Battlezone Forums

Baconboy wrote:I don't hate gays, but I just disagree with their lifestyle.

Nothing personal Bacon, but I always need to laugh when people make that statement. Yours and mine lifestyle are probably more different than that between you and a gay person down the street.

Baconboy wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:

Zenophas wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/1 ... gay-voices

Lol, 'bout time.

Psychological re-adjustment should not be illegal in any way if it is fully voluntary and non-medical. Whether it works or not.

Totally agree. I don't hate gays, but I just disagree with their lifestyle. So I actually agree with the father/psychologist, but even if I didn't, I think it'd be ridiculous to outlaw a type of voluntary psychological therapy. It's not necessary. Don't throw a fuss over little things. But that's what most of the pro-gays are doing a lot nowadays.

I don't mean to offend anyone by saying that, but it is true through my eyes.

You missed the part where it wasn't voluntary. Kid was psychologically re-adjusted without their consent.

Baconboy wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:

Zenophas wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/1 ... gay-voices

Lol, 'bout time.

Psychological re-adjustment should not be illegal in any way if it is fully voluntary and non-medical. Whether it works or not.

Totally agree. I don't hate gays, but I just disagree with their lifestyle. So I actually agree with the father/psychologist, but even if I didn't, I think it'd be ridiculous to outlaw a type of voluntary psychological therapy. It's not necessary. Don't throw a fuss over little things. But that's what most of the pro-gays are doing a lot nowadays.

I don't mean to offend anyone by saying that, but it is true through my eyes.

These posters apparently did not read the article.

Seems to be as common as not listening to yourself. I can't help but notice the glaring contradiction between "small government" and attempting to control the minute details of individuals sexual/reproductive choices. Seems to be a case of upholding your freedom to do what your told...

Zenophas wrote:These posters apparently did not read the article.

Yes, yes I did. Are you saying that I am not allowed to make a fully qualified statement where in I note what must and must not happen for it to be allowed? I specifically stated that it must be VOLUNTARY and NON-MEDICAL.

But you apparently didn't read my post.

Nielk1 wrote:

Zenophas wrote:These posters apparently did not read the article.

Yes, yes I did. Are you saying that I am not allowed to make a fully qualified statement where in I note what must and must not happen for it to be allowed? I specifically stated that it must be VOLUNTARY and NON-MEDICAL.

But you apparently didn't read my post.

Ahhh, I get it now.

Stumbled across this today:

Why can't we have a fiscally conservative but socially liberal party?

Because you have allowed your democracy to be dominated by only 2 parties, who have conspired to prevent any other competitors from succeeding. The binary nature of the system forces both to adopt relatively extreme positions in opposition to each other. Rational policies are not important, as most people always vote against rather than for. A third party (or more) means voters still have to vote for one particular party rather than just against one.

Nielk1 wrote:Why can't we have a fiscally conservative but socially liberal party?

I guess the closest to that is Libertarian.

I vote legalize gay marriage, but ban any strange marriages (IE to dog/cousin/sister/brother etc.) - Make everyone free and happy like it's suppose to be. Remove religion from the government/states... all it does is cause problems, and believing in some deity that says "WORSHIP ME OR DIE" and has tons of "magical powers" is delusional..

DarkCobra262 wrote:I vote legalize gay marriage, but ban any strange marriages (IE to dog/cousin/sister/brother etc.) - Make everyone free and happy like it's suppose to be. Remove religion from the government/states... all it does is cause problems, and believing in some deity that says "WORSHIP ME OR DIE" and has tons of "magical powers" is delusional..

Banning strange marriages leaves innocent people unhappy though. Being deviant doesn't automatically make you evil.

DarkCobra262 wrote:ban any strange marriages (IE to dog/cousin/sister/brother etc.)

Huh? Nobody ever went near suggesting that.

AHadley wrote:

DarkCobra262 wrote:ban any strange marriages (IE to dog/cousin/sister/brother etc.)

Huh? Nobody ever went near suggesting that.

But if we have gay marrige, people will marry their dogs and their children!

Welcome to American logic AHadley.

I say get rid of all marriage and only have the legal core civil union.

it is more like, 'scope creep'. give an inch, take a mile, and all that