You'd have a better chance of arguing that some primates have a great deal of identical DNA to a human, far closer than any vegetable. To get highly specific, every organism (even the same species) has differences in their genetic makeup. It's how you could use My DNA, and compare it to the DNA of my mother, and the DNA of a stranger, and be able to tell which one I was actually related too, although there would still be differences due to the other half of my genes having been received from my father.

Narsrim is very much correct in saying that, while small (and when you work with genetics, it can be microscopic, and still be highly important.) there are differences.

Now, if you're finished going off on tangents, and bringing up matters that have little to nothing to do with the topic at hand...perhaps we can continue? Otherwise, Daganev, you've made it very apparent in several threads (including ones similiar to this very subject) you're not going to change your mind. While I do love a passionate debate, I'm certain that everyone has grown weary of your unrelated or inane points and arguements, (comparing homosexual marriage to incest, for an example, or humans being very close to vegetables on the genetic level. Or, if you want to get very specific, saying things like 'a homosexual can marry, it just has to be to someone of the opposite sex', when it's more than obvious the arguement being made is that a man cannot marry another man, or a woman to another woman) as well as your generally unresearched or unproven or biased information.

Are you arguing to show your personal beliefs? Or are you arguing simply to argue?

The argument was that there is no difference between a white man versus a black but man but there IS a difference between a man and woman. You never explained how those differences were established. I pointed out that on a molecular basis, that's not true nor it is always the case. In fact from a molecular viewpoint, there are examples of when a man and a woman are more similiar than a white man and black man.

Now, we don't have to use the molecular basis... but we need some basis. What would it be?

=====================================================

The relevance of this is that Daganev has argued that inter-racial marriage is based upon the notion that there are no differences: a white man is no different from a black man. He said, however, there is a difference between a man and woman.

I have argued that in the eyes of the law, a man and woman are both equal parties much the same way that a white man and black man are, however, I'm curious to see how he arrived at the basis that no differences exist in one case, but do in another.

So what your saying is, that no matter what reasons I bring no matter what arguments, I have to change my mind and say that anyone who argues against homosexual marriage is obviously a biggot? What type of load of crap is that?


I would like you to first prove that anyone who is against such things is "small minded religious zealot."

And I'm sorry if you are unaware of the recent findings that there are certain vegetables that have more DNA in common with humans than with primates.

If you require "proof" that men and woman are different then there is really no point in having any discussion since your obviously living on a different planet than me.


I love how people can throw around insults like "small minded" or "biggot" or "irratioanl religion" and yet when someone tries to defend thier own views you call them stubborn and say that they "obviously arn't going to change thier mind"....

Its such double standard crap and so intolerant I don't even know why I bother trying to show people that there is another side to an issue.

Welcome to the world of newspeak where love means hate and peace means war.

If you honestly can't understand the simple idea that trying to reinvent basic fundemental princples of human relationships without giving a full reasnoing or explanation for those changes save "I'm diffeent and I want everyone to reward me for it" then I truly wonder if anyone even knows what it means to be tollerant and accepting of other people.

Who's turning it into an emotional debate now, Daganev? I'm the one who can't marry the person I love, can't adopt and have limited rights in relation to my heterosexual married friends, not you. All I want is to be treated as if I weren't less than you. Apparently, that's me forcing my ideals on someone else. I apologise for this silly idea of equality I have floating around.

And what is that crap about being different? Estimates on the number of homosexuals range between 2%-10%, that's a pretty damn significant portion of any population. You go and wipe out just two percent of the population of the US and see how quickly the country falls to its knees.

Reward me for being gay? No, how about just treat me as if I weren't a disease.

First stop acting like people who have an opinion other than yours isn't a disease.

When I am attacked personally, I take it personally...


Honestly, I havn't treated anyone like they are "disease", however I often feel like I am given labels that are often A: Untrue, or B: Insulting.. and why am I given these labels? because I express an opinion that is not one that you share.

So stop playing a victim, its getting tiring.


Edit: It should mean something to you when if asked the question: "Should gay people have the same rights as non-gay people?" The answer is 90% YES

But when asked the question "Should there be "gay-marriage" (A contradiction in terms)?" The numbers drop to less than 50%.

Might as well just ask people if there should be rich people on welfare.

Just found a nice quote that basically sums it all up for me.

Abraham Lincoln was fond of asking, “If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” “Five,” his audience would invariably answer. “No,” he would politely respond,” the correct answer is four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.”

Sorry? I don't follow. I said that homosexuality is treated as a disease or disorder, not that others are.



I don't recall labelling you as such, but perhaps you know why I get worked up? You may not be speaking of me in particular, but you are speaking of a part of me.



When I am no longer being discriminated against I will stop acting as though I am being discriminated against. If it tires you then perhaps you need a nap.



So people contradcit themselves and I should concede to the weight of a majority vote? The majority has always been correct, we all know that don't we. Silly me, what was I thinking.

So its appropriate for me to be running around telling everyone I deserve equal access to the woman's locker room?


Maybe you could try, you know, actually adressing the concerns that other people bring up instead of just dismissing it as "hate speach"

Pretend to care what other people are saying.. I dare you.


I did not know that arguing the definition of marriage was an affront to your very being. You might want to look into how you define yourself a bit better.

Let me ask you this... Is there a contradiction in saying that A: I think firemen and policemen are important jobs of self sacrifice and then saying that B: I don't think firemen and policmen should get the same economic benefits as Veterans?

Because if you don't see a contradiction there, then you should not see a contradiction when it comes to the question of what is marriage.

You can tell people whatever you want, that isn't my argument.



Maybe you could try, you know, letting people live their lives without wanting to control things that have nothing to do with you.



Heh, that actually made me giggle. Do you think I would get worked up over something I don't care about? I did not know that my being gay and perhaps wanting the same rights as others was an affront to legal marriage as a whole.

It seems we all have things to learn, Daganev.



I don't believe in Veterans getting economic benefits at all, but that's a whole different argument which I know I am quite marginalised on. Theoretically though, I don't see a problem with firefighters and the police service being treated the same as those who fight wars and such. It's not something I've given a lot of though to and reall I don't care either way. I don't argue for the sake of it and if it doesn't hurt another then it generally won't stir much of a response from me.

Wow.. just wow.

I ask you to care about what OTHER people are saying, and your responce is that you do care about what you think because it affects you...


Your asking me to but out of issues that don't affect me while the same time telling me I'm evil because I don't agree with you and will vote against what you want me to vote for.

Why don't you butt out of other people's voting habbits and minds?

And I didn't ask you if you agree with Veteran benefits, I asked you if you saw a contradiction in those statements. Its a pure question of Is this a contradictory statement or not. You obviously don't see it as contradictory since your saying that maybe firefighters -should- get veteran things, indicating that you do indeed see the difference between a person who is a veteran and a person who is a policeman or firefighter.

So I ask you, why is it a contradiction if someone says that a married person means its between a man and a woman, or if you prefer, a husband and wife.

Is it so hard to believe that many people could give a rats ass about a person's inner sexual desires? Or find it disturbing that you would even wish to volenteer such information to people?

Sometimes I really wonder why its ok for people to go off about thier sexual habbits, but not ok for people to talk about thier opinions on what goes on in the world around them. Its all so backwards.

Be open about that which you do in private and be private about that which people do in public.

LoL perhaps you need to go over what I said and stop reading into things that are not there. I am very particular about how I phrase things.

The reason I was ambiguous about the Veteran's affairs issue was not so that you could jump at connections which don't exist, but because, as I said, I've not given a lot of thought to the issue.

Peace out Daganev, me love you long time .

Ok lets try this.. Quidgy, is it a contradiction for a gay person to care about meaning of words?

For being someone who is particular, you sure don't think about things much.

Edit: When someone is asking you a question about reading comprehension, it really shouldn't require you to think deeply about an issue to see if said words are a contradiction or not.

Woah, this thread hasa exploded.

Some things that make me giggle...
Daganev using Pedophillia, Incest, and Polygamy in arguements.

And this stuff about DNA, I mean seriously if you want to talk about genetic differences i could say i am better than people prone to high blood preassure simply because I get bleeding noses easily, which i inherited from my father.
As such i get bleeding noses instead of headaches and if my blood preassure were to get too high, oh I also don't feel bloodloss as much (I had a bleeding nose for 2 hours and i only got slightly woozy, though thats not to say i won't pretend at work when my manager is being ebil)

Anyway on topic now...
I just think it would be fairest if the laws were written along the lines of "Marriage is the legal union of two people granting them blah blah blah" (yes the blah's should be in there ).

The two issues are not related. How is homosexuality a contradiction of semantics and definitions? I know sometimes what you write isn't overly clear, so I will just leave that there, but I really don't see what that has to do with anything.



If you say so .

You aren't asking questions about reading comprehension, daganev, you are trying to link two unrelated topics by claiming that they are or are not contradictions. I'm not going to give a simple answer to a question you will extrapolate beyond its meaning and outside of its context.

I guess I kinda see what Daganev's trying to say, I think I do anyway. Something like 'It's alright when homosexuals have a view about marriage that's different to mine but when I put my argument forward it's called bigotry?' Something like that? (Sorry I'm asking 'cause all this is kinda over my head and I'm trying to get it)

I guess it's a fair point although I can't really think of any non-spiritual reason why there should not be same-sex marriages. I think there should be same-sex marriages.