Faried Becomes First NBA Player To Join Group Fighting Homophobia In Sports

You're delusional if you thing calling someone stupid "gay" is innocuous. Why don't you try going around calling stupid people "ni**er" and see how innocuous that is. And if someone gives you a hard time just say "oh it's ok, it's just a homonym, it means something else the way I use it."

 

Define marriage, as in remove any gender qualifications and define the basis of marriage.

Is it about financial bonds? kids? love? choice? what? (historically it's been about some or all of those things at different points, but it really comes down to how society today sees it)

Then cross check your basis against the different types and see where it lands.

I understand why my parents are against it, their generation saw marriage as almost exclusively a kids thing, me and my generation? not so much.

 

<P>

</P><P>&nbsp;</P><P>Read what I wrote. What I said was that calling something that is stupid gay is not the same as calling someone who is gay stupid. You are all kinds of hetero.</P><P>&nbsp;</P>

 

You clearly did not read what I wrote. I am saying that calling something/someone who is stupid "gay" is offensive, just like if you called something stupid "ni**er".

You might say "but 'gay' isn't a slur." Fair enough. Then why don't you try using the word "Hispanic" or "Negro" to mean stupid, and see how people react.

 

<P>

</P><P>&nbsp;</P><P>Like I said earlier when someone tried to make the false argument that race = sexual persuation, does it bother you when I call something stupid hetero? Answer no. So get over it, gay is only a slur if you make it one. I don't. </P>

 

False equivalence.

Being "hetero" has never been a subject of taboo, criticism or oppression. In other words, it has never been considered "bad".

Homosexuality on the other hand, has been perceived as a "bad" thing in certain cultures. When being gay has been associated with negativity, it gave rise to a colloquial usage of the word gay to describe anything that is negative in any sort of way.

However, now that we are more civilized, accepted and less prejudice in general, it's only natural that people start to be more sensitive around these issues. And to be more sensitive around these issues, people need to realize the ignorant negative connotations that has been attached to certain words like "gay".

 

I always find it funny when someone says "take religion out of it" when discussing gay-marraige.

The fact of the matter is marriage and religion go hand in hand. Marriage is a religious activity between a man and woman. I am not against "gay-marriege" because it doesn't exist. if it's not between a man and a woman, it's not marriage...

Obviously, Im against "gay-marraige" but that doesnt mean I disagree with what Kenneth Farried is doing. Im against their lifestyle, but I dont hate them. I think it's kind of pointless to try to change "locker room talk" but whatever, more power to ya.

Personally, I couldnt care less about people "calling me names". But its a bit ironic when liberals call conservatives "hateful" or "closed-minded" or "ignorant" or "a bigget" just because they disagree with our opinions... Seems like the pot calling the kettle black to me.

 

I agree with you to an extent here. I'll add that the other day a co-worker from the UK chatting a few of us up about the cost of a potential purchase order for server hardware. In reference to the numbers he gave us he said, "These are my back-of-*** calculations", meaning he scribbled the numbers of the back side of his packet of cigarette.

It caught me by surprise, but figured it was a cultural thing, the use of the word ***. Of course, you should always try to be aware of your audience and their cultural sensitivities, so probably not the best choices of words at the office with some guys from the US.

 

that is not a fact at all.

 

Can Atheists and couples of different faiths get married in America?

 

A dog can't consent, so yes, it should be illegal. Same reason it is illegal to marry a child.

 

ACtually if you were to on the percentages (studies have actually been done) there is no difference as far as damage done between children with gay parents, and children with straight parents.

 

I do not understand this "gay civil rights movement" either. It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

First of all, Civil Rights isn't exclusive to African-Americans and never has been. It is a term to be applied to any minority fighting for equal rights against the established majority. Even if you are correct, and being gay is a choice (much like religion is a choice), they would still be a minority fighting for equal rights in the society within they live.

And, while there are many key differences between gays and African-Americans (one key difference being that Jackie Robinson could not hide that he was black and announce it after his career like a John Amaechi), there are also many similarities (Matthew Shepard vs James Byrd Jr).

But all of this is moot if you truly believe the LGBT community should not be discriminated against and should receive equal rights. Because that, in itself, means you support the gay rights movement, however uncomfortable that may make you.

This must be one of those miraculous facts that is somehow contrary to reality. Because in reality, I can be married in court or at city hall by a government official. In some states,such as California, I can even be married by having a friend or relative "get a one day designation of Deputy Commissioner of Marriages to perform weddings for a $35 cost". (http://weddings.about.com/od/gettingstarted/a/findofficiant.htm)

And I can do all of that as an open atheist. AMAZING!

Incidentally, the reason people want to "take religion out of it", is because, in this great country, we have something called separation of church and state. As such, your (or my) religious views should have absolutely nothing to do with our laws.

P.S. I LOVE Kenneth Faried for being open about this.

 

Now that's just a flat out lie.

 

I don't support the gay rights movement, call me a cave man. But regardless of religious views, but for the procreation and sustaining of the human species, I believe marriage is between man and woman.

Moreover, I'm really out of the loop because I also believe that men should be able to marry more than one woman at a time together, as long as all the women consent to it.

To add more fuel to the fire, I like bi-sexual women, but don't like (NOT hate) 100% lesbians and gay/bisexual men. I think the ultimate family is with a man and his bisexual multiple women, but I don't ever expect that to be the norm or acceptable in our society.

But just because I don't like lesbians and gay/bisexual men, doesn't mean that I feel that they should be abused in any way or not have basic human rights. But since I feel that marriage is between man and woman(women), I don't support gay marriage, and that's my choice and right whether anyone likes it or not.

But that is not the same as agreeing with other people who don't want gay marriage, but also want to abuse or make life difficult for gays in other ways strictly because of their sexual preference. I don't think their lifestyle is healthy for society, but I also don't think that they are hurting anyone else with their own choice of lifestyle.

So although it may sound mixed and complicated, I don't support the gay rights movement, although I don't support abusing gay people either. I don't hang around Jehovah's witnesses nor gay people, but would not have a problem talking to them, doing business with them, having a meal with them, laughing and talking with them, etc...but they are not probably gonna be in my inner circle of close friends.

 

Why has this thread not been moved to D&D? It has nothing to do with NBA action.

 

Never said you have to be religious to get married. But the history of marriage goes hand in hand with religion.

Agree or disagree, I really don't care.

I don't have the energy for a debate, just stating my opinion like the rest of you... Can I have that right without being called a lier please... Irony of liberals is hilarious!

 

So let me get this straight - a marriage is between a man or a woman, or a man and multiple women, but not a man and a man, a woman and a woman, or a woman and multiple men or man and multiple men or a woman and multiple women. And it's not only okay, but even preferable, for a woman to be at least kind of gay. OKAY! Got it.

I also have no problem with consensual polygamy provided all parties are of a legal age of consent. However, generally polygamist marriages are arranged and the women have little say in the matter and participate under the threat of being exiled and ostracized by their community. That isn't cool.

But so far as I'm concerned, if you're not hurting anybody and your relationship works for you, I don't believe I have any right to define it or tell you what you can and cannot do and think it's ridiculous there are laws that do. Talk about big government.

There are over 7 billion people on the planet. Are you seriously worried about the survival of the species? Because if anything, over-population is a much greater threat to our continued survival than 'the gays' could ever dream of being.

 

I never called you a liar - but if I did I would have spelled it correctly. :grin: