Australian Politics Forum - Marriage equality only for homosexuals

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 96693	Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals Reply #120 - Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:02pm .
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 96693	Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals Reply #121 - Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:03pm Come come, old chap. You've just said nothing again. Shall we start from the beginning?
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96693

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #122 - Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:20pm

Soren wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 10:54pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 10:33pm:

The only good thing about the gay marriage idea is that it causes the old boys an enormous amount of beard-tugging anxiety.

What a pointless debate. No one on any side has any good arguments. It's all a lot of hot air, signifying nothing.

You blather as if you were above the arguments. But your assessment is also a self-assessment - so bugger off, you are full of "hot air, signifying nothing".

Oh, I am, old chap. I couldn't give a tinker's cuss whether boys or girls get to marry each other or dogs or chairs or anyone or anything at all.

Why would I? Why would you?

And as for the idea of "marriage equality", why not hideous mother-in-law equality? Misery equality? Being nagged until death equality?

Funny how no one mentions that.

Back to top

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23818 Carlsbad, CA Gender:	Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals Reply #123 - Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:23pm As is your right not to care. Other people though tend to hold the moral decay of society a little more seriously.
Back to top	Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 107130 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals Reply #124 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 1:06am Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:23pm: As is your right not to care. Other people though tend to hold the moral decay of society a little more seriously. Hear hear Andrei.
Back to top	IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #125 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 4:49am

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:23pm:

As is your right not to care.

Other people though tend to hold the moral decay of society a little more seriously.

Moral decay? Gays have been gay since before those silly religions. Why shoudlnt they have the same rights as anyone else? this is the interracial thing all over again. you ppl never learn.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #126 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 9:04am

Grendel wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 7:54pm:

here ya go kiddies...

Quote:

Yes I agree with this. Sexual attraction isn't a "social construction". There's definitely something biological about it (which is a given when you consider its main purpose).

really?
yet different societies and cultures find different things attractive. in some cultures large woman are considered attractive in others not. Some older men. etc, etc, etc... so the attraction thing can indeed be a social construct. It can be learned by and ingrained in both sexes.

yes, really.

Quote:

There is a vast body of evidence indicating that men and women are biologically and psychologically different, and that what heterosexual men and women want in partners directly corresponds to these differences. The features men evolved to go for in women—youth, clear skin, a symmetrical face and body, feminine facial features, an hourglass figure—are those indicating that a woman would be a healthy, fertile candidate to pass on a man's genes.

These preferences span borders, cultures, and generations, meaning yes, there really are universal standards of beauty.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201010/the-truth-about-beauty

I'd read the article if I were you. The blank slate theory you're pushing has been scientifically (though not politically) disproven for decades.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #127 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 9:31am

Karnal wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 10:23pm:

... wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 5:37pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 5:33pm:

... wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 5:32pm:

Karnal wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 5:26pm:

He'd never been interested in guys before that.

He'd never admitted to being interested in guys before that, but one on the edges of the spectrum of gayness

tm

cannot choose to swing to the other side. One a scale of 1-100, 1 being the gayest gay and 100 being the heteroest hetero, a 51 may choose to be gay. There is some elasticity, but not to make a meaningful difference for the vast majority of people.

Gee - that's scientific. How do you know all this, Honky?

1.because I'm a genius.
2.because I am learned.

Learned, are you? Who learned you?

A gentle older man who learned you through the ways of learning with an abundance of patience?

Or merely by your own hand?

One thing is certain, Honky. A genius you are not. Misty will testify to that.

Yers, I thought that might push your buttons - It's usually those with a 115-120 IQ that get most butthurt over people having higher intelligence than they.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 35241
Gender: male

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #128 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 10:15am

good point rob,

when i won the qld state maths contest in grade 6 (competing against kids in grade 7 mainly), i got hauled up at assembley and lauded as a child genius.

all my life, people having a crack at me for anything to do with intelligence has just been water off a ducks back.
its simply never fired me up.

i suppose it would be like someone telling megan gale she's ugly or telling steve jobs he doesnt have an imagination Wink

.

it really is great to live with self confidence.

i suppose its a problem that sometimes one is therefore seen as arrogant, but arrogance is often the partner of excellence.

its how i know the lefties in the labor party just arent that smart. they fire up SO quick if someone calls them dumb. paradoxically, this only makes them seem dumber Wink

.

i apologise for my spelling and grammar, english bored the sh*t out of me at school and i felt it was a complete and utter waste of time. sort of like a fish being asked to study water Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals Reply #129 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 10:15am Sorry honky but you are wrong a quick look at past times even in western society shows that "beauty" and it's parameters have changed.
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96693

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #130 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 12:29pm

Bobby. wrote on Jun 7^th, 2013 at 1:06am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 11:23pm:

As is your right not to care.

Other people though tend to hold the moral decay of society a little more seriously.

Hear hear Andrei.

Oh, yes. Bobbie is most concerned about the moral decay of society - how to find a pair of Jimmy Choos in a size 13?

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96693

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #131 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 12:38pm

... wrote on Jun 7^th, 2013 at 9:04am:

Grendel wrote on Jun 6^th, 2013 at 7:54pm:

here ya go kiddies...

Quote:

Yes I agree with this. Sexual attraction isn't a "social construction". There's definitely something biological about it (which is a given when you consider its main purpose).

really?
yet different societies and cultures find different things attractive. in some cultures large woman are considered attractive in others not. Some older men. etc, etc, etc... so the attraction thing can indeed be a social construct. It can be learned by and ingrained in both sexes.

yes, really.

Quote:

There is a vast body of evidence indicating that men and women are biologically and psychologically different, and that what heterosexual men and women want in partners directly corresponds to these differences. The features men evolved to go for in women—youth, clear skin, a symmetrical face and body, feminine facial features, an hourglass figure—are those indicating that a woman would be a healthy, fertile candidate to pass on a man's genes.

These preferences span borders, cultures, and generations, meaning yes, there really are universal standards of beauty.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201010/the-truth-about-beauty

I'd read the article if I were you. The blank slate theory you're pushing has been scientifically (though not politically) disproven for decades.

Honky, there is no such thing in the social sciences as "blank slate theory". The tabla rasa is more a general axiom that goes back to early empiricism. It’s not proven or disproven - it’s an important, but not provable, idea. It’s a philosophical proposition.

It would make you look smarter if you stopped going on about things you don’t understand.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #132 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 1:12pm

Karnal wrote on Jun 7^th, 2013 at 12:38pm:

Honky, there is no such thing in the social sciences as "blank slate theory". The tabla rasa is more a general axiom that goes back to early empiricism. It’s not proven or disproven - it’s an important, but not provable, idea. It’s a philosophical proposition.

It would make you look smarter if you stopped going on about things you don’t understand.

'Social sciences' - now there's an empty proposition.

Back to top

IP Logged

Fit of Absent Mindeness

Gold Member

Offline

We need more fits of absent
mindedness

Posts: 1622
Brisbane
Gender: male

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #133 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 1:53pm

I see this thread is still cruising along - some posters conversation, reasoning and level of argumentative skills is second to none.

They offer well thought out arguments that are backed up by evidence that people couldn't possibly refute.

It's like they don't want people to question their opinions (yes they are opinions) as this shows everyone exactly what they are:

Unhappy bitter individuals who can't stand that others have better lives than them.

It must really bother some posters that homosexuality is seen as "normal" and "part of nature".

Imagine if these posters - or heaven forbid their children - turned out to be gay or lesbian.

They wouldn't disown them would they?

Back to top

Putting the n in cuts

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Marriage equality only for homosexuals
Reply #134 - Jun 7^th, 2013 at 2:11pm

Grendel wrote on Jun 7^th, 2013 at 10:15am:

Sorry honky but you are wrong
a quick look at past times even in western society shows that "beauty" and it's parameters have changed.

Not really. Superficial fads come and go but things like waist/hip ratio, youth and facial symmetry are universal and timeless. Maybe if you read the article I posted from psychologytoday.com, rather than sticking with psychology50yearsago.com, you'd be a bit more up to speed. But somehow, I think you've grown quite comfortable with your ignorance.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged