Dulak
9 years ago

Still stand with this opinion..

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



also agree with the above - who really cares what 2 consenting adults do?
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

To me.. the concept of not allowing them to join in the legal definition of marriage is absurd.

The church and afterlife can have there say independently from the legalities of this country..

The hypocrisy of any government that will label "Under God" from the pledge of Allegiance as nothing more than "ceremonial and patriotic nature", cannot justifiably cite any religious connotations to gay marriage. You can't have it both ways.

We have wasted probably billions of dollars in this country on this topic, that has really no reason to be an issue for the government to rule upon.

It is not our fight as a union to decide.. two adults should be able to form a marriage freely if both consent.. regardless of sex, race or religion.

But pressure from religious voters sways the self serving politician in seeking re-election.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



OK, point taken, but ......... as I'm sure you know, if you think about it, there is a LOT more to marriage in terms of government than mere approval - affirmative aspects: tax law, community property and inheritance, just to name a few. You want to apply all of that to homosexuals the same as to normal married people? OK, then how about polygamy? A much stronger case can be made for THAT in terms of normalcy, morality, and religion than for homosexuality. And if abnormal and religiously abominable is deemed to be acceptable, then how about the guy who wants to marry his favorite sheep - or maybe the whole flock? Where do you draw the line?
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
DakotaT
9 years ago

OK, point taken, but ......... as I'm sure you know, if you think about it, there is a LOT more to marriage in terms of government than mere approval - affirmative aspects: tax law, community property and inheritance, just to name a few. You want to apply all of that to homosexuals the same as to normal married people? OK, then how about polygamy? A much stronger case can be made for THAT in terms of normalcy, morality, and religion than for homosexuality. And if abnormal and religiously abominable is deemed to be acceptable, then how about the guy who wants to marry his favorite sheep - or maybe the whole flock? Where do you draw the line?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



You draw the line with two human beings. This really isn't that difficult. It's just one more thing for all the Leviticus Christians out there to stomach. Poor bastards! The bigots have beaten up gay people long enough, let them have their rights.
UserPostedImage
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

You draw the line with two human beings. This really isn't that difficult. It's just one more thing for all the Leviticus Christians out there to stomach. Poor bastards! The bigots have beaten up gay people long enough, let them have their rights.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I understand, you don't have a problem with that particular perversion. How many others do you approve of? Pedophilia fits snugly within the line you drew, for example.

Why would you have a problem with homosexuality merely being allowed or even ceremonially sanctioned as marriage, just not given the preferred or subsidized status of real marriage? And how do you justify favoring homosexual marriage over polygamy - assuming your motive is just to "let the poor bastards have their rights"?


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
dfosterf
9 years ago
I say "let the poor bastards have their rights".


I'm not here to judge anyone else's sexual activities.
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

I say "let the poor bastards have their rights".


I'm not here to judge anyone else's sexual activities.

Originally Posted by: dfosterf 



The judgment comes in when you decide to give them all the legal bennies of government-recognized marriage. Are you in favor of that? And were you talking just about homosexual marriage? Or polygamy among normal people also? Sure, let 'em all have the right to practice their crap - and probably a lot of other perversions too, but why bring tax benefits, inheritance, property ownership, ability to adopt/pervert kids, immigration, etc. into it just like real marriage?
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
mi_keys
9 years ago

OK, then how about polygamy? A much stronger case can be made for THAT in terms of normalcy, morality, and religion cherry picking beliefs from bronze age fables than for homosexuality.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Fixed.
Born and bred a cheesehead
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

Fixed.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



So what's your point? Are you PRO-homosexuality? Or anti-Judeo-Christian? Or what?

Speak up/identify your favorite perversion/state what part of our American tradition and heritage and concept of normalcy you have a problem with. Don't be shy.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
GermanGilbert
9 years ago
It scares me that there are still people who use terms like "perversion" when it comes down to homosexuality.
blank
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

It scares me that there are still people who use terms like "perversion" when it comes down to homosexuality.

Originally Posted by: GermanGilbert 



Oh really? Exactly how did homosexuality become any less perverse than it was x number of years ago - as seen by virtually every culture and civilization in history? I would suggest that the practice is the same; It's just the perspective of an increasing percentage of people - I doubt a majority even now - has been transformed/successfully propagandized/whatever. WHY do you see what has been seen as an abomination not only by us - Judeo-Christian people, but pretty much ALL cultures as somehow NOT perverse? Other than being one or being extremely close to somebody who's one, WHY would you fall prey to this propaganda?

I have nothing against what Dakota and Gunny said - "let the bastards have their rights". I just think the whole practice should still be seen as society has seen it ....... ever since there was such a thing as society - as a perversion - something sick and abnormal.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    dfosterf (3h) : Maybe
    Mucky Tundra (3h) : Yes
    Zero2Cool (4h) : No.
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : End of a Degu-era
    dhazer (7h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
    Zero2Cool (10h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
    Zero2Cool (11h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
    dfosterf (21h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
    Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
    beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
    Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
    beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.