Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
November 27, 2014, 11:25:01 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ATTENTION ALL NEW MEMBERS
PLEASE READ THIS OR YOUR ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED - CLICK HERE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat(1)  

Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: To wed or not  (Read 6488 times)
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #20 on: June 27, 2007, 06:37:45 PM »

I really doubt that homosexuality can be taught, and I don't believe it is a choice. There must be some gene that triggers homosexuality. There is no way anyone could teach me to be gay, no one could pay me to be gay. I wish my Doctors were all women, I would be more comfortable with that than having these male doctors poking and prodding.

I don't think they should teach anything about "sex", as in relationships, in schools. That should be done at home. But if they are going to teach this stuff and hand out condoms then why not teach about the homosexual way of life. Then perhaps there wouldn't be so much aggression against it. As a parent I really would not like to see my child become gay. But if it should happen then I except it. Just because we don't like something doesn't give us the right to deny someone else their happiness. (that is why I mentioned the make and color of the car thinggy earlier)

and i ask again:  if you are going to accept one form or deviant behavior, why not others?

And I say again. If it is consenting adults it is none of my business.... nor yours. And I say again, all sexual acts beyond the purpose of reproduction is deviant sex. Did you miss that?

Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
Understudy
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4640


Location: West Palm Beach, Fl


WWW
« Reply #21 on: June 27, 2007, 06:42:41 PM »

And I say again. If it is consenting adults it is none of my business.... nor yours. And I say again, all sexual acts beyond the purpose of reproduction is deviant sex. Did you miss that?

So since my wife takes birth control. I guess that makes us a couple of deviants.  evil evil evil

I can live with that. Smiley

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Logged

The status is not quo. The world is a mess and I just need to rule it. Dr. Horrible
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15279


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #22 on: June 27, 2007, 07:08:05 PM »

Quote
You smoking is to me an apple and oranges comparrison. You are resticted from smoking in areas where your smoking does have an impact on others.

i can't smoke 10 feet from the door of the airport...where the cars are idling spewing exhaust, but i can smoke 20 feet away because this changes what?  the fact that they can't smell my smoke? getting a whiff of tobacco smell does them no harm.  that exhaust is another matter.  maybe they should make the cars park out away from the door? and i pay extra taxes for social welfare programs why?

i don't have a problem with a legal contract between adults.  it's a good idea in any living situation.  a legal contract or civil union does not impact the institution of marriage.  companies and states can decided how they want to handle the issue.

as for sex outside procreation being deviant....i'll pass that on to my husband.  i have no intention of having more children and i do enjoy my sleep  smiley

understudy, following your line of thinking, we could not regulate any behavior in public or private because it would discriminate against someone.  people should just do what feels good and we shouldn't make it our business!
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Understudy
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4640


Location: West Palm Beach, Fl


WWW
« Reply #23 on: June 27, 2007, 08:01:09 PM »

understudy, following your line of thinking, we could not regulate any behavior in public or private because it would discriminate against someone.  people should just do what feels good and we shouldn't make it our business!

If you behavior has a disregard for other it needs to be looked at. You cannot drink and drive while intoxicated because you are likely to hurt someone else. You cannot smoke near other people because smoking affects others who have made a choice not to smoke.

I agree with you on the cars spewing hydrocarbons and other emissions. Something is being done about it(more needs to be done). But that becomes part of the global warming discussion. There are no more leaded gasolines. Cars now have Catalytic Conveters, Electric fuel injection. It doesn't put it to an end but if you compare the output of a 1957 chevy to a current car there is a definite decrease in the amount of emissions. And they are still trying to lower it.

Actually with my line of thinking people would be able to live their lives without hassle. The problem isn't the gays, jewish, vegans, or most others. It is those who view them as a problem. If you want to eat meat that is fine, if you don't that is fine. You should also be free of hassle from others for that choice. I don't have a problem with vegans. I have a problem with PETA telling me I can't eat meat. I don't have a problem with interacial couples, I have a problem with the KKK tresspassing on their property and burning crosses on their lawns and scaring people. I don't have a problem with someone being muslim. I do have a problem with fringe elements recuiting suicide bombers. I don't have a problem with homosexuals. I do have a problem with Fred Phelps and his members protesting at funerals.

If you want to drink and smoke in a way that it has no effect on others that is fine by me. You can have sex the same way I won't care. If you want get behind the wheel of a car on a major highway with a BAL of .08 and you have comprimise your reflexes. I have a problem. Now let me go one step further. There are factors in how I view things. If you are 95 years old and can't pass an eye exam and your arthritis prevents you from having a good grip on the wheel or you have some other health related issue, you should not be allowed to drive. I think driving through the swap market is a good thing. I know that doesn't make me popular with the senior population and living in SoFla that makes me enemy #1 . So do I discriminate? According to some I do. I prefer Brunettes to Blondes and Redheads are my fav. But I don't take that into how I hire someone for a job and I don't care if someone prefers to be gay to being hetro.

If someone wants to get married to someone of the same sex that is fine. I don't think that should be prevented. I don't think companies should be allowed to discriminate against same sex couples when it comes to benefits.

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Logged

The status is not quo. The world is a mess and I just need to rule it. Dr. Horrible
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15279


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #24 on: June 27, 2007, 08:41:23 PM »

guess i would agree with you if i took the narrow view that this was just about gay marriage.  i think it's part of a larger picture.  i believe it is part of the agenda of the far left to undermine the social structure of the country.

guess also that i don't have anything else to add to the whole thing  smiley
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
dlmarti
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 181


Location: Mercer County, NJ


« Reply #25 on: June 27, 2007, 09:55:33 PM »

They can do what they want in their lives, it doesn't effect me.
I don't see how allowing a gay couple effects anyone else except them.

If that is what they need to keep them happy, then let them get married.
Logged
reinbeau
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2502


Location: Hanson, MA and Lebanon, ME


« Reply #26 on: June 28, 2007, 06:09:55 AM »

guess i would agree with you if i took the narrow view that this was just about gay marriage.  i think it's part of a larger picture.  i believe it is part of the agenda of the far left to undermine the social structure of the country.
It's so scary that more don't see this... rolleyes
Logged


- Ann, A Gardening Beek -  ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Click for Hanson, Massachusetts Forecast" border="0" height="150" width="256
Understudy
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4640


Location: West Palm Beach, Fl


WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 28, 2007, 07:45:32 AM »

guess i would agree with you if i took the narrow view that this was just about gay marriage.  i think it's part of a larger picture.  i believe it is part of the agenda of the far left to undermine the social structure of the country.
It's so scary that more don't see this... rolleyes
Because the right's vision is far more scary.

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Logged

The status is not quo. The world is a mess and I just need to rule it. Dr. Horrible
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #28 on: June 28, 2007, 09:02:03 AM »

guess i would agree with you if i took the narrow view that this was just about gay marriage.  i think it's part of a larger picture.  i believe it is part of the agenda of the far left to undermine the social structure of the country.
It's so scary that more don't see this... rolleyes

The real scary part is that all these things are really engineered by Satan. Just leading up to the final days. Armageddon
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
indypartridge
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1101


Location: Brown County, IN


« Reply #29 on: June 28, 2007, 09:14:54 AM »

Understudy: While agreeing with much of what you have written, I do question your comment that denying homosexuals marriage is discrimination. Yes of course it is. So what? The government discriminates in countless ways. My son has to register for the draft, my daughter does not.  I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than some, and a smaller percentage than others. In 14 States a person with a felony on their record is barred for life from voting, so that a stupid act as a teenager prevents an otherwise responsible citizen from EVER casting a vote.  I could go on an on.

As for companies being required to cover "domestic partners", would it be "discrimination" if gays had to pay higher health insurance premiums because the statistics show the gay lifestyle to be a major health risk? (Some companies make smokers pay higher premiums for the same reasons).

What is it about 'marriage' that is so special to be coveted by gays? The legal aspects? As has already been posted, I don't see anything that couldn't be done with a legal contract. Tax benefits? In my tax-paying years, I've seen both a marriage benefit and a marriage penalty, so that's a crap shoot at best. Monogamy? No, from what I've read, fidelity between gay partners (especially males) is rare.

Even marriage is discriminatory, limited to just TWO. Why not three? Isn't itdiscriminatory to prevent a man from having multiple wives, or a woman to have multiple husbands?

Because of the above, I have to agree with kathyp that the push for 'gay marriage' appears to be more of an attack on a foundational institution, rather than just seeking legal and societal recognition.
Logged
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #30 on: June 28, 2007, 10:25:43 AM »

Understudy: While agreeing with much of what you have written, I do question your comment that denying homosexuals marriage is discrimination. Yes of course it is. So what? The government discriminates in countless ways. My son has to register for the draft, my daughter does not.  I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than some, and a smaller percentage than others. In 14 States a person with a felony on their record is barred for life from voting, so that a stupid act as a teenager prevents an otherwise responsible citizen from EVER casting a vote.  I could go on an on.

I am not understudy but here is my take. Just because there is discrimination of some things doesn't mean we have to keep discriminating on everything. (Still working on the black/white issue I think.) And if we all take the "Oh well" attitude, as the above statement implies, then we will never get the draft registration for women. Felons will never get to vote, and we will keep paying unconstitutional taxes. Just because a hundred sheep jump off a cliff doesn't make it right.

As for companies being required to cover "domestic partners", would it be "discrimination" if gays had to pay higher health insurance premiums because the statistics show the gay lifestyle to be a major health risk? (Some companies make smokers pay higher premiums for the same reasons).

How is their lifestyle a major risk factor? A monogamous "union" between a gay couple would be no more a risk than a monogamous union between heterosexuals. Its the ones that have multiple sex partners that are the risk, no matter what your orientation. 

What is it about 'marriage' that is so special to be coveted by gays? The legal aspects? As has already been posted, I don't see anything that couldn't be done with a legal contract. Tax benefits? In my tax-paying years, I've seen both a marriage benefit and a marriage penalty, so that's a crap shoot at best. Monogamy? No, from what I've read, fidelity between gay partners (especially males) is rare.


But you never knew gay couples yourself? And how many heteros do you know that has only had one sexual relation in there life time?

Even marriage is discriminatory, limited to just TWO. Why not three? Isn't itdiscriminatory to prevent a man from having multiple wives, or a woman to have multiple husbands?

 
Once again. This is something we must work to change. It is no concern of anyone how many wives I have.

Because of the above, I have to agree with kathyp that the push for 'gay marriage' appears to be more of an attack on a foundational institution, rather than just seeking legal and societal recognition.

I sure will be glad when some one explains what a "foundational institution" means. And how would two men being married be different from a man and a woman.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15279


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #31 on: June 28, 2007, 11:30:36 AM »

jerrymac, thanks.  i wish you'd made this last post earlier because you pretty much made my point for me.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
reinbeau
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2502


Location: Hanson, MA and Lebanon, ME


« Reply #32 on: June 28, 2007, 01:18:52 PM »

guess i would agree with you if i took the narrow view that this was just about gay marriage.  i think it's part of a larger picture.  i believe it is part of the agenda of the far left to undermine the social structure of the country.
It's so scary that more don't see this... rolleyes
Because the right's vision is far more scary.

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Oh, yes, the end of civilization as we know it is an excellent agenda for the left to push forward  rolleyes
Logged


- Ann, A Gardening Beek -  ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Click for Hanson, Massachusetts Forecast" border="0" height="150" width="256
Understudy
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4640


Location: West Palm Beach, Fl


WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 28, 2007, 02:56:47 PM »

Understudy: While agreeing with much of what you have written, I do question your comment that denying homosexuals marriage is discrimination. Yes of course it is. So what? The government discriminates in countless ways. My son has to register for the draft, my daughter does not. 
I think women should have to register also.

Quote
I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than some, and a smaller percentage than others. In 14 States a person with a felony on their record is barred for life from voting, so that a stupid act as a teenager prevents an otherwise responsible citizen from EVER casting a vote.  I could go on an on.
I am not a big fan of the flat tax. I don't completely hate it either. But if you earn a million  dollars a year you should have to pay more taxes than someone who earns $14,000 a year. The felon issue is because voting is tied to a states right issue or at least it was until the supreme court stepped in on the gore v bush election. I do understand your point. As I said earlier I am not discrimination free either. However I do try to have some sound reasoning behind my points of view.

Quote
As for companies being required to cover "domestic partners", would it be "discrimination" if gays had to pay higher health insurance premiums because the statistics show the gay lifestyle to be a major health risk? (Some companies make smokers pay higher premiums for the same reasons).
Women pay less for auto insurance than men. How about single people in general pay more because the single lifestyle has more risk to it than the married lifestyle gay or straight? How about we discriminate against single persons when we make them work longer and harder to compensate because a person with a child has to deal with a sick child. There is a difference between discrimination and commpassion but it can be a very thin line and I have some very harsh opionins on that topic.

Quote
What is it about 'marriage' that is so special to be coveted by gays? The legal aspects? As has already been posted, I don't see anything that couldn't be done with a legal contract. Tax benefits? In my tax-paying years, I've seen both a marriage benefit and a marriage penalty, so that's a crap shoot at best. Monogamy? No, from what I've read, fidelity between gay partners (especially males) is rare.
What about marriage is so special? Ask my wife. I would have been perfectly happy to remain a living together couple for the rest of lives. As much as I joke about it one of the reasons(not the main one , we do love each other very much) we are married is because she as a domestic partner cannot make any decisions regarding my well being in a medical format if she were not married to me. Also she very much wanted to have the establishment of being my wife and all that comes with that. Gay male couples who have long term relationships from what I have known are pretty much like other straight couples. Boring. Most I know don't have wild lifestyles. And cheating whether gay or straight is still cheating to the partner. I don't think I agree with your statement about male gays.
Quote
Even marriage is discriminatory, limited to just TWO. Why not three? Isn't itdiscriminatory to prevent a man from having multiple wives, or a woman to have multiple husbands?
Why not? Outside of christian religous ideals many others cultures do that. However the uproar caused by allowing that would be bigger than the gay marriage debate. Mormons used to be that way. But in order to obtain statehood they had to agree to retract it. I am not saying they are the shinning example of poly relationships. But I would not see a problem with sound minded consenting adults doing what they want as long as everyone in the relationship was in agreement.

Quote
Because of the above, I have to agree with kathyp that the push for 'gay marriage' appears to be more of an attack on a foundational institution, rather than just seeking legal and societal recognition.
I disagree. I think people preceive it that way out of fear or ignorance. But you are entitled to view it whatever way you feel.

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Logged

The status is not quo. The world is a mess and I just need to rule it. Dr. Horrible
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #34 on: June 28, 2007, 05:21:10 PM »

jerrymac, thanks.  i wish you'd made this last post earlier because you pretty much made my point for me.
What are you talking about? The last part where I say;

I sure will be glad when some one explains what a "foundational institution" means. And how would two men being married be different from a man and a woman.

I wanted some one to tell me their meaning of it because the "institution of marriage" that I have been in with three different women for 34 years would not be any different if I had male partners.... except for the six kids which I could have adopted. So I am wondering how in the world a gay couple is going to destroy this "institution" as you keep calling it.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
Brian D. Bray
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 7369


Location: Anacortes, WA 98221

I really look like this, just ask Cindi.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: July 01, 2007, 02:49:30 AM »

Every "Gay Person" I have ever met had been in a normal hetrosexual relationship prior to their discovery they were gay.  This tells me that they are capable of engaging in a hetrosexual relationship and have chosen not to.  I Have yet to meet a gay person who has not consciously made the choice to be that way.  I do not condone homosexuality, I view it as an act against nature.  It is hetrosexual relationships to procreate--homosexual behavior cannot.  Procreation is an act of nature.

As far as discrimination is concerned I have found that if you take each case individually it is impossible to be prejudice.  Prejudice comes from making generalities about things you dislike.
Logged

Life is a school.  What have you learned?   Brian      The greatest danger to our society is apathy, vote in every election!
beekeeperookie
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 185

Location: Newark, Ohio


WWW
« Reply #36 on: July 05, 2007, 09:13:21 AM »

In my opinion of course i am only 26 so, 

I dont have a problem with gays adopting, hey get the kids out of the homes and into a place where they can be loved.  Singles should be able to adopt (with restrictions) who says you need two adults.  Look at all the kids growing up with single parents. 

I dont have a problem with gays having marriage you know what if they want to go through with divorce and issues being married so be it,

I believe they should be able to get insurance for there partner etc.  They should have equal rights as anyone else. 

On religion i believe in God and he had a son that sacrificed his life for us, I believe there is a virgin mary, etc.  I am a catholic that hasnt practice for years.  I found out going through life that organize religion is a question mark.  I dont condone it, I also dont believe in the bible for it was created by man, how can i believe that what that man wrote is 100% true, maybe 75% then he added his own words not Gods
Logged


<img src="[url]http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/miniWeather02/language/www/US/OH/Newark.gif
" border=0
alt="Click for Newark, Ohio Forecast" height=50 width=150>[/url]

Beekeeping since 2007
Mici
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1502


Location: Zagradec, Grosuple, Lower Carniola, Slovenia

tougher than rock


WWW
« Reply #37 on: July 05, 2007, 09:33:46 AM »

but really, how many AMERICAN kids are in need of adoption?
you won't believe what i've read.
so...this couple wanted to adopt a kid, fortunatelly, you have to wait 5 years to get a local kid (Slovenian) because aparently we don't have issues or they're hiding them.
so, they got an offer you would have to refuse.
for crying out loud, they had to choose between 3 kid PACKAGES!!!!!!
a) two boys, one has AIDS
b) two boys, one is missing both of his arms
or c) three kids

imported from Ukraine. i mean...this is just...criminal, baby packages FFS. i still have trouble believeing this is true.

i know this is very OT, but...people mostly mention adopting when gay issues come up but...do you need adopting parents?
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15279


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #38 on: July 05, 2007, 11:00:34 AM »

Mici, we have a lot of kids that need adoption.  we support the drug and prostitution life of these women with welfare.  the more kids, the more money.  then the state ends up taking the kids because mommys boyfriend is at them, and now they are up for adoption.  who wants kids that are so damaged?

in all honesty, i don't have a problem with single or gay adoption because those kids will not turn out well if they are raised in foster care or institutions.  this would be a good reason to have civil unions. 

a fair number of americans that want undamaged kids, adopt overseas. 

of course, a better solution would be to stop supporting these women...but that would be unkind.....
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #39 on: July 23, 2007, 11:26:18 PM »

Just when you thought this one died.

I just had to wake it up

Perhaps there is a good reason to specify it as a marriage

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070724/ap_on_re_us/alimony_partnerships;_ylt=Atw2WbPldbNjZgLnpFvRT7XMWM0F

California marriage laws say alimony ends when a former spouse remarries, and Ron Garber thought that meant he was off the hook when he learned his ex-wife had registered her new relationship under the state's domestic partnership law.

An Orange County judge didn't see it that way.

The judge ruled that a registered partnership is cohabitation, not marriage, and that Garber must keep writing the checks, $1,250 a month, to his ex-wife, Melinda Kirkwood. Garber plans to appeal.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.254 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page November 21, 2014, 06:20:44 AM