Virginia bans homosexual civil unions

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

::smacks forehead:: Please edit that... I don't want my thread being closed.

[Gnarf]

Gone... sorry. Getting pissed off. Shouldn't post :/

[Jerr Conner]

Ah, forgot about the no talk of religion rule.

Another thing I'd like to point out to Yorick, you said I'm just invalidating what you see as truth and what others see as truth and have proven. Well, aren't you invalidating what I see as truthand others as well, who have proven their own beliefs?

[promethius9594]

::smacks forehead:: Please edit that... I don't want my thread being closed.

::smacks forehead (yours not mine), laughs maniacally:: edited to be less religiousy but still something of an answer to the question without dipping too far into religion. that okay now?

edit: that smack was a joke, by the way... not some vieled attempt at some personal degredation... just in case you were wondering:: smacks self in the head.

[ 06-04-2004, 07:59 PM: Message edited by: promethius9594 ]

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

Actually, I was alluding to a post Gnarf was gracious enough to remove quickly.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Jerr Conner: [QB] quote: Why? To prove a point on the internet? Seems like a silly reason if you ask me. I'm not that insecure. Besides, I am my own proof. I am not the one complaining about being unable to choose things. I am suggesting empowerment for yourself and you want me to prove it to you? There are more than enough books which support what I am suggesting. Try it on yourself. Don't expect me to sabotage my families happiness just to prove a point to you.

Called Burden of Proof. You make a statement, back it up. At least I tried to back up my statements.

If you don't want to prove a point, fine. But you make the world out like it's black and white when it's not.

[/QUOTE]The proof I offered was my own life and consequences. I have been describing "what worked for me" and countless others. You request is to actually negate the proof I've offered. It's like me saying "I'll prove I exist: I think therefore I am", and then you saying "Hah! Prove it, kill youself so you are not thinking, and thus not existing!".

All well and good in a scientific experiment where you want to test the oppostite outcome, but not great in life. A bit silly if you ask me.

Sometimes it's simple, sometimes it's not.

I've found a key to understanding is to simplify elements into their simplest, black and white components, and then amplifying them. Break it down, break it down, break it down. To primal, fundamental levels.

quote: Commitment in a relationship IS deciding to love. Don't know what else to say. Was commited to a woman for 10 years including 7 of marriage. Then divorced. I know what long term commitment is and isn't based on both success and failure.

Then what about those people who are not in love who commit in a relationship so they lessen a risk of STDs? Are they still 'deciding' to be in love?

Making a decision to commit is just that, to commit.[/QUOTE]I really do not think you understand committed romantic relationships. I offered some of my personal story, and you did not offer yours. I ask again, what personal experience of being in a commited relationship have you got, seeing as you are so prepared to fly in the face of mountains of psychological/marriage counsel. Have you ever been to marriage counselling? Conflict resolution counselling? What books have you read? The Road less travelled? Where are you getting your opinions?

As well as having person experience in a sucessful, and then failed marriage, I DID undergo counselling, DID read very widely on relationship matters. It was in my best interests to heal quickly. I'm now in a commited relationship again, and looking towards a life together. I am constantly testing my ideas in a practical application in my life.

You have not offered any indication you are doing this.

quote: If you believe you have no choice but to love your parents, then that love hasn't been tested yet. When and if you are confronted with issues that leave you at crossroads over the continuation of that relationship, you'll understand what I'm talking about. The ones we love hurt us the most precisely because we love them.

That's a pretty big assumption to make about a person you don't even know at all.

And yes I have had lots of tests with my love for my parents. We barely get along, yet we still love each other.[/QUOTE]Then you are all working on your relationship, whether you're aware of that or not. As a human, you were not born self aware, it developed. There are many aspects of self that we become aware of in due course.

quote: I choose to love my parents. I certainly don't hate them, and that is through a series of choices, starting with a decision to maintain relationship.

Again, you're making it black and white when it's not.[/QUOTE]And yet it can be. I can break down my entire worldview on life to "It's all good".
Much value in simplification of the complex.

quote: Which is my point exactly. Check what I'm saying again. Your desire for staightness is what created the pressure I'm speaking about. It's not about a simple physical response in your case, but overwhelmed with a pressure on self perception.

Well even now there's no pressure on my self-perception, yet I can't find women sexually attractive.[/QUOTE]But why would you? You're not in a relationship with a woman. I mentioned repeatedly that WOMEN GET MORE ATTRACTIVE TO ME, WHEN IN RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. Plenty of homosexual men used to find my ex-wife attractive. Being gay doesn't preclude a man from being attracted to women, just as being hetro doesn't preclude a man from finding other men attractive. I even know gay men who've had sex with women once or twice. A man has to be attracted to a degree to have intercourse Jerr.

quote: Then why change laws giving people rights depending on their sexual preferences? It is homosexual people who define themselves - simply by creating delineation - by their sexual preference.

We're not trying to change laws based on sexual preference/orientation. We're trying to get equality. Besides, those benefits can already be said to be based soley off of sexual preference since right now they only recognize a man and a woman in a marriage. So your point is kind of moot.[/QUOTE]Nope. Not all all. It still stands. If you are not using sexual preference as a definition, you would not need laws changed. At the moment there is equality for every human. You can marry a person of the opposite sex. It's not a heart matter, it's a physical qualifier. The minute you add in "love" and "gender attraction" you're making definitions based on sexual preference. Marriage has nothing to do with sexual preference (mental), and everything to do with physical state of being.

Bi, gay, straight. All can marry a member of the opposite sex. All are equal if we are all humans, rather than sexual objects.

quote: I agree with you, which is why I advocate laws encouraging procreating heterosexual couples, based on a desire for a healthy perpetuation of the human race.

And what about those gay men and women that adopt? Do their families even matter in your estimation? Why should they miss out on benefits and be forced to pay more than someone because they are straight?[/QUOTE]Because they cannot procreate. I previously did not delineate between childless couples and procreating couples but when pushed changed my position. I am advocating encouraging procreating blood families for the mental health of society, by creating stable related family united (mini societies).

A gay family will always only have one "parent" who is not related by blood.

It simply comes down to my right to have a say in where my energy is spent. What people I am encouraging. I would never forbid a gay couple from adopting or marrying, but I certainly have every right to decide where my excess energy is spent. As does the rest of society.

quote: That flies in the face of so much wisdom it's not funny. "Sure didn't require any work other than just being in love". Being in love for 50 odd years requires work Jerr. Perhaps you'd care to list your own sucessful relationships seeing as you're so prepared to contradict generations of sucessful relationship testimonies with your statement. Would love to know the secret based on your personal revelations. Care to share?

Reread what I said. I said some people I know. Two couples. Though I've lost touch with one.

I knew two people in college who had been seeing each other for almost seven years before I lost contact with them, and they said they never really had to work to fall in love with each other other than just dating.

The other couple would be online, about ten years they've been married. But they could be just generalizing themselves.

So as I said, some people, not me. I haven't been in a relationship for six years. [/QUOTE][/quote]

I would be so bold as to suggest you don't know the full story of these two couples.

"Just dating" is a far cry from cohabiting in life partnership for starters. Secondly, even dating relationships take work if they are to last longer than a week. Making time, investing trust, communicating, compromising values, demands and needs, working on losing offence or being forgiving. All "work" buddy. If they had one fight, they've worked. If they had one clash of schedules, one compromise, they've worked.

How long was your last relationship six years ago?

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

As your post is too long for me to quote point by point without making my head hurt, Yorick, I've simply put your words in italics to make things easier on me.
The proof I offered was my own life and consequences. I have been describing "what worked for me" and countless others.
And he offers his own life and consequences, and describes what works for him and countless others. Why do you refuse to accept that? It doesn't work for you, great. But NOT EVERYONE THINKS LIKE YOU.

I really do not think you understand committed romantic relationships. I offered some of my personal story, and you did not offer yours. I ask again, what personal experience of being in a commited relationship have you got, seeing as you are so prepared to fly in the face of mountains of psychological/marriage counsel. Have you ever been to marriage counselling? Conflict resolution counselling? What books have you read? The Road less travelled? Where are you getting your opinions?
This isn't about the nature of personal relationships, it's about equality. But we'll get to that later.
But why would you? You're not in a relationship with a woman. I mentioned repeatedly that WOMEN GET MORE ATTRACTIVE TO ME, WHEN IN RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. Plenty of homosexual men used to find my ex-wife attractive. Being gay doesn't preclude a man from being attracted to women, just as being hetro doesn't preclude a man from finding other men attractive. I even know gay men who've had sex with women once or twice. A man has to be attracted to a degree to have intercourse Jerr.
Snip.
Nope. Not all all. It still stands. If you are not using sexual preference as a definition, you would not need laws changed. At the moment there is equality for every human. You can marry a person of the opposite sex. It's not a heart matter, it's a physical qualifier. The minute you add in "love" and "gender attraction" you're making definitions based on sexual preference. Marriage has nothing to do with sexual preference (mental), and everything to do with physical state of being.
This is downright ignorant of you.
homosexual
adj : sexually attracted to members of your own sex
Are you saying that you and you alone, a proclaimed heterosexual, understand the nature of homosexuality? Where the HELL do you come off doing that? It smacks of hubris and intolerance. While we're at it, "Well, gay men can marry women, so everything is equal. Nyah." is the same argument Prometheus used, and it's no better coming from you. As Americans, we are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. A gay man will not be happy married to a woman. ACCEPT THAT. The percentage of homosexuals who will stay faithful and HAPPY in a heterosexual marriage is miniscule. Deal with it.

[Dirty Meg]

There is no point in arguing with the anti-gay lobby as they are, without exception, the products of incestuous pairing between man and niece. It is ironic that those who claim gay marriage demeans the institution of marriage are all in fact wedded to blood relatives. The state parliment of Virginia probably have one chromosome between them.
It is remarkable that some people want to infringe on other people's private lives in a way that doesn't benifit anybody at all. Do they sit around stewing in their own geneticaly defective juices over the thought that somewhere out there people are inulging in homosexual activities?

PS. I admit my remark about those who pass law in Virginia being short on chromosomes was unfair. Some of them have one too many.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Illumina Drathiran'ar: [QB] he offers his own life and consequences, and describes what works for him and countless others. Why do you refuse to accept that? It doesn't work for you, great. But NOT EVERYONE THINKS LIKE YOU.

If you're going to butt your head in, at least have the decency to follow the argument.

I never for once contended that Jerrs mental process was not as he says it is. He claims to have no awareness of, and thus no control over the process of choice involved in sexuality, commitment and desire. He also claims to have desperately wanted to be straight, yet was unable to achieve that end - THEREFORE IT DID NOT WORK.

What he desperately wanted did not come to pass = problem and lack of success = incorrect application of will and incomplete understanding of mental pathways.

These are HIS claims about himself, not mine. I did not contest his facts about HIMSELF.
He demanded, as proof that what I was saying about MYSELF was true, that I reverse the very process I've been speaking of. Negating the very mental control, commitment and choice awareness I've been speaking of.

Can we follow what's written next time please?

This is downright ignorant of you. homosexual adj : sexually attracted to members of your own sex Are you saying that you and you alone, a proclaimed heterosexual, understand the nature of homosexuality? Where the HELL do you come off doing that? It smacks of hubris and intolerance. While we're at it, "Well, gay men can marry women, so everything is equal. Nyah." is the same argument Prometheus used, and it's no better coming from you. As Americans, we are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. A gay man will not be happy married to a woman. ACCEPT THAT. The percentage of homosexuals who will stay faithful and HAPPY in a heterosexual marriage is miniscule. Deal with it.

Downright ignorant? I have qualified my definitions. I have gone at length explaining these in my posts. It includes personal experience. This subject is also quite relevent, as I have a number of straight and gay friends who are affected by this right now. One is one the verge of becoming homosexual. I've been in commited romantic relationships with women who WERE in lesbian relationships before being with me. I've excercised choice in NOT entertaining the flattering attentions of attractive men in my life. I see so much CHOICE involved in sexuality and desire. We DO have control over what we love and hate and WHAT MAKES US HAPPY. We do not need to be helpless, slaves to whatever desires come our way.

Happiness is a perceptional choice Illumina. For you to state unequivically that a person will not be happy, completely flies in the face of the reality of perceptional choice involved in happiness.

You meet someone, you fall in love, you want to spend your life with them, but you're afraid... "what if I fall out of love"? What I am speaking of is a LACK of fear. Not "Will I love this person" but I WILL LOVE THIS PERSON!"

As for "me alone" and "hubris", what I am speaking about is common knowledge. Standard mental health. I am far from being alone in this, regardless how many people in this thread choose to disagree with me. As far as hubris goes, did I not mention part of my understanding came through sucess and FAILURE? What I learned came through painful realisation of my own weaknesses and mental deficiencies.

Read what I'm writing before butting in and insulting me next time.

[Stratos]

That post can be view as offensive to some, Dirty Meg, and you may want to edit it.