The same-sex marriage referendum debate

[heganboy]

by simply trying to live a good life and doing one's best

many peoples' view of living a good life and doing one's best are at odds with your views Tony, and also those of "scripture".
and again to be clear- do you mean Christian or catholic scripture?

[J70]

"Unnatural?" Are you saying that homosexuality does not exist in nature?

Its Extremely rare in Nature almost unknown . Seem much more often  when animals are in captivity
same as with people Sailors prisoners ETC

It is not almost unknown in nature.  For starters,  check out our closest cousins, bonobos.

Regardless,  rare does not equal unnatural. 90% of people are right handed. That does not make left handedness unnatural.

right/ left handedness is a conpleate non sequiter any more that hair colour , the one thing that is self evident is homsexuality is not hereditry where as the others are.
Bonobos are jsut randy feckers who use sex like activty for almost every purposebut  are nearly never exclusively homosexual and im sure they are not the image  human homosexuals would like to be their calling card

"Self-evident that homosexuality is not hereditry"? No its not self-evident. Genetics may play only a part, but so what? A mixture of genetics and environment does not mean its unnatural. And given that one can be trained to use their weaker hand, you can't say that left or right handedness is exclusively genetic either.

And I never said bonobos should serve as the model for human homosexual relationships or that their behavior was exclusively one or the other. I said they were an example of homosexual behaviour in the animal world i.e. natural.

[J70]

"Supporters of families"??

Spare us the American right wing Frank Lutz - type  euphemisms!

Never heard of him, I'm not the one bringing American values into the debate.

If you say so, but "family values" is a staple of the American religious right, basically a euphemism for anti-homosexuality, and cultivated to great effect  by Karl Rove, especially in the 2004 presidential election, and currently in the growing Republican field who were tripping over themselves last week in Iowa to condemn the move towards gay marriage nationally.

BTW, Luntz is a Republican operative who uses focus groups to test phrases and words for the GOP. Apparently it was he who advised the Bush Administration to use "climate change" instead of "global warming" and instead of inheritance tax, we now have "death tax" in the US. There are plenty of other instances where something will get relabled to make it more palatable or offensive, depending on whether they're pushing their own ideas or condemning the Democrats.

If my kids espouse bigoted views of anything,  they will hear about it from me.

So if you were the parent of one of the homosexual people in the No campaign, would they "hear about it from you"? What would you say?

It would obviously depend on how he rationalized his opposition.

[Eamonnca1]

"Unnatural?" Are you saying that homosexuality does not exist in nature?

Its Extremely rare in Nature almost unknown . Seem much more often  when animals are in captivity
same as with people Sailors prisoners ETC

That is factually, empirically incorrect.  Homosexuality is widespread in nature, it has been observed in thousands of species and is well documented in about 500 species.

[Eamonnca1]

right/ left handedness is a conpleate non sequiter any more that hair colour , the one thing that is self evident is homsexuality is not hereditry where as the others are.
Bonobos are jsut randy feckers who use sex like activty for almost every purposebut  are nearly never exclusively homosexual and im sure they are not the image  human homosexuals would like to be their calling card

Bonobos are not always exclusively homosexual. Sounds a bit like humans.
Bonobos are highly sexual. Sounds a bit like humans.

[Eamonnca1]

It is not exalting oneself, or lacking in humility, by simply trying to live a good life and doing one's best, in the hope that this will lead to redemption, as promised in Scripture.

And yet if you had a vote you would use it to prevent other "lesser" people from getting married. But apart from that you're just minding your own business.

Aye.
Right.
Dead on.
Keep her lit.

[armaghniac]

BTW, Luntz is a Republican operative who uses focus groups to test phrases and words for the GOP. Apparently it was he who advised the Bush Administration to use "climate change" instead of "global warming" and instead of inheritance tax, we now have "death tax" in the US. There are plenty of other instances where something will get relabled to make it more palatable or offensive, depending on whether they're pushing their own ideas or condemning the Democrats.

The abuse of language is a frequent tool of extreme groups. So we have "marriage equality" instead of redefining marriage, and its "about people loving each other" when it really about paying less inheritance tax.

That is factually, empirically incorrect.  Homosexuality is widespread in nature, it has been observed in thousands of species and is well documented in about 500 species

This is all very interesting, but the existence of homosexuality is not really in doubt, the issue here is whether there is a public policy requirement to give legal privilege to people practising it at the expense of the rest of society.

[Eamonnca1]

The abuse of language is a frequent tool of extreme groups. So we have "marriage equality" instead of redefining marriage, and its "about people loving each other" when it really about paying less inheritance tax.

So now gay people who want to get married are "an extreme group?"

This is all very interesting, but the existence of homosexuality is not really in doubt, the issue here is whether there is a public policy requirement to give legal privilege to people practising it at the expense of the rest of society.

I could use a bit of clarification on what you mean by "at the expense of the rest of society."

[Eamonnca1]

That is factually, empirically incorrect.  Homosexuality is widespread in nature, it has been observed in thousands of species and is well documented in about 500 species

This is all very interesting, but the existence of homosexuality is not really in doubt, ...

I just realized what you did there. Nobody has questioned the existence of homosexuality and I was not refuting anyone who did. To put those goalposts back where you got them, the point made by someone else is that homosexuality is "unnatural." And that is tripe.

[J70]

BTW, Luntz is a Republican operative who uses focus groups to test phrases and words for the GOP. Apparently it was he who advised the Bush Administration to use "climate change" instead of "global warming" and instead of inheritance tax, we now have "death tax" in the US. There are plenty of other instances where something will get relabled to make it more palatable or offensive, depending on whether they're pushing their own ideas or condemning the Democrats.

The abuse of language is a frequent tool of extreme groups. So we have "marriage equality" instead of redefining marriage, and its "about people loving each other" when it really about paying less inheritance tax.

That is factually, empirically incorrect.  Homosexuality is widespread in nature, it has been observed in thousands of species and is well documented in about 500 species

This is all very interesting, but the existence of homosexuality is not really in doubt, the issue here is whether there is a public policy requirement to give legal privilege to people practising it at the expense of the rest of society.

"Extreme groups"?? 

On the second point, Rosnarun is saying its unnatural.

[Oraisteach]

At times, this thread can produce wonderful humor, usually from the fingers of TF.  I especially like the statement that the "LGBT community are . . . increasingly intolerant" as opposed to . . .

[Eamonnca1]

At times, this thread can produce wonderful humor, usually from the fingers of TF.  I especially like the statement that the "LGBT community are . . . increasingly intolerant" as opposed to . . .

To people who are used to privilege, equality feels like discrimination.

[armaghniac]

That is factually, empirically incorrect.  Homosexuality is widespread in nature, it has been observed in thousands of species and is well documented in about 500 species

This is all very interesting, but the existence of homosexuality is not really in doubt, ...

I just realized what you did there. Nobody has questioned the existence of homosexuality and I was not refuting anyone who did. To put those goalposts back where you got them, the point made by someone else is that homosexuality is "unnatural." And that is tripe.

I didn't mover the goalposts, any movement in your imagination. The question of homosexuality being natural is not an issue in this case, except for a handful of lulas. No doubt it suits to keep attention on this, as it is so easily refuted.

[J70]

That is factually, empirically incorrect.  Homosexuality is widespread in nature, it has been observed in thousands of species and is well documented in about 500 species

This is all very interesting, but the existence of homosexuality is not really in doubt, ...

I just realized what you did there. Nobody has questioned the existence of homosexuality and I was not refuting anyone who did. To put those goalposts back where you got them, the point made by someone else is that homosexuality is "unnatural." And that is tripe.

I didn't mover the goalposts, any movement in your imagination. The question of homosexuality being natural is not an issue in this case, except for a handful of lulas. No doubt it suits to keep attention on this, as it is so easily refuted.

Take your complaint up with the person (s) who introduced the topic to the discussion then!

[armaghniac]

Take your complaint up with the person (s) who introduced the topic to the discussion then!

OK, person who introduced this topic, please stop now.