Same sex Marriage

I see no reason why two consenting adults can't get married, regardless of their gender or race. It's silly to think that legalization of gay marriage would end humanity - there's more than 7 billion people on this planet, I don't think we're going to have a shortage of people.

 

Did you guys read about the Willard Insane Asylum in the 1800's? They've been in the news because they found a bunch of suitcases in the basement of prior inmates. This morning I read about one lady committed there. Her name was lucy, and they said she was insane because she chose to dress and live like a man. She was there 30 years until she died.

 

Ok here my two pennies worth

Why are trying to run other people's lives - we are here for a short time so SSM (and divorce) should be legal for all.

"such marriage will set a bad example for the society we live." - on this subject I see you're in India and that society is a very different society from here (UK). So ...

 

Actually, an argument has been made that a society's acceptance of homosexuality usually comes about at a time of social and moral decay. The decline of the Greek city-states and the decline of the Roman Empire are common examples. It's debatable whether the acceptance of homosexuality is a cause or just a symptom of decline.

That depends upon what you think is the LEGAL reason for marriage in the first place.

 

A decline in your world maybe. A huge improvement in mine.

 

Well, can you show me a historical example of a civilization where the open acceptance of homosexuality occurred when the civilization began significant growth or expansion?

 

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

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

If the old saying that ignorance is a bliss is true then you are indeed a very fortunate man.

 

"Of course homosexuality existed in Greece, just as it has existed, and will continue to exist, everywhere and at all times in human history. However, while it did exist, it was never legally sanctioned, thought to be a cultural norm, or engaged in without risk of serious punishment, including exile and death."
- Dr. Georgiades, Greek historian

If you do your research, you will see that homosexuality in Greece wasn't OPENLY socially accepted until the Hellenistic age, when the city states were bankrupt and Greek society was in open decline. At that time Greece practiced what today is attempt to call "pederasty" but historians correctly recognize as pedophilia rape

Also, homosexuality in Rome wasn't OPENLY accepted until it had past it's peak and was on the decline.

Note that I'm not saying homosexuality didn't exist, I'm discussing open acceptance. Blindly citing Wikipedia without checking references doesn't cut it.

 

LOL. It is always fun when one moron uses another moron as the source.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/

This is a source and not some Greek moron. You could have as well quoted an American moron.

 

@gworld, if you have a point, go ahead and make it. But your childish language seems to imply you do not want us to take you seriously? I looked at your last post - what is your point?

If you are going to discredit someone with a Ph.D in Greek History, then it should be pointed out that Georgiades clearly has credibility on this topic than you do and you've been soundly discredited here many times. And if you had read more into Georgiades you'd see that most of those accusations in the Wiki page are wrong or misleading. You don't like his facts so you engage in character assassination. Yeah, we get that about you. What about your character?

@gworld, all you are doing is blindly copying cites from Wikipedia without being able to interpret them yourself. You've accomplished nothing and convinced no one.

Meanwhile, I've let everyone know that homosexuality wasn't socially openly accepted until Greek society was on it's decline during the Hellenistic age. I'll bet few people here knew that. Don't you think many people here will remember that? What do you think they will remember about you?

Do you think you can add anything at all of significance? Do you think you can make a difference at all?

To repeat myself:
If you do your research, you will see that homosexuality in Greece wasn't OPENLY socially accepted until the Hellenistic age, when the city states were bankrupt and Greek society was in open decline. At that time Greece practiced what today is attempt to call "pederasty" but historians correctly recognize as pedophilia rape

Also, homosexuality in Rome wasn't OPENLY accepted until it had past it's peak and was on the decline.

Note that I'm not saying homosexuality didn't exist, I'm discussing open acceptance. Blindly citing Wikipedia without checking references doesn't cut it.

 

LOL. Posting something stupid in big and bold fonts doesn´t make it any less stupid.

Georgiades is a two bit Greek bigot who is anti-Semite, Islamophobic, racist and most likely also homophobic. May be people should start quoting Hitler in discussions about Jewish culture and Israel.


Your so called "historian" hasn´t provided any historical sources while my quote from philoshopy department of Stanford university quotes Plato and other important historical records. I don´t expect you to know who Plato was but you can at least read about it.

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

The Even funnier fact is that historical facts exactly contradicts your bigoted views:

So in ancient Rome, as the Republic starts falling apart, they become more negative toward the homosexuality which is exactly opposite to what you claimed. It seems as a scientist who sells cars while being the captain of industry, these discussions are too complicated for you and you should stop before making yourself look even more ridiculous.

 

Seems the appropriate response to any discussion where one disagrees with another is to illicit a response that indicates the other is a biggot.

I kinda miss those days when that there Fox news was the preferred pejorative.

 

What do you call someone who tries to change the historical facts to suit their narrow view about people´s sexuality and refuses to see the facts when you point to them that history disagrees with them?

I am kind of old fashion and like to call a spade a spade.

 

I call them gworld!

look, if you had done your research instead of resorting to childish insults (like you always do), you'd have seen that Plato later condemned homosexuality later as being immoral, specifically, he was against the practice of pedophilia which was becoming more and more common in Greece:

In a State such as this, how will the young abstain from those desires which frequently plunge many into ruin... If we were to follow in nature's steps and enact that law which held good before the days of Laïus,
declaring that it is right to refrain from indulging in the same kind of intercourse with men and boys, as with women,
and adducing as evidence thereof the nature of wild beasts, and pointing out how male does not touch male for this purpose, since it is unnatural,

I maintain that our regulation on this head must go forward and proclaim that our citizens must not be worse than fowls and many other animals which are produced in large broods, and which live chaste and celibate lives without sexual intercourse until they arrive at the age for breeding; and when they reach this age they pair off, as instinct moves them, male with female and female with male; and thereafter they live in a way that is holy and just, remaining constant to their first contracts of love: surely our citizens should at least be better than these animals.
Plato:Laws, Book VIII (835b - 842c)

Sure, it's common for gworld to scream insults and holler "Hitler", at which point I simply invoke Godwin's Law to show gworld lost yet another argument.

qworld argues that I quoted someone he doesn't know, who was attacked by someone else he doesn't know, over issues he doesn't understand and he thinks that blindly copying Wikipedia will save his ass. For gworld to scream anti-Semitic is really pot/kettle/black given his open history of racism on DP.

I mean - really - once he starts curling up in a fetal position and throws insults like a monkey throwing his own feces, he pretty much guarantees that he can't and won't be taken seriously here, and never will.

 

LOL. I told before writing something stupid in bold doesn´t make it any less stupid and writing it in blue doesn´t change anything either. Now that I have shown your first statement about linking the decay of a society with homosexuality is totally stupid, you have decided to argue about Plato´s ideas. You should have taken my advice and stopped discussing things that are far behind your mental capabilities but since you didn´t then I have to wipe the floor with you again.

I think that you most likely haven´t heard about Plato before today and when I mentioned him then you just did a search on Google and copy & pasted from the first Catholic BS website without actually looking at the page. Your so called quote is actually a dishonest cut & paste to give a different meaning. Here is the quote without selective "cut & paste".

This is the first part of your quote, do you see how that part in red conveniently has been cut.

The second part of your quote is actually about something totally different and many paragraphs later, namely avoiding sexual contacts in search of higher goals. Plato generally didn´t have that high of opinion about sexual contacts be it with women or men.

The Even more clear the ideas of Plato about homosexuality is in this quote:

A bigot copy and pasting from a dishonest religious site, what a surprise. Lies and intellectual dishonesty are the signs of bigots and religious crazies which they will probably justify by thinking about it as serving their imaginary God.

 

@gworld, I think that the childishness of your last post says all I need to say about the weakness of your argument on this topic. You sound like a pouting child.

Grow up.

 

LOL. Do you mean showing that you don´t know what you are talking about and you just copy & pasted from a dishonest religious site is a sign of weakness?

Proving you wrong is so easy but so much fun.

My advice to you is read a book sometime.

 

You know what gworld, this discussion isn't about how crappy religion and believing in god is. To be honest, I am not religious either. But I don't insult opinions and belief of others, as everyone have their own point of view. Stop with your immature tantrums. You are looking like an arrogant, obnoxiously self-assertive little brat who is pissed off by someone else's opinion. I don't have the time, nor do I care to play along with your childish wars.

 

This discussion is partly about religion. Why? Because without the crazy teachings of religions, people will not get the ideas to limit the freedom of other people. Why shouldn´t I show the stupidity of the religious belief? Isn´t keeping quite also the same as encouraging such crazy ideas? Religious people do not accept other people ideas and way of life so why should we accept theirs? How about the ideas of anti-Semites and racists, when I hear next time someone makes an anti-Semite or racist remark should I keep quite so I don´t insult their opinions and beliefs or is this something we just do for religious people?

 

Why would I care of missing a filthy, morally-objectionable party?