McCain is against free choice

Originally posted by Dace Ace
Is that the best you can counter with? Come on, that gray matter between your ears is more than a hat holder, I hope.

Try actually refuting the argument.

Originally posted by CliffLandin
And some have the mental capacity to realize that they aren't attracted to the opposite sex and that there is another hole that can accommodate their urges. This is natural, as well.

I am sure that is what pediphiles say too.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Try actually refuting the argument.

I defined un-natural, to you..define natural?

Originally posted by Dace Ace
I am sure that is what pediphiles say too.

So, do you agree that people that have oral sex shouldn't be allowed to marry?

If the only reason to marry is to have children, should people that are married and either choose not, or can't, have children have their rights as married couples revoked?

Originally posted by CliffLandin
So, do you agree that people that have oral sex shouldn't be allowed to marry?

If the only reason to marry is to have children, should people that are married and either choose not, or can't, have children have their rights as married couples revoked?

If it keeps homosexuals from marrying, sure.

Originally posted by Dace Ace
If it keeps homosexuals from marrying, sure.

Ok, so now you aren't just regulating against things that are "unnatural", but you are also regulating against things that are natural, like a woman not being able to conceive. So, in reality you are just regulating against something that you don't like, which makes you a bigot.

Originally posted by CliffLandin
So, do you agree that people that have oral sex shouldn't be allowed to marry?

If the only reason to marry is to have children, should people that are married and either choose not, or can't, have children have their rights as married couples revoked?

Despite all this fascinating discussion of various holes...

If any aspect of homosexuality is "unnatural", wouldn't it be the attraction to a person of one's own gender in the first place?

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
Despite all this fascinating discussion of various holes...

If any aspect of homosexuality is "unnatural", wouldn't it be the attraction to a person of one's own gender in the first place?

Are you one of those ignorant people that think that homosexuals choose to be homosexual? If it is unnatural, then why does it occur. They don't have a choice. Nature made them homosexual.

Originally posted by CliffLandin
Are you one of those ignorant people that think that homosexuals choose to be homosexual? If it is unnatural, then why does it occur. They don't have a choice. Nature made them homosexual.

And murderers? Are they born that way? Or do they choose to kill? If they were born that way, then it is "natural" so it should be allowed? They don't have a choice. Nature made them murderers.

Originally posted by CliffLandin
Are you one of those ignorant people that think that homosexuals choose to be homosexual? If it is unnatural, then why does it occur. They don't have a choice. Nature made them homosexual.

No, actually I don't think that. I know a few gays and that's just the way they are. I'm just saying that if one is on a quest to define homosexuality as unnatural then that is the most likely candidate for discussion. Not which hole they use etc. That just seems like a weak argument for "unnaturalness" since heterosexuals engage in anal sex as well. If it's unnatural for gays then it is for straights as well.

Originally posted by CliffLandin
No, he didn't.

yes he did.

''You should stick with subjects you understand, such as theoretical physics -- logic just isn't your forte. Here are some activities that are natural: loving your parents, caring for your child, marrying a member of the opposite sex. Here are some activities that are unnatural: eating your own feces, jabbing yourself with scissors, engaging in sex with animals, etc.''

Originally posted by Dace Ace
And murderers? Are they born that way? Or do they choose to kill? If they were born that way, then it is "natural" so it should be allowed? They don't have a choice. Nature made them murderers.

I don't think that is a fair comparison. Gays aren't hurting anyone by being gay, nor breaking any law for that matter.

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
No, actually I don't think that. I know a few gays and that's just the way they are. I'm just saying that if one is on a quest to define homosexuality as unnatural then that is the most likely candidate for discussion. Not which hole they use etc. That just seems like a weak argument for "unnaturalness" since heterosexuals engage in anal sex as well. If it's unnatural for gays then it is for straights as well.

I agree.

Originally posted by Dace Ace
If it keeps homosexuals from marrying, sure.

So you're an unabashed bigot, then?

You think oral sex is unnatural, so it should be illegal for heterosexuals
as well as homosexuals. But you're a lying sack of crap for claiming
you don't enjoy BJs.

As for anal sex, check these statistics out:

According to a 2004 report, "Some research suggests that one in four heterosexuals in the US has tried anal sex and for one in 12, it is an occasional or episodic practice. Other surveys suggest that seven times as many women as gay men engage in anal intercourse, a figure reflecting the greater overall heterosexual population.

In 2005, a survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control determined that the incidence of anal relations in the heterosexual population is on the increase. The survey showed that 40 percent of men and 35 percent of women between 25 and 44 had engaged in heterosexual anal sex.

So, I guess some 25% of the heterosexual population is 'unnatural.'

What are you doing about them? What laws are you being proactive about
in order to stop this 'unnatural' practice?

Furthermore, how does denying civil privileges to same-sex couples
contribute to their being more 'natural?'

Nemesio

Originally posted by Dace Ace
And murderers? Are they born that way? Or do they choose to kill? If they were born that way, then it is "natural" so it should be allowed? They don't have a choice. Nature made them murderers.

Maybe nature made them that way, but the difference here is consent:
a murder's victim doesn't consent to being killed. That is, the victim's
sovereign right to live is being denied.

The issue with same-sex unions is whether or not it's permissible to deny
civil privileges to one group of people and what the justification for that
is. Since allowing same-sex couples to inherit each other's property
without penalty doesn't affect your fundamental rights to life, liberty and
happiness, your murderer example doesn't apply.

Nemesio