Bass Fishing HomeBass Fishing Forums

Go Back   BassFishin.Com Forums > Additional Categories > Non-Fishing Related Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 07-30-12, 10:05 AM   #26
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTL View Post
All fair points. I just wonder if there are some who havent been consistent on the issue at hand.
That is a great point.

I always hate it when people say "both parties are the same" (mostly as an excuse to be apathetic or lazy), but there is some truth to it at least in the way the citizenry acts. Neither side seems to understand that when you vote the government more power, i.e. the Patriot Act, the Affordable Healthcare Act, etc. that power can be used against you by the next administration from the other party. Total shortsightedness.


We all can be kneejerk reactionary from time to time (it's human nature), but we must try our best to be level-headed. We must be consistent, and not support tyranny, even when the tyrant is from our party.
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 11:16 AM   #27
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

Points to Ponder:

This is another fine example of people not seeing through the smoke to the truth of the agenda of the Socialist/Democratic politicians. Mayor Rahm Emanuel is cut from the same cloth as Obama, worked for him in the White House if you remember, they are very close personally and politically.

Mayor Emanuel, obviously demonstrated he feels powerful enough to trample on the Civil Rights of an "evil, white, large business owner" when it suits his agenda. Civil Rights apply to EVERY American and cannot be appied at will or because you happen to be Mayor of a large city and don't happen to agree with another individual's opiinion, REGARDLESS of who he may be. It's an obvious abuse of his Office.

By targeting Chick-Fil-A, Mayor Emanuel also (probably without even thinking about it, it's so ingrained in their mentality) attempted to block employment opportunities to citizens of his "domain" who need it most - students (good part-time work with flexible hours, to help with finances) and other unemployed, especially those with limited skills. Rather than offering employment to those citizens and get them working and off government assisance, Socialist/Democrats, like Mayor Emanuel, would rather keep them depentant upon the government and therfore solidify the Socialist base of support. It's no wonder, with the mentality exhibited by Mayor Emanuel and other SocialistDemocrats, that the unemployment rate is (and has stayed) at (to use one of Obama's most favororite words) UNPRECEDENTED levels. You won't get rich working at a fast food resturant, but you can EARN something and reduce the amount of assistance expenditures by our government. Small business needs encouragement by City/State/Federal govenments not sanctions.

Mayor Emanuel, cited discrimination against Gays. That's politial spin. The truth is Mr. Cathy did not speak out against being gay, nor is he anti-marriage - he spoke out against the concept of GAY MARRIAGE and there IS a difference.

As to the issue of marriage - my logic (such as it is) precludes the possibility of marriage existing between a same-sex couple. It just does not meet my understanding of marriage as santfying a union between a man and woman for the purposes of establishing a family unit and the propagation of our species. Species propagation requires a biological union between a male and female of the species.

It is so like fringe groups (yes I'm referring to the Gay community as a fringe group) to attempt to change established concepts to fit their own needs and agendas, rather than attempt some new concept or a more applicable established one (ie: civil union). It's their way of undermining the established practice and imbed themselves in what most everyone sees as "normal", rather that retaining their ABNORMAL identity. I have no problems with ABNORMAL individuals as long as they quit trying to convince me they are as normal as I and go about their business and keep their nose (and other body parts) out of mine.

I could care less about what goes on behind a closed door - but sex between two of the same gender cannot result in offspring, create a family and therefore does not meet the intended critera to be considered deserving of the santitiy of marriage. Why can a gay couple not be happy with the term "civil union" - rather than marriage? Simply because, as I said prior, that would not allow them to assimilate into the married culture and be seen as being the same, which they are not.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 11:49 AM   #28
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bassboogieman View Post
Points to Ponder:
but sex between two of the same gender cannot result in offspring, create a family and therefore does not meet the intended critera to be considered deserving of the santitiy of marriage. Why can a gay couple not be happy with the term "civil union" - rather than marriage? Simply because, as I said prior, that would not allow them to assimilate into the married culture and be seen as being the same, which they are not.

Old heterosexual couples cannot have children, but we allow them to marry.
Infertile heterosexual couples cannot have children, but we allow them to marry.

Homosexual couples can adopt children, thus create a family, yet we should not allow them to marry because they do not do work to propagate the species?

What about mormon bigamy and polygamy? That was created it seems for the express purpose of propagating the species, is polygamy thus ok?


(before people think I am arguing in favor of gay marriage, I need to say that I am not.

I think that marriage is a largely religious-cultural institution, and that the government has no business in it - either for heterosexual unions or homosexual unions. The power to marry is not a power that ought be vested in the state. We are essentially arguing over the state's power to define a word of religious signifigance, and because of that the discussion is so heated. What if the state could define the word "baptism"? Or "godfather", that is even a more apt question because to be a godfather includes an expressly religious purpose, and also a relationship that is defined by culture and religious scruples. You use the word sanctity - I'm glad you use that word. What role does the state have in declaring what has sanctity?

What the state does have the power to do is enforce and recognize contracts, and to that extent may recognize those contracts that parties execute to say take the vows. We just can't stop that. SO we really are arguing over the definition of a word as recognized (and blessed) by the state.

My personal view of gay marriage from a moral standpoint is that it is "weird".)
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.

Last edited by WTL; 07-30-12 at 12:21 PM.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 01:33 PM   #29
AUFred
BassFishin.Com Veteran Member
 
AUFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Prattville, Alabama
Posts: 801
Default

Mr. Cathy has a right to his opinion like anyone else. I happen to agree with his opinion but the media has made a circus out of his comments and politicians are trying to make a platform out of the comment one way or the other.
AUFred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 01:35 PM   #30
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

Quote:
Old heterosexual couples cannot have children, but we allow them to marry.
Infertile heterosexual couples cannot have children, but we allow them to marry.

Homosexual couples can adopt children, thus create a family, yet we should not allow them to marry because they do not do work to propagate the species?
You missed the entire point - man/woman/children is the traditional, biological family image.

Yes old people can marry - I did, but they MAY have children from a previous marriage, thus the family tradition continues.

Yes infertile people can marry and adopt - they can carry forth the traditional biological representation of a family.

Get it yet? Mommy & Daddy and kiddies 1 or more. Not Daddy & Daddy or Mommy & Mommy and kiddies. That is not biologically correct and what child should be raised in such a confusing family group? Think once about the child raised in such a "family" - do you think his playmates are going to treat him with any respect? Or will he likely be tormentmented mercilessly? Not that it's the child's fault he was chosen by a couple human misfits and forced to be raised in a situation in which that adopted child had no choice. I find the mere thought appalling and the worst kind of child abuse I can imagine (other than being befriended by an individual like Sandusky). I do not doubt homosexuals of either gender could be loving parents - that's not the issue. The issue is, should any child be placed in such a confusing arena, without choice, where they will undoubtably face the torments of their peers. Many liberals will say we need more tolerance, I say bullsh!t, and leave the kids alone (Pink Floyd). That's part of the gay agenda - assimilation into the mainstream by projecting the image of normalcy. I find it especially appaling that certain individuals in the "entertainment" industry that are gay and very public about their adoptions, like Rosie O'Donnel (why would anyone let her have a kid) and Neil Patrick Harris among others. They have sufficient money to give a child a good (but probably scarred) life, but not every gay couple is affluent and that kid will have a much harder time as he won't be able to buy friends as he gets older. If a gay couple want something to love let them buy a honey badger, cause we all know............. Honey Badgers don't give a sh!t.

Regarding sanctity - I didn't say a State or govenment entity sanctifies anything. As you (Billy) said the sanctity of marriage is a religous/cultural thing, a State issues a marriage license to cover the civil aspects of a union between two people (ie: contract) when they marry. You could say a State validates the sanctity of the union in doing so, but I would not as I'm not a lawyer and that's beyond my "expertise". It's back to the actual term marriage - and what it means in religious and cultural terms not any definition defined by government at any level. As it is a "religious issue" and we have a constitutional requirement seperating church & state, the state should not be involved - at any level - regarding "marriage". The civil issues surrounding a union is not based in religion, therefore I have no issues with a marriage license being issued prior to a "marriage" to insure the legal rights of those engaging in marriage. I just think the title should be changed to avoid reference to "marriage", and possibly eliminate some confusion between the two completely different entities (religion & civil) involved in the "marriage" of a man and woman (just for claity). In that senario, a gay couple could obtain the "civil union" certificate and be a legal union of two individuals, they should just be denied being classified as MARRIED because under most religious doctrine they cannot be.

And before you jump all over me and tell me a couple (man/woman) can have a civil ceremony rather than a religious one and still be termed "Married", I get that. While technically different, as one is based on religious belief the other may be due to lack of belief or a conflict between beliefs, a civil ceremony is a way to resolve those issues. The bottom line is that a civil ceremony, in lieu of a religious one, is still a public statement between a man and woman that wish to enter into a social arrangement known as (see religious or cultural asignation of the following word) "marriage" as defined by the common definition by Webster. The key to marriage, by common definition, is a union between a man and a woman, therefore a civil ceremony involving the same can be considered a civil version of a marriage adhering to the definition but without the religious overtones. A civil union of anything (opps, shoud have said anyone) other than a man or woman cannot be construed as a "marriage" because it does not meet the definition.

As we all know, language is interperted as words having an accepted, traditional meaning. And language can change, new words or additional meanings are introduced annually, adding to the confusion. It is in this spirt the Gay Community is attempting to change the meaning of marriage, I and many others - not just Christians - do not think that should be allowed to happen.

The issue of "Gay Marriage" is, as I said, an attempt by a group to change or alter a traditional concept in order to allow them to assimilate into and become part of their targeted group. Whether the targeted group wants them or not is of no matter to the interlopers, it what the ones wishing to assimilate want that counts. Like a vampire at the window, asking to be let in - aw what the heck, yeah he has pointy teeth but he's a good looking vampire, what could it hurt? Too late you realize you've been had, screwed over and left for dead. Well if a vampire bit you it would be living dead - who'd really be happy with that?

So, assuming the Gay Community gets it's way and a marriage between same-sex humans becomes accepted, who's (what's) next. What about the farm boy that wants to marry his pet sheep? Or the woman who's desperately in love with her pony? Or the weird lady in the mountains that wants to have here two chimps married so they can have legitimate little chimps. It's absurd, absolutely absurd - I mean gay marriage. If we permit gay marriage, can inter-species wedlock be far behing? OMG, what if there really are aliens? The inter-galatic kind, as we already know the earthly aliens are already acceptable marriage partners.

Last edited by bassboogieman; 07-30-12 at 02:51 PM.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 02:15 PM   #31
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

I think most here are missing the point.

We're probably 99% in agreement about what marriage should be.

The issue is whether the government can shut you up about it by penalizing you in other ways.

However, if we want to keep aruging the marriage issue, finding the legal justification is the tough part.

We must all avoid using "that's how I feel about it" as a legal rationale because that can be twisted and used against us on other issue. And at that point, you'll be screaming "THAT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!"
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 02:20 PM   #32
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

Its easy to miss your point, it is so small and unconvincing. I thought you were more referencing the work of Robert George and Ryan T. Anderson on natural law and marriage, not making an even weaker appeal to tradition.

Tradition is not a strong enough leg to stand on to win this argument, and I even agree with you about the importance of tradition. It just doesn't win people over to say that traditionally marriage had this image, and we must conform to tradition - and you know this...

You are fighting a losing battle. Do you know that? Possibly. But let me inform you of the costs of losing. Give Government the ability to determine what has sanctity, and they will pervert the concept. Give them the power to define marriage, and they will define it as broadly as possible to appeal to the democratic masses. THAT is what Christian conservatism is doing to Christianity in America.

The people who are defending marriage by running to the state are doing the most damage possible to the institution.
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 02:23 PM   #33
kennethdaysale
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
kennethdaysale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: rock hill, sc
Posts: 2,315
Default

Adam and eve not adam and steve
__________________
Sometimes you gotta risk it to get the biscuit.
kennethdaysale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 02:39 PM   #34
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

There is also a policy argument in favor of promoting marriage, that being that marriage is an institution that directly leads to prosperity, higher education for children, ect. People use this to make arguments that either a.)we should have more marriage across the board, including gay marriage or b.) we should return to an older definition of marriage, before the no-fault divorce laws gutted the institution.

And while all that may be true, it is still not a powerful enough argument to overcome the simple American precept that we should be free to decide how to choose to live and how we purport to define our choices. Once we ask to democratic masses to define something, we risk too much. So yes, essentially we are stuck with civil unions, or common law marriage where you just say you are married and it is enforceable later on should something happen. It really is simple to deny the gay movement their victory, by just doing that. The government essentially will recognize marriage as a term of art in a contract between two cohabiting individuals as meaning they possess certain rights and responsibilities towards each other, without actually having the government itself instigate the usage of that term.

Edit; I see that you edited your post, and I am more in agreement what you have said there. It is an argument about semantics. I am just saying we are making a huge mistake by allowing them to define the battlefield over which we argue, and that we should actually prefer as traditional Christians a separation of church and state for that reason. I think we are closer than we realized previously.
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.

Last edited by WTL; 07-30-12 at 02:47 PM.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 03:04 PM   #35
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bassboogieman View Post
What about the farm boy that wants to marry his pet sheep? Or the woman who's desperately in love with her pony? .

You can't enter into a contract with a pony. Thank goodness.
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 03:25 PM   #36
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTL View Post
You can't enter into a contract with a pony. Thank goodness.
But more than two people can enter into a contract. Hence the bigamy problem...
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 03:33 PM   #37
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nofearengineer View Post
But more than two people can enter into a contract. Hence the bigamy problem...
I actually dont have a problem with it. Why should we? Even if we appeal to the traditional concepts of marriage, bigamy, polygamy are traditionally practiced in many historical and current world cultures with little problem. As long as its consenting adults, of course, I don't see why need to be afraid of it in the US.

(Its not like it will become a common institution. If you are worried about that, you guys who are married ask if she will accept you bringing in another wife)
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 03:42 PM   #38
Z521Bass
BassFishin.Com Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 41
Default Caution this post is in support of Gay don’t read if you can’t handle it!

This thing you people talk about is bigger than all of us on a little ole fishing forum. I am in a same sex relationship, have been all of my adult life. I appear “straight” as does my partner. As a result many casual observers don’t judge us on appearance. When we fish most assume we are a couple of buddy’s having a good time. Opinion is just that opinion, this county was founded on the ideal that one could live the lifestyle they so chose and have an opinion. The need or desire to “hate” “judge” “opinion” is just that.

We have raised two wonderful kids through adoption. Now I dare you say that we did not provide and continue to provide a productive environment for our kids. Both are in major university’s and straight. One votes republication and the other could care a less about politics in general. (Like me) The one that has nothing to do with politics is getting their masters in corporate law planning for a PHD the same as mine and the other who votes is becoming a social worker for children’s programs. (Like me) What is a better environment for our kids, our sustainable stable home and household or the drug addicted imprisoned birth parents that brought them in this world? Both of whom are still drug addicted etc.

We are all citizens of this great country and we are all entitled to our opinions. For me it seems to be a certain demographic that says one thing but when they get to know a person in person they change their views. The uneducated or exposed on the subject think that all gay men are *****s and looking to do what they can whenever they can, for me my self esteem has never dipped that low. O and please don’t flatter yourself thinking so.

Look at aids, remember all the people in the small town of Ohio that ousted the poor boy from school etc. because he had aids and they all thought you could get it by casual contact. It was ignorance; I think for the most part now that we know what we know about aids, that small town no longer at large thinks that way.

When I am headed down the road with my SUV and Ranger bass boat in toe I am willing to bet that the people passing by could careless about my lifestyle preference. I remind you that when I joined this forum I was welcomed as a fishing buddy, I also am willing to bet if I fished with anyone who did not know I was gay would be happy to be my buddy, I wonder if I am still welcomed here?

Now if you don’t mind I have some ironing and dishes to do before the old man gets home. Not really just love messing with the phobic’s. O by the way, we eat at Chic-Fil-A. We laugh every time we eat there or any ware else it pisses people off. Most guys that have problems with gay guys is worrying more if their the guys type or not. Had some of my best arguments with straight friends on why they are not my type, and they argue that could change my mind. It’s funny, you know it is. You don’t have to believe in what the next guy does to hang out. Just hang out.

Move on past your hang ups and who really gives a crap who likes what. If you don’t like gay or support I really don’t care and still respect your opinions, likes or dislikes. Makes no difference to me. Life is short go fishing and laugh.

I think this post was about Chick-Fil-A and free speech. Both are good.
Z521Bass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 04:03 PM   #39
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Z521Bass View Post
Look at aids, remember all the people in the small town of Ohio that ousted the poor boy from school etc. because he had aids and they all thought you could get it by casual contact. It was ignorance; I think for the most part now that we know what we know about aids, that small town no longer at large thinks that way.
Are you referring to Ryan White? He was from my home state of Indiana. Please don't fall back on the old stand-by of calling people "ignorant" when they disagree with you. I felt truly, truly sorry for Ryan White, yet that did not change the fact that he had a disease, that if contracted was a death sentence (he did die from it after all). Ryan White was completely innocent in what happened to him; a victim in the truest sense of the word. But other parents were justified in their fear of having their children in school with him. It would not have helped Ryan to have some other innocent catch HIV from a scratch, nosebleed, or stray sneeze. The odds were very, very small I know, but it would be folly to ignore a known danger in the name of political correctness.
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.

Last edited by nofearengineer; 07-30-12 at 04:16 PM.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 04:03 PM   #40
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

Personally, I don't care about you being gay, I am glad that things are going well for you. You are welcome on this board as far as I'm concerned.

There are some people who are homophobic, and are fighting this fight just to single out gayness, and then there are some who are just worried about marriage and religion in general, without wanting to piss in your long island ice tea(sorry, bad joke).

Understand that for some, it is not necessarily about trying to relegate gays to second class status.
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 04:15 PM   #41
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTL View Post
There are some people who are homophobic
William, please don't use that ridiculous word. It is a construct created to goad those who oppose homosexuality. By substituting fear for dislike, it supports the mantra-like, elitist propaganda that people fear what they don't understand.

A fear of sameness? I'm sure you would agree if heterosexuals and homosexuals were the same, there wouldn't be an argument.
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 04:17 PM   #42
Tavery5
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Tavery5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,427
Default

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
__________________
They call me Ishmael
Tavery5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 04:24 PM   #43
WTL
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
WTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 7,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nofearengineer View Post
William, please don't use that ridiculous word. It is a construct created to goad those who oppose homosexuality. By substituting fear for dislike, it supports the mantra-like, elitist propaganda that people fear what they don't understand.

A fear of sameness? I'm sure you would agree if heterosexuals and homosexuals were the same, there wouldn't be an argument.
Bryce, don't call me William in that tone. Whatever that tone may be.

I am not the biggest fan of the term "homophobia" for a little of the same reasons you state, but it is the commonly used word and I will go along with it because there can be no doubt there is a segment of the population that has some sort of special hang up with gays. I think that hang up varies from person to person, for some it seems to be a phobia, for others a deep seated disgust, for others maybe there is even a bit of self denial, and for some it is just an intellectual disapproval - and so naturally the term misses the complete mark...but its what we got to use.

Unless you wanna coin a better word.
__________________
Selling live waterdogs for less since 2005.
WTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 04:24 PM   #44
joedog
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: JANESVILLE,WI. 53545
Posts: 3,415
Default

I remind you that when I joined this forum I was welcomed as a fishing buddy, I also am willing to bet if I fished with anyone who did not know I was gay would be happy to be my buddy, I wonder if I am still welcomed here?

You are WELCOME to be my FRIEND!
No questions asked cause I'm mono-sexual.
Fact is, I'm getting to the point that, 'I think I'm the only one who can do it RIGHT!'. :
Z521Bass, congratulations on the family.
I feel the two of you did a great thing helping 'your' kids have a chance at life.
Now there is one thing I do feel very strong about.....THE TWO OF YOU BETTER BE RAISING THEM AS ANGLERS!

I want to see some of the kids pics, with or without a fish.

Oh and thanks for sharing. You sound like a person I would be honored to consider as a FRIEND.
I'm really not in any need of more friends seeing "I still have a lot I've never had the opportunity to 'use' yet".
__________________
"Fishing isn't life or death... it's more important than that."

Last edited by joedog; 07-30-12 at 04:39 PM.
joedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 05:08 PM   #45
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

Quote:
Tradition is not a strong enough leg to stand on to win this argument
Tell that to a Jew, or Italian, Greek or any European heritage American and I think you'll get an agrument - not that you want one as you seem to embrace tradition.

It seems tradition is not as important to the under 30 generation (and this is not a slam, just an observation) as it is to their parents or grandparents. This point, generational views of tradition, is also an example of how society changes and groups, formerly deemed to be "unacceptable" become "acceptable" and are assimilated into society.

I would argue, that Tradition is a very important aspect of the issue of "Gay Marriage", in order to keep the goverment out of the business of redifining the meaning of "marriage". Acceptance of the word's traditional meaning (not necessariarly the actual definition) as being based upon religous/cultural/societal beliefs, precludes the govenment from redefining the meaning based upon the doctrine of seperation of church and state. If we accept and defend marriage as a religious or cultural institutiion, then we can assert ourselves and refute the govenment's meddling in trying to tell us what it means.

I have to agree with you in that the govenment has no business sticking it's nose in this pot, then be allowed to season the contents to suit IT's taste. As you said, govenment will make the definition as broad and obtuse as possible, not creating a definitive description, but one that can be interperted and contested for generations, as most things political tend to be. I do think this is what the gay community actually wants and the reason they keep stirring this pot and those in the majority must be aware of the tatic and refuse to let it happen.

We need to remember Gay Marriage does not equate with Gay Rights. Gay Rights is a legitimate entitlement, the same as the rights guaranteed to every citizen. Gay marriage on the other hand is not a right only a concept of a relationship between two individuals, that does not meet the traditionally accepted definition of marriage. It should remain so and whether or not an individual agrees is a matter of their own moral values and judgement, not the govenments.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 05:17 PM   #46
nofearengineer
BassFishin.Com Premier Elite
 
nofearengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southwest IN
Posts: 5,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTL View Post
Unless you wanna coin a better word.
I would say "normalists", but I'm pretty sure the people who use "homophobe" as a slur aren't going to take to it. We live in an era of spin, and the spinners never stop spinning.

Now before anyone goes off again and says I need to shut my mouth about things I know nothing about...

I had two foster brothers, Tommy and Ricky. They had lived across the alley from us before their mother was thrown in prison for prostitution. My mother took them in and they became family. Unfortunately, it was probably too late in their lives to make any real difference (they were both teenagers). Tommy had a lot of anger in him (who wouldn't?) and ended up running away after my Mom slapped him for calling her some horrible name. I found out a few years later that he had married a prostitute, and either through her or heroin use had contracted HIV and died.

Ricky was the more laid back of the two, but it didn't take long for him to split after Tommy did. I found out a couple years ago he was living a homosexual lifestyle in a neighboring town. Ricky was always my favorite, as he was the one who always watched us, cooked for us, etc. while my Mom was working. How stereotypical is that? Anyway, given the choices he has made, I always have this thing in the back of my head that I am going to hear he has died of AIDS too. Though I guess he is over 50 now, so hopefully if he's made it this far, he will live out his whole life.

So anyone who even thinks I lived some sort of silver spoon life, my opinions are indeed based on life experience. I have seen what results from poor decision making and it is usually not pretty. One can attempt to change the meanings of words, question what the meaning of "is" is, and all of that nonsense, but it doesn't change reality.
__________________
Many men go fishing all of their lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
nofearengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 05:39 PM   #47
bassboogieman
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
bassboogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Parkesburg, Pa.
Posts: 3,762
Default

I surrender.



But I'm still eating at Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday and Rahm Emanual should change his name to Richard Cranium.

P.S. like NFE, I've had life experiences that have shattered me personally. I was born in 1949 and grew up in a society with attitudes FAR different than those of today, in many issues. Regarding this issue: I had a first cousin who was gay, a well known radio personality in Phila, who after he was discovered committed suicide and my family was devestated with finding out he was gay and his death by his own hand. My best friend in H.S. and my best man at my first wedding is gay. I never knew, until 15 years after we graduated H.S. I was shocked and to this day I don't know when he decided to stop hiding it - he dated girls through H.S. and college - when did he recognize he was gay? I don't know, and never will as I haven't seen him or communicated in any way for over 30 years and I won't. Gays have hurt me personally, not physically but by the impact of the revelation they were gay. I just will never understand the concept, and it's probalby the reason I have issues today - which is not an excuse, it's my problem but it will not resolve itself in my life time.

Last edited by bassboogieman; 07-30-12 at 05:57 PM.
bassboogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 07:53 PM   #48
joedog
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: JANESVILLE,WI. 53545
Posts: 3,415
Default

Ok,looks like story time.

I have a gay brother who is the most dedicated Republican you will ever find. He's like a big player in business as well as with the party. He is so involved in his political view points that he will publicly and personally proudly state, 'Our contries problems can all be traced back to the unions". Crazy huh.
He will never ever disclose his sexual preferences to anyone!
I'm the only family member he has even told.
Does he live in the closet? Probably but man you have to see the fluking MANSION he lives in. I'd gladly live my life out in one of HIS closets.
Seriously though, he's generous and an extreme workaholic and a practicing Catholic. If you show a good work ethic he'll do almost anything for you to help you succeed. A great man!
I personally do not and CAN not understand his sexual beliefs and frankly don't really give a DAM about them. I and he both believe in TRADITIONAL values, strongly I may add. Long before he told me this I worked for years in food service and became very aware of optional lifestyles. Some were proud some were not. Some were hard workers some were not. Some were almost saintly some worshipped the devil. Some were neat and some were flat out slobs. Pretty much the same as where each and everyone of you lives and workers regardless of what you have happening at home in the bed room.
I'm refering to the WHOLE workforce not just those that strayed from tradition.
I remembered asking the Bishop when I was in 5th grade, If Adam and Eve were the first and only humans, doesn't that make all of us a product of incest?
Just thought I'd leave you anglers something to think about.
__________________
"Fishing isn't life or death... it's more important than that."
joedog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 08:02 PM   #49
kennethdaysale
BassFishin.Com Super Veteran
 
kennethdaysale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: rock hill, sc
Posts: 2,315
Default Too Funny

Hey yall want to see something comical? Take a look at mudboys welcoming post to Z521. 6-20-12 post #12. What are the odds
__________________
Sometimes you gotta risk it to get the biscuit.
kennethdaysale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-12, 08:04 PM   #50
Z521Bass
BassFishin.Com Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 41
Default NOfear

No worries wont ever get an argument out of me. I live the life and that is enough for me. As for the use of the word "Ignorant" that was the case for Mr. White. I don't know what else to call it whenever a majority does not understand a disease. It is ignorant in the sense we don't understand not that the person is ignorant in general terms. I used in a text where I was not looking for agreement it was an illustration. Hope that helps clear it up. (I.e. I was not looking for anyone to agree or disagree with me, not my bag man)

Quote:
Originally Posted by nofearengineer View Post
Are you referring to Ryan White? He was from my home state of Indiana. Please don't fall back on the old stand-by of calling people "ignorant" when they disagree with you. I felt truly, truly sorry for Ryan White, yet that did not change the fact that he had a disease, that if contracted was a death sentence (he did die from it after all). Ryan White was completely innocent in what happened to him; a victim in the truest sense of the word. But other parents were justified in their fear of having their children in school with him. It would not have helped Ryan to have some other innocent catch HIV from a scratch, nosebleed, or stray sneeze. The odds were very, very small I know, but it would be folly to ignore a known danger in the name of political correctness.
Z521Bass is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Disclosure / Disclaimer
Before acting on the content posted, you should know that BassFishin.Com may benefit financially and otherwise from content, advertising, links or otherwise from anything you click on, read, or look at on our website. Click here to read our Disclosure Policy and Disclaimer.


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2013 BassFishin.Com LLC