOW thats quite a claim if you think they are. If you were to say Iran or North Korea were violating human rights then I would be more likely to buy your arguement. However, I and many others cannot buy your claim that the most just societies of today are violating human rights…it just does not make sense!
The top three religions around the world are against gay marriage(Christians, Mulsims and Hindus). Well I guess you could say there are a FEW Christians who support it but the majority do not(Catholics, Evangelicals, Pentacostals, etc). If so many world religions are against it, why should we change the definition of marriage.
Finally, by definition same-sex erotic attraction is predicated either on the narcissism of being attracted to what one is as a sexual being or on the delusion that one needs to merge with another of the same sex to complete one’s own sexual deficiencies. Arguing that we should grant marriage status to homosexually inclined persons to avert promiscuity is like insisting that we grant marriage status to adult incestuous or polygamous unions to promote relational longevity. It doesn’t address the main problem with this particular kind of sexual immorality!!
Shaun,
Oil for food scandal, abandonment of genocide in Rwanda, apathy about genocide in the Sudan. Rape committed by UN “Peacekeepers” in Haiti, Burma and Congo, but that’s really besides the point.
Civil unions are fine. But if civil unions have all the legal rights as marriage, why the semantic quibbling? Marriage, to the state, is merely a civil union. There is no religious vow taken when you sign a marriage certificate. Why do we have to play word games?
I wouldn’t call this a human rights violation… I’d call it a civil rights injustice. If you offer marriage to one group of people, you should offer it to others.
Care to show me that definition? Perhaps it’s right next to the definition of a heterosexual as someone who “loathes their gender and wishes to be with someone of the opposite gender to punish their disgusting self.”
It’s not the government’s job to address morality, where such morality (or lack thereof) doesn’t violate the rights of other citizens.
I dont believe in gay/lesbian crap. It’s against what God has limit for us. We know it’s un-natural to be gay. And why do they need a contract to legalize there animal behaviors. No way would any religion except such abnormal behavior. No gay now and forever in marriage. How absurd can they be, what are we going to tell our kids?. Well I will end by saying we as Americans and the whole world would never except such behavior, which God is against.
If it isn’t natural, why do animals do it? It isn’t about legalizing behaviors… the behaviors are already legal. It is about the legal rights that marriage provides, like next-of-kin rights. Tell your kids whatever you want, that’s your business. Nice of you to appoint yourself God’s official liaison, by the way, I’m sure he appreciates you putting words in his mouth.
You are a freaking fag!! I think that people should be able to do what the heck they want to do and not be forced around by the gosh darn government!! And your reasons for not having gay marriages sucked ass!! I’m not gay but i have an opinion on everything and your reasons for no gay marriages were the suckiest, stupidest, and most retarded reasons ever..burn in hell!! DICK HEADS!! TO ALL GAY PEOPLE..IM SORRY FOR HOW THESE PEOPLE ARE TREATING YOU AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR LOVERS!!!
Jessi, it’s a joke. The “10 reasons” are making fun of people who argue against gay marriage. And calling someone (me?) a “freaking fag” doesn’t really work in your favor if you’re trying to come off as open-minded.
The reason that gay marriage is really wrong is that it completely contrasts the facts on which this country was founded. It also ISN’T natural because you don’t see a guy animal humping another one in hte forest. If you saw this, I guess you could have more reason to why it was right, but you don’t see it! This proves that gayness is all in the mind and not from what is “natural”. Also, I cant see gay parents raising the right kind of kids who can grow up in a normal world, which in turn, makes their kids have a bad life, and is passed on as such. This ruins our ever-changing society for the worst as we come to an hour as dark as this where we say if it is okay to be gay. Others support them too?! Where has this world gone!?
“It was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve” JoJo
Male animals hump each other all the time in nature. Many animals choose lifetime homosexual partners.
There is no evidence that being raised by homosexual parents will make the children have a “bad life.” This is based totally on your prejudices. Shouldn’t you be spending your time at school learning instead of gay-bashing in the computer lab?
It was “Adam and Eve” because you need a male and a female to reproduce. We’re not really in danger of dying out anymore, so constant reproduction isn’t needed. If you think the fact that the first two people created by God in the creation story were a man and a woman is some sort of divine anti-homosexual statement, you’re a flaming idiot.
You know what Mark! IT WAS ADAM AND EVE, NOT ADAM AND MARK!!!!!!!
Hey man, if I had my way, it would be Mark and Eve, and Eve’s 10 hot friends who don’t mind “sharing.” 😉
Even though i think that homosexuality is wrong, things that were said on this sight were unfactual and were opinionated.I think that the statments that were made were inconsiderate and unlogical. Yes gay marriages are wrong but interacial relationships are natural and fine.
allow me to argue this message. 1. who the heck rejects air conditioning, polyester, and eyeglasses? 2. how small minded, hanging with tall people will make you tall. wat kind of logic is that??? I’m tall and all my long time friends are still short! 3. marry their dogs? people already do that for the fun of it! 4. bull f*ckin sh*t, i am a woman and i am no one’s property, and i am white and i would definitely say blacks like Usher and 50 cent are hott!!!! 5. sanctity? everyone i know thinks she’s a s-l-u-t! 6. the population is already too high and we shouldn’t have orphanages in the first place!!! 7. dude this person needs to get out more, i have lots of LGTB friends with straight parents. 8. there are so many different religions in north America it’s not even funny! 9. wtf is that? i have lots of friends with single parents who are very successful. 10. haven’t adapted to cars? our lives revolve around cars!!! longer life spans, we pay millions to save ourselves from cancer! personally i think whoever started this was on something strong. this is the dumbest thing i have ever read.
Andrea, I’m waiting with eagerness for your reasoning that justifies interracial relationships, but not intergender relationships.
Sara, read the list again, but consider the possibility that it might be satire. Then do a search on this site for “gay marriage” and find out how I feel on the subject. 😀
Oh my dear sara, i really hope that you’re kidding [snicker] .. this list is not something to take seriously. I believe mark already said:
…and…
Heh.. Mark, you rock. This is a great list. Very funny 😀 You get my vote!
Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn’t get it.
Keaven,
I love that contest! That word is from the Washington Post contest where you change one letter to create a new word.
Some of my other faves:
[snicker] you cought me 😀 I wasn’t sure in which year it was printed, otherwise i would have cited it properly 😛
That is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen in my life and whoever wrote it is close minded and apparenlty is a closet gay. stop bashing just because we are alot more open-minded. Gay marriage should be allowed and Marriage is about love.
And women are not property. They could dominate the world if they had the will genius
lol, dude, I’m so stupid. But yeah, I get it now. this is everything against the people who are against. thanks you guys and sorry
I feel it’s none of the goverment or anyone else’s business who gets married.
IMHO
I far as i know, just as worst as the population is growing in india,gay marraige is the best way of avoiding the population toll.
ok. you are sick and bigoted and your opinions are regressive and are the reason america has a jackass for a president. you must be a homophobe, right? there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality. you wouldn’t know what’s natural, because you’re just constantly rejecting anything that doesn’t fit into the little bigoted rules that are you religion. you wouldn’t know a single thing about being homosexual, or homosexuality or anything relating to such, because you are not homosexual and you think it is wrong. you’re just rejecting what is indeed very natural. so shut and stay out of people’s business. if you don’t like homosexual marriages, fine, don’t go to one and don’t marry someone of the same sex. but don’t ever persecute people based on something you know nothing about.
yet another example of Sarchasm (see comment #41 for deffinition). I mean, come on.. how can you take “the sanctity of Brittany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed” in any other way BUT as sarcasum?
I will say this though, i take great offence at the “Religion is Wrong” statement. Most of what that character said i could turn around and say right back about religion. Just because you don’t like their oppinion on the matter dosn’t make them “wrong.” everyone is entitled to an oppinion. And not all relgious people think that way. I’M a religious person AND gay! Immagine that!
Granted this is just my opinion … but …
I can’t help but feel that people against Gay Marriage are
simply against Homosexuality. Period. They say they are not, but if they weren’t they wouldn’t have a problem with Gay Marriage. Allowing Gay Marriages is a simple, logical extension to accepting the fact that some people prefer people of the same sex. To me, its a none issue. Sex is sex. And Love is love. Homosexuality seems to me to be simply a matter of preference. One man may prefer (be more attracted to) blonde women and another to brunnette women. One may like tall women, and another short. It is all a matter of preference. Sex is sex. As long as you are not hurting anyone (without consent; for the BDSM folks out there), whats the problem. And how is it any of your business who people prefer to have sex with !?!
But that is one issue. Sex. The other, seperate issue is Love. Who are they to tell others who they can and cannot love. Most opponents to Gay Marriage will say … “fine. let them have homosexual sex. And fine, let them love whomever they want. But Marriage, thats sacred. My religion forbids it”. Well I say fine, let your religion forbid it. Freedom of Religion. I would never want to see a government tell a religion how it can and cannot operate, as long it doesn’t hurt anyone. A Government should never force a Religion to change its belief system, as long as that belief system does not hurt anyone. But, to a governemnt, Marriage is not a religious institution. The governemnt is not there for the Majority of its citizens, it is there for ALL of its citizens! And this is where I think a lot of people get confused. When it comes to denying and granting certain basic/fundemental rights, the government must represent ALL of its citizen’s not just the majority! Trust me, no one wants a government that only grants rights to the majority, because God help you if you are ever in the Minority!
as i will amitt, i am gay, and its not fair the way gay ppl are treated. Just because some1 is gay does not mean that person doent have feelings. to make some feel as thought they are worthless because of who they are or how they were born or how there personality is, is nothing to be ashamed of. pple will find if they treat ppl the same no matter of race, sexuality or colour the world will be a better place..
Not that Mark wasn’t doing an admirable job, but maybe it’s time to be blunt.
Okay, all you morons taking this seriously- listen up! I’m your worst nightmare, and I’m here to give you a lesson in learning how to read!
Let’s start with reason number one: Homosexuality is not natural. Real people always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
Hmmm…. How many people here know someone who wears glasses? C’mon, raise your hands…. Very good, class! What about air conditioning? I’m sure at least some of you have that, just like the majority of you are probably wearing polyester today, or will sleep on it tonight.
So that means – gasp! – it’s not true! No, it’s not. This, class, is called satire. S-A-T-I-R-E. Write this down; there will be a test. Satire is when someone sees something so absurdly idiotic that they just can’t help but make fun of it. Then they decide to be clever about it. The only probably with that is the number of idiots who wouldn’t recognize satire if it walked up and hit them upside the head with a frying pan.
Here, let’s try another example: Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
But…. if straight people only raise straight children, where’d all the gays come from?
And that crack about hanging out with tall people making you tall- that was priceless. And I thought it was the most obvious satire in the whole list, aside from Britney Spears.
If you still haven’t figured out that this list is one big joke, then I wash my hands of you. No one can help you now, so we might as well not waste time trying, when there are young, impressionable children out there that need saving from the people this piece pokes fun at.
See ya.
hahahahahahahaah … *clap*clap*clap* … thank you Beki 🙂
Rock on, Beki. 😀 Now, any bets on how many people comment after this, still not getting that it’s satire?
That’s a bet I’d rather not take. I’m sure we can count on at least one ijit that doesn’t even bother to read the comments jumping all over it. I’ve seen this list in other forums, and no matter how many times I tried to explain, the thickwits still took it seriously. This is about the fourth or fifth time, and needless to say, I’m getting tired of it.
Confuses invention with perversion. Eyeglasses help people see. Aircon helps people keep cool. Homosexuality helps people… what…?
False analogy. Never heard of the “Tall and Proud” movement. Gay lifestyle has a tendency to attempt its own propogation. And gay experiences can be chosen to be entered into – height cannot.
Attempted irony, but actually true. Bestialists and paedophiles, like gays, think that society is the one with the problem.
Confuses a traditional institution with negative outdated prejudices. Also self-conflicting. Are you saying that marriage, because it is long lived, is as repugnant as racism or masogeny? If so, why do gays want to be a part of it?
Attempted irony fails. Those who oppose gay marriage on principe should also oppose quickie Vegas-style hetero marriages. Both are contrary to the spirit of marriage.
Age and infertility are, in child-bearing terms, disabilities. Are you calling homosexuality a disability!? Gotcha!
Children imitate their parents, it’s how they learn. God help the poor hetero kid who feels bad coz he can’t be gay like his daddy and daddy.
Factually mistaken. All major religious oppose gay marriage.
Yes. Single parent families are not preferable to the traditional nuclear family.
Just like we have adopted to genocide, racism, poverty and warfare? What’s your point? Not all modern innovations are positive.
Helps them live a fulfilled life. Helps them feel like they’re not going through life faking everything.
Tall people don’t face discrimination. On the contrary, they do quite well. The “tendency” you mention is your perception. Homosexuality is as common now as it was 2000 years ago. Could you have chosen not to be straight? In a country that is about half-filled with people who think like you do, why on earth would anyone choose to be gay?
Slippery slope fallacy. How the hell do you jump from homosexuality to bestiality? How do you jump from homosexuality to pedophilia (which is disproportionately committed by heterosexuals)?
It is the legal discrimination that is repugnant, not marriage. Just like it was the legal discrimination that was repugnant when blacks couldn’t marry whites.
They should, but somehow they’re not concerned with making laws about it.
As far as child-bearing is concerned, there is no bigger disability than homosexuality, yes. You can try to conceive a child through a homosexual union, but it’s not going to work.
Not statistically valid for sexuality. A child raised by homosexuals is no more likely to be gay than anyone else.
You miss the point. Yes, most major religions oppose it, but what does that matter? This isn’t a theocracy.
You know what? No one cares what you prefer, because it’s none of your business. Good luck confiscating the children of all the single parents in this country.
Point noted. However, the issue here is legal discrimination. Do you contest that eliminating legal discrimination is not a positive thing?
wow… and then he doesn’t even subscribe so he can see a rebuttal. [shakes head]
No, it points out that corrective vision techniques go against what is natural.. loosing your eyesight or being born blind is the natural state. Heat is a natural state, trying to alter the natural ambient temperature mechanically or chemically is not.
This is not to say that homosexuality is NOT natural, but rather that the argument that it IS is not valid since something being ‘unnatural’ is hasn’t kept us from adopting things.
[roll eyes] oh yeah, the infamous ‘homosexual agenda,’ right? we’re out to ‘convert’ the children… give me a break. Also, heterosexual experiences can also be chosen to be entered. That’s what all the parents worry about on prom night. So what’s your point? That BEING homosexual is a choice? You had better be real sure about that before you say it.
Sadly, you still missed the point. Dogs and Children cannot enter into a legally binding contractual agreement. Adults can, regardless of their gender. Therefore, the irony stands. A man and woman can enter into a social contract with the state, but two men cannot. Aside from religion, there is no reason for this.
Again, you miss the point. How many protesters did you see carrying signs like, “God hates 55-minute marriages!” At most, you have an embarrassed set of parents who wonder about their son’s/daughter’s judgement… not the “Get the F**K out of my house, F*G! I have no son!”
The people you speak of may oppose quickie marriages, but they do so with a shake of their head. Gay marriages illicit a crinkled face, narrowing of the eyes, a very un-Christ-like snarl, usually accompanied by spitting.
Not self-conflicting, you have once again missed the irony. Laws in the US once made it illegal for a black and a white to marry. At the time every major religion was against the idea of interracial marriages.. it went against scripture and was an abomination unto the Lord!! hmmm.. now where have we heard THAT before? People have since opened their eyes, and accepted the fact that there’s nothing wrong with interracial marriage… just like there’s nothing wrong with homosexual marriage.
Age and infertility are no disabilities in ANY terms. They are NATURAL states of being… things which cannot be controlled, chosen, or helped (unless you accept the unnatural as with eyeglasses). No one is calling homosexuality a disability (as you would so very much like us to).
The irony here (which, again, you seem to miss) is that if marriage is only supposed to be for procreation (an argument made by many anti-gays) then why allow the elderly and infertile to marry? Its pointing out the hypocrisy of the anti-gays.
Oh, but too bad to the gay teenager who blows his brains out because his family makes him feel like he’s an abomination, that God hates him, and that he is a disappointment to the family?? Yeah, children imitate their parents.. things like acceptance, love, and understanding… or things like hate, prejudice, and intolerance.
Christianity does not oppose homosexuality, denominations do. There are many denominations that accept and support their gay parishioners. The problem is that the ones who hate gays are much more vocal. I cannot speak of other major religions, since i do not know enough about them to comment.
In terms of marriage, however, it should be pointed out that it is a social contract between two people and the state on matters of financial interdependence and mutual responsibilities. There is no legal reason that this contract cannot be gone into by two persons of the same gender. It is only religious bias that has prevented such an undertaking. So much for separation of church and state.
Yet we allow children to live with single parents all the time. But God forbid an orphan gets adopted by two gay men! [clutch the pearls]
and what’s YOUR point, that gay marriage gets lumped into the negative column? and why is that exactly? Because, in a world where 50% of heterosexual marriages ends in divorce, WE’RE the ones ruining the sanctity of marriage? Give me a break.
Listen, if you don’t want your church to marry me to my boyfriend, fine. “Go First Amendment! Yippie!” Your church can do (just about) whatever it wants to. However, that should NEVER impede my ability to establish relations with the state. Not in THIS country. THAT’S what pisses me off so much.
Calm down, I can see the rebuttal.
Question-begging. Validation of homosexuality through marriage for the benefit of homosexuals cannot make the same appeal to objective utility as eye-glasses and aircon.
Perverse logic. Impaired vision is the natural state!? OK- can’t argue if that is you premise, but I wonder how many people agree with that. I always thought that normal vision was the natural state; eyes are built for seeing properly.
In terms of justification of perversion. My point was not that homosexuality is closer to bestiality, but that bestiaists often make similar-sounding arguments to homosexuals, i.e. “accept me – its my choice” etc.
Most people who enter quickie marriages soonafter regret them. They do not stand up and act proud of their moronic behaviour. Of course they are embarrassed. My point focuses on the moral reprehensibliity, not on the viewpoints of the participants which are necessarily different.
Introverted rubbish. I was talking, if you don’t mind, from the child’s perspective. Children benefit from having a mother and a father – it is therefore objectively PREFERABLE for them to have one of each. What I personally prefer is irrelevant.
Children of single parents are the default state of divorce, separation or death. Children of gay parents can only be the result of active state participation, to allow the gay couple to adopt. The legal pemissibility of the situations is therefore not comparable.
Impaired vision is as natural as any other state of vision. 20/20 is normal only because it is in the majority. The eyes are biological and subject to deterioration, just like the rest of our bodies. That is the natural state. The cycle of life: birth, growth, death.
Yes, i understood your point. However, you seemed to have missed Mark’s and mine: notably, that you don’t see people so up in arms about the moral reprehensibility that they pass loss, and attempt to amend the constitution to outlaw the quickie-marriage.
No? There are plenty of people who have children in wedlock who later can no longer repress their homosexuality… they become single gay parents, who will probably find a new partner of the same gender with whom to raise their child. The situations are, therefore, comparable. Of course, since you feel homosexuals are incapable of being decent parents and rolemodles, you probably would want the child to be given to the straight parent, no matter the situation?
Brilliant. Both the post and the discussion. Shows you how far we’ve come and how little we’ve traveled as a nation and as a people. So much for the “humanity” in the issue of being human. 😉
Just leave him alone. People like J16 are so wrapped up in how their view is the only view that they never listen to reason. No matter what evidence or argument we present, he’ll go on believing what he does, secure in the fact that it must be right, since it’s what he believes.
A sidenote to J16- All major religions do not oppose homosexuality. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam might, but the Wiccan, Atheist, and Agnostic groups(which, incidentally, include way more people that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) have absolutely not problem with it. An’ it harm none, do as thou wilt is the biggest Rule of Wiccan religions, and I think it’s a hell of a lot better than the usual You’re wrong because your opinion differs from mine, which gives me the right to declare holy war on you.
As long as you’re going to take satire seriously, you might as well use an argument that’s valid for everybody, not just people who share your beliefs.
Satire!
Saaaatttiirrreeeeeeeee!!!
*head-desks*
Atheism and Agnosticism are not “religions”. And I’m fairly sure than Wiccan isn’t either. That’s witches and wizards, right? That’s utterly ridiculous.
OK, fine. I admit it. Homosexual marriage is good because the witches and wizards and enchanted folk of the fairy land say it is good. Whatever.
Why don’t we resume this discussion when you’ve all graduated from High School?
Depends on your definition of ‘religion.’ Are only Christian theologies considered true religions? You might laugh, but there are people who don’t consider Buddhism and Hinduism as true religions (since they aren’t Christian).
Agnostics do have a theistic ideology… it just happens to be the belief that no gods exist rather than the belief that gods do exist. They are both belief systems, and both logical in their own ways. What makes one a religion and the other not?
Wow… how condescending, closed-minded, and intolerant of you. And you have the nerve to call -us- high schoolers? I personally do not subscribe to the Wiccan faith… in fact, i stay as far from it as possible, but i would never make the mistake of writing it off as you have. It is still a faith system (one that i disagree with, but a faith system none the less).
Your recent comments force me to completely re-evaluate this discussion.
Again, you’re missing the point. The point is that it doesn’t matter what different religions say about it, because we don’t live in a theocracy.
And while agnosticism isn’t a religion, atheism is as much as a matter of faith as theism. Agnosticism is the default. Any deviation from that has to involve a leap of faith. And yes, Wicca is a religion. Yes, one that is popular with antisocial teenagers, but if you let that be the only standard by which you judge it, you’re as bad as the people who consider Pat Robertson as speaking for all Christians.
There’s no such thing as a wizard.
Except we do, though, don’t we. What book are the majority of our laws based on? It ain’t the Kama Sutra, that’s for sure.
This may be true in America, but in England, where Wicca was formed in the 1950’s (yes, believe it or not it isn’t an ancient religion), the majority of its followers are between 25 and 70. 🙂
Perhaps without “Thou shalt not murder,” it might not be a crime, eh? Even so, we’re not ruled by clerics, and civil law isn’t subordinate to religious law, so it is not, by definition, a theocracy.
Here as well. I wasn’t saying that teenagers were a majority. It’s just that the teenage set tends to latch on to things that seem to be new and “counter-culture.” Some people associate Wicca primarily with this young minority, which is a mischaracterization.
Ok, you got me. I don’t believe in witches and wizards. Or UFOs. Or JFK conspiracy theories. Does all this make me “closed-minded and intolerant”?
…
Or just NORMAL!?!?
You seem to be under this impression:
Miracle Worker : Christianity :: Witch : Wicca
It’s a little bit more like this:
Priest : Christianity :: Witch : Wicca
It’s not a perfect analogy, but it’s better than the first.
At which point did it become normal to flock to a building to sing about, devote yourself to, and worship a being that you’ve never seen or heard any proof of that probably doesn’t even exist at all?
At least with Paganism and nature worship you’re paying homage to things you can see and touch.
Hmm… I’d say this personally:
Priest is to Christianity as High Priest and High Priestess are to Wicca.
Christian is to Christianity as Wicca is to Wicca (I am a Wicca, we are Wicca, they practice Wicca. Simple, really.).
Catholic is to Protestant as Witch is to Wicca.
:p
From the moral and social impace of gay marriage … to the essence of witchcraft, and whether it is wrong to reject it as a basis for social normality.
Typical of a liberal-dominated debate to swing aimlessly from unmeritous minority cause to unmeritous minority cause.
“At least with Paganism you’re paying homage to things you can touch and see”. Well worship a supersized Big Mac meal then. You can touch and see it, and most Americans worship it anyway.
You can’t touch or see democracy, but I still believe in it. Silly me eh.
Wicca is actually monotheistic, but we’ve strayed far off course. The topic is the objective morality of homosexuality and the questionable legal basis for denying rights to homosexuals that are protected for heterosexuals. There is no church of America, so number 8 is dead.
Thank you, Mark; very nicely summed up, although the original post was probably supposed to be more in the nature of a joke than the start of a debate.
Also, to those bashing Wicca by saying it’s not a religion, I wouldn’t recommend saying that around my mom’s side of the family. Or my siblings. They follow the Wiccan faith, which, as I’ve pointed out, makes them a helluva lot easier to hang out with than a lot of Bible-thumpers. Don’t knock the faith just ’cause it ain’t yours; you’d only be proving my point.
People are different, it’s a fact of life, people will never pop out of cookie-cutters. Discriminating against gays and saying ‘God will smite you’ (etc) is no different than what Hitler did in Germany. Except it’s a little more passive-aggressive and apparently more socially acceptable. People will always be different from each other, it’s the way ‘God’ made us, so in my opinion people just need to mind their own business. If you’re not hurting someone else it should be all clear. Especially in America, where we’re supposed to be free to pursue personal happiness and exercise our rights as human beings. Otherwise, it’d just make us all hypocrites. What gets me is the gay movement is just protesting for the right to live as they choose and the anti-gay movement is continuing to enforce their views into a complete stranger’s life.
I personally oppose gay-marriages. My first problem is the churches that I attend to strictly oppose gay-marriages, and I go with them, plus the bible/catechism condems gay marriages, and these good books claim it as a sin. Another reason is, look at all of the support gays and lesbians are getting not just in the U.S, but Canada, Spain, Ireland (gay-marriage supporter), and maybe Germany, there fore gays and lesbians are another type of people who want more. My third reason is, GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgenders) usually compare their sins and problems with good heterosexual christians, as opposed to openly gay people looking at their own background and reputations. Last reason, GLBT people have the tendency to protest, place grafitti on churches, vandalize churches, and even some cases assault. One example, a group of openly gay people broke into a church and intentionally, willfully, and with no proper cause, beat a priest with a 75 pound cross.
Let me add this reason as well, to tell you the truth, GLBT people take things too personal when it comes down to big religious organized christians when they say no to these people. Faithful conservatives don’t hate gay-marriages, or gays, they just don’t agree with them.
interesting… isn’t it cool that no heterosexual people ever beat the living shit out of gay people? Or terrorize youg gays in High School through vandolizum and physical violance? Cause if they did, your argument would be meaningless.
Yes, Keaven. So it’s very good for him that heterosexual people have never once commited a single act of violence against homosexuals. Yupyup. Because if those boys in my school had beaten up my gay friend, he’d just be a hypocrite.(end heavy sarcasm)
these are the worst 10 reasons i have ever seen!
For Helen:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=irony
Am in England by the way. Just reading website for essay research, found it hilarious!! gonna show my mother and her partner before they embark on their civil ceremony life together!
Sorry have to comment on the 75 pound cross beating… it is a great leap from the large wooden cross burning that some christians got involved in!!!!!!!!
“You are a freaking fag!! ”
Um…. Mark person, if you are such an supporter of gay/lesbian people, then why, oh why are you using the word “fag” like an insult? XD
(sorry, it just made me laugh.)
I’m Christian myself and it does say in the bible that homosexuality is wrong.
HOWEVER
it also says lying is wrong, and stealing, and being jealous, and saying mean things to people who said mean things to you…
and so on
So let me ask you this? Why are you singling out homosexuality? There are a multitude of sins out there.there is no sin any worse than any other. God loves the gay just as much as he loves the straight. He does not love the sin, but he doesn’t love straight people’s sin either. So why are we fighting? It’s between that person and God.
If they wanted your advice they’d ask it, wouldn’t they? And yes you could tell them your opinion without being asked, but there’s a difference between telling and shoving down someone else’s throat.
I’m not for it, and I’m only against it for MY OWN LIFE. I choose not to be lesbian, but I do not choose for other people. In the end, God will be he one to judge us all, the gay and the straight.
(funny list BTW.I suspected it was a joke but then knew it must be when Britney Spears was mentioned XD People take this way out of hand, and this list definitely points the stupidness out.Dumb humans.)
I’ve seen this so many times, but I still love it. And now I’m having trouble deciding what’s more amusing; the original post, or the comments on it.
Just a nitpick, nothing really to do with the conversation at all, but are you saying that because my parents have been divorced since I was five, and my mother did her best to raise me and my half-brother pretty much on her own, while supporting an alcoholic husband, and has been and will forever be a better parent than my asshole father, that that situation is NOT preferable to my parents staying together, which would effectively erase my brother (whom I love dearly no matter how much I complain about him) and place me in a situation where I would have grown up in a loveless home with bickering parents who only stay together to provide a “stable” home for their child?
Mark, you’re awesome, and I wish there were less people who took this list seriously and/or agreed with it.
People wake up being Gay is not a sin. We all live in fear of sex. To keep us like that the religious institutions have used all kinds of proclamations against various kinds of natural sexual practices.
Sex is natural and to be gay is a gift from the universe. If what some religious claim was right most of you would be blind o have a good case of acne.
in my last post I said something to mark, but i meant to say it to jessi.sorry^_^()
I agree with spawnie.Not only do I think Mark is awesome, and I also agree with what he said about so-called “traditional” families.If my dad and his first wife stayed together, I wouldn’t be here and neither would my sisters. Plus, his first kids would not have a very stable home despite having both parents.Things aren’t always perfect so I wonder why people expect them to always go a certain way.
you make me sick. all of your reasons are close-minded and pathetically presented. theres a surplus of children so i have no idea what you’re talking about. there’s thousands of children in poor countries that want parents and here you are talking about separating the innocent love of two people just because they cant create more kids?
HA.