French march by tens of thousands against homo "marriages" and adoptation

[joea]

Well, I don't care if gays want to get married, but am not sure I like the idea of homosexuals adopting children. So am I PC or not??

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by joea

So am I PC or not??

Depends if you can replace your spleen for a newer, more powerfull version.

Damn it, I've been suporting gay rights for so long now, I aquired a taste for Lady Gaga

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by joea

Well, I don't care if gays want to get married, but am not sure I like the idea of homosexuals adopting children. So am I PC or not??

It's called schizophrenia.

Serious, the basic idea behind marriage has been an economic partnership serving as the fundament for raising children. In other words: family founding. Yes, there are kings marrying princesses, and poltrical marriages and all that - but that is not the everday purpose that marriages have served for for 99% of the ordinary people. And yes, there are bad marriages, and families better never have come to existence, and children suffering from alcoholics and tyrants, and wifes being beaten from their thugs of a husband. And still: the general idea why a man and a women came togather and decided to spend their lives togather, roginally was about sharing the workload of a shared place (farm), and ordanizing the educaiton adn caretaking of thechiuldren. Both mother and father to their best and individual (-gender-related) advantages).

It makes little sense to principally try to separate "marriage" from "family/child raising". That many couples do not have children, does not chnage the principle behind the historic roots of the institution.

We have immense dmeograpohic problems in Wetsern societies, too few children. The family gets decosuntructed by modern, left-leanijng and materialistic conceptions, who often also aim at simply egoist motives of the actors: avoiding the responsibility that comes with family, putting job and career, sexual adventuring and freedom to "discover oneself" and such before responsibility. It seems, from a sociological perspective as well as a culture-historic perspective, it does not work too good. Nor has it made people more happy, self-fulfilled, and reasonable. We try to destroy families today. Put children into anonymous institutions at the age of 1 year so that their mothers - a term nor declared to be sexual discriminating - should both enter the workforce pool agfain and should also prove feminist ideology right by makiong career in high posts of the economy where they should at best gain 50% parity with male actors - not caqrting oine mooent for the question whether that really is what women in genersal want. That there are fewerr women in certain fields, and fewer men in other fields, may be owed to the simply fact that men and women have different interests, and set different priorities. But feminists, every woman has to be a female soldiers for the sake of gender ideolgy whiczh says that there are no diffeercnes between girls and boys buit that such diferences in interests and role-finding are totally artifical and transported by culturer and education only. Which has been so often found to be wrong. But when the wrong thing gets repeated often and loud enough, it nevertheless gets mistake for the truth, eventually.

Genderism, destroying the family institution, homo marriage, feminism - it all comes form the same basic mindset, the same ideologic direction. Add to this poltiicians attempts to lure people into submitting themselves into dependency from social nanny-nursing by the state that pays for everything and takes away all responsibility form them to make these well-nursed crowds depend on the parties and vote for them, securing them in power, and you have successfully outlined the basic scheme that explains why things are being pushed over the edge. It is no accident. It is wanted.

Another reason why I have serious doubts about democracy. See the German book recommendation ("Prolokratier") I just gave in the "Notes from Germany" thread. "Notes in German" would now be a better title, maybe, but the thread changed slightly in idea since it began.

[Armistead]

Skybird,

What you're saying let's stay in the dark ages and not progress with culture. The problem with the American family has nothing to do with sexuality. Marriage and relationships have evolved. Still, why not promote marriage for all people? I honestly don't care who loves who.

I realize you would probably like to go back to the day of no civil or equal rights, but it ain't gonna happen,

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

You "tolerate"? Who put you in charge?

Give the guy a break ... he means in his mind he tolerates this union.

You must have a language problem not a spelling problem

[Morts]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Another reason why I have serious doubts about democracy.

Oh stop the drama Skybird, just because you cant get it your way.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by geetrue

Give the guy a break ... he means in his mind he tolerates this union.

You must have a language problem not a spelling problem

Neither. I have a problem with people who "know" that they're right and insist that if we don't listen to them we'll destroy civilization as we know it.

That said, I don't know that he's wrong. I try to listen to all sides of every argument. I just wish we could have a rational discussion rather than a diatribe or lecture.

[geetrue]

Hey! Hottentot ... that's one cute puppy.

The TSA (Homeland Security) wants to train your puppy to smell out homosexual men and gay women for further examinations in the back room.

Is he available for this training?

Originally Posted by Hottentot

Me too. But this puppy doesn't like homos. Hehad some seriously stern views on the matters of purity even when he was less than 8 weeks old. Also, he was very keen on claiming living space from other puppies...

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Neither. I have a problem with people who "know" that they're right and insist that if we don't listen to them we'll destroy civilization as we know it.

That said, I don't know that he's wrong. I try to listen to all sides of every argument. I just wish we could have a rational discussion rather than a diatribe or lecture.

Your really saying you don't like the way skybryd's mindgate works and you would prefer for his mindgate to operate more along the same principles as yours do.

In other words you just want to continue long standing arguements in lew of a true debate, correct?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by geetrue

In other words you just want to continue long standing arguements in lew of a true debate, correct?

Not really. I love a good debate. I just don't see one here.

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by geetrue

Hey! Hottentot ... that's one cute puppy.

The TSA (Homeland Security) wants to train your puppy to smell out homosexual men and gay women for further examinations in the back room.

Is he available for this training?

If I'm not completely mistaken, he already has an occupation. One involving reins and a person with a white cane.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Skybird,

What you're saying let's stay in the dark ages and not progress with culture. The problem with the American family has nothing to do with sexuality. Marriage and relationships have evolved. Still, why not promote marriage for all people? I honestly don't care who loves who.

I realize you would probably like to go back to the day of no civil or equal rights, but it ain't gonna happen,

That is your propaganda, not mine.

Nonsense, and I honstely don'T care for who has which friends, what kind of colleagues, what people to live together in a community. I just say that the insttiotuion of the family is spoecial, and important, and of vital interest, and while i8t is indeed under attack already and destroyed in the name of left idoelogy and better availabiulty of the "human resource" on the labour market so that poeople sopend more time in jobs instead with their children and families, well, while I realsie that this takes place, this doe snot atumotaically means itr is somethign good that happens. It is not, I see, becasue the degenration of moral and socialstandards, the desintegration of self-inhibitory limits regarding egoism, exhibitionism, violence and overstepping moral limits, does not just fall from the sky but is caused by soemthing, and a major part from that is the modenr chnages ine ducatiuon - or lack of education that it often is. The family should be a legally protected and materially priviliged institutions indeed. Gay or lesbian couples mean nothing for a soceity,. they are totally irrelevant for society - like I am irrelevant to society as well in the meaning that this single that I am does fulfills no contributiing function by just being a single. Fpor society, gay couples mean nothing, and I fail to see anything being accopmplished by two men or two women living together. They are free to do so already. Why giving them the ssame respoect that I claim should be reserved for family? They just do not earn it, like I also do not earn any special respect for being a single, or for meeting a friend and watching a movie with him/her/them together. It is of no interest for society whether we do that.

Hell, some idiots even go as far as demanding that schools should encourage young children to expolore homsoexcual experiences as well in order to undersatand them better and not to "discriminate" them. Hell, am I the only one thinkling that this is just plainout SICK?

It is not discmri8nating atr all to tell gay or lesbian couples they are nothign special. A family is somethign special, and it gioves a contriobtuion to the fututree of a society that friendship or colleagues alone cannot come up with. And here is the problem of the whole gay debate: that it is called discrimination if interst groups and activists are not given special respect for - essentially for nothing, they did nothing that justfies the special inetesr and restct that cinstanbtly claim. Gays are just gays. Singles are just singles. Friends are just friends. Fine. More they are not. No contribution. No acchievement. Nothing special and wonderfl in their nature. The most absurd propaganda ohrase in all this is this stupid word of "gay pride". Pardon, but when by your genes you are gay, or transsexual, or crosssexual - what is there that justifies a feeling of "pride" Should I be proud of my hair colour now, or what? My hair is what it is, and pride has nothing to do with it. My sexual orientation and preferences are what they are, and again pride has nothing to do with it. If somebody would have talked of "white pride", he alraedy wpuld have been crucified by political correctness, and would be randmarked as a racist. But "gay pride" is acceptable a term? Well, to me it just ilustzrates how stupid and upblown ther whole "debate" is. If somebody is proud for being gay, he really has lost his marbles, I would say. He is what he is - and full stop right there. Leave him that way, but special rewspoct payed, pride atributed, equal status like for couples that indeed contribute to the social interest of society by aising children, hopefully - no, not with me.

And once again I ask why gay and lesbian couples deserve so much more respect, than singles like me. What makes the gay couple so much more valuable and special and precious that it should be given legal privileges that singles do not have, even beneficial tax status maybe, that again singles do not enjoy? Sorry, that is dicrimination of singles.

that one must explain modern Westerners why family and a protected framework for the raising of children is important and of vital inerest for the social health of a society, tells me how sick and really degenerated our sense of sociality already is. We crucify and destroy ourselves over our pedantic micro-balancing of political correctness. But all you need to do is visit a hectic kindergarden with 2 and 3 year old that have been taken away from their parents and mothers, and compare that to the situation of children playing in the framework of a home with mother or father around, and no hectic and constant nervousness around. There is a reason why chikldren if being forced into Kindergarden and early schooling too young develope a weak immune system, and have a very much higher risk of developeing concentration deficits, behaviour aberration, psychological problems, and in the adulthood after shcool also run a highe rsk for psychological symptoms like depressions, suicides tendencies, and personality changes. The roots for who we become, get polanted in our very youngest chidhood already, and if society messes around with that phase of a human's biography, than this makes itself felt sooner or later.

Many of you guys just donb'T see that. You take opportnistically isolated glimpses at this or that, and refuse to see that they are all linked and connected in one higher order of framework. Like somebody seeing a tree, and look, there is another tree, and a third tree, why is there even a fourth tree! and look, there is another one, where did it come from, and the sixth tree over there, why is it there? If you get consummed by always self-isolated details always, and never open the eyes to see greater contexts, then you just miss that you are not dealing with just individual trees, but witzh the higher context that his ecosystem called "forest" is, and that forms its own relaities and runs its own rules - that you cannot conclude on when always just looking at one tree at a time.


We are a heterosexual species, biologically and psychologically evolutionary processes has made us and many other species to run like this. Aberrations take place, from gay people and cross-sexual people (wrong sexual identity locked in a wrong biologic body) to albinos. But albinos are no norm, nor are bleeders or carriers of other defective genes causing serious diseases. Homosexuality is no disease maybe, but it is an aberration from the way our species is meant to run the survival process. One should not deny this, and that is why I say that while e should not discriminate albinos or gays/lesbians, there also is no reason to give the equal respect and priviliges protective status like social institution that - different to gay couples or singles or albinos - indeed play a vital role for the society. Being gay or lesbian, does not make you anything special, it only makes you different. You have nothing gained by being that that deserves special respect and tribute being payed to you. There is no reason to be proud of being gay, like there is no reason to be proud of being a white, a red-.haired, or having eyes with blue iris.

So lets stop this daily attention-craving. Let'S worry more about the pitiful state that the family-institution is in. Different to singles living single or gays marrying or not, that IS an important and decisive issue for a change. And as I have indicated, it is embedded in a much greater context.

Not everything that is sold as "progress of culture", in modern present times indeed is a progress. All too often now it is just the rejection and destruction of culture, and declaring dilletantism a virtue and chaos resulting from the lack of substance the glory of the new world order.

I think I see the problem, Skybull really wishes Elton John was his mum so he could have got bedtime stories like this

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by Skybird

The most absurd propaganda ohrase in all this is this stupid word of "gay pride". Pardon, but when by your genes you are gay, or transsexual, or crosssexual - what is there that justifies a feeling of "pride" Should I be proud of my hair colour now, or what? My hair is what it is, and pride has nothing to do with it. My sexual orientation and preferences are what they are, and again pride has nothing to do with it. If somebody would have talked of "white pride", he alraedy wpuld have been crucified by political correctness, and would be randmarked as a racist. But "gay pride" is acceptable a term? Well, to me it just ilustzrates how stupid and upblown ther whole "debate" is. If somebody is proud for being gay, he really has lost his marbles, I would say. He is what he is - and full stop right there. Leave him that way, but special rewspoct payed, pride atributed, equal status like for couples that indeed contribute to the social interest of society by aising children, hopefully - no, not with me.
......

Being gay or lesbian, does not make you anything special, it only makes you different. You have nothing gained by being that that deserves special respect and tribute being payed to you. There is no reason to be proud of being gay, like there is no reason to be proud of being a white, a red-.haired, or having eyes with blue iris.

So lets stop this daily attention-craving.

It's very simple.

Gay pride exists because gay shame exists. It's a simple reaction. Because it's still a difficult thing to admit for young people, because gays and lesbians still get treated like subhumans around the world. They're still publicly executed for it, countries are even today trying to pass laws that makes homosexuality a capital offence. This alone is a reason for pride in being gay, open, and free. Because a lot of people are not. They live their lives in secret and in fear.

For example, in my home country it was still illegal to be a homosexual less than twenty years ago. The Supreme Court said that keeping homosexuality illegal kept the population healthy and ensures no threat to traditional marriage.

This alone is a reason for pride. If you see it only as attention-seeking, then I don't know how to explain it clearer.

You haven't a clue what you are talking about.



As to your larger point, that recognising that LGBT couples should be able to get married legitimises aberrations that don't produce children and reverse the Western decline of birthrates due to genderfascism and feminism and forced KinderGarten-gay-sex-play-time and not seeing the forest for all the albinotrees something something new world order....

I'm sorry, I really tried. I don't get it.

Gay or lesbian couples mean nothing for a soceity,. they are totally irrelevant for society - like I am irrelevant to society as well in the meaning that this single that I am does fulfills no contributiing function by just being a single

It is possible to be a contributing member of society while not lying flat on one's back either producing or conceiving children. You could adopt an orphaned child with your partner, for example. Bring a little love into a life that needs it.

Not everything that is sold as "progress of culture", in modern present times indeed is a progress.

I'd call the recognition of equal rights for homosexuals a mark of good progress towards our "Treating Each Other Like People" merit badge.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Skybird

That is your propaganda, not mine.

Clearly. You've got propaganda all of your own.

Nonsense, and I honstely don'T care for who has which friends, what kind of colleagues, what people to live together in a community.

Just so long as they aren't able to enjoy the same rights as you.

We are a heterosexual species, biologically and psychologically evolutionary processes has made us and many other species to run like this. Aberrations take place, from gay people and cross-sexual people (wrong sexual identity locked in a wrong biologic body) to albinos. But albinos are no norm, nor are bleeders or carriers of other defective genes causing serious diseases. Homosexuality is no disease maybe, but it is an aberration from the way our species is meant to run the survival process. One should not deny this, and that is why I say that while e should not discriminate albinos or gays/lesbians, there also is no reason to give the equal respect and priviliges protective status like social institution that - different to gay couples or singles or albinos - indeed play a vital role for the society. Being gay or lesbian, does not make you anything special, it only makes you different. You have nothing gained by being that that deserves special respect and tribute being payed to you. There is no reason to be proud of being gay, like there is no reason to be proud of being a white, a red-.haired, or having eyes with blue iris.

So homosexuality is a genetic defect that must be combated by preserving marriage for people that are heterosexually oriented only. Of course, homosexuals are also the product of heterosexual intercourse, so the only solution to the gay problem is to prohibit breeding entirely.

So lets stop this daily attention-craving. Let'S worry more about the pitiful state that the family-institution is in. Different to singles living single or gays marrying or not, that IS an important and decisive issue for a change. And as I have indicated, it is embedded in a much greater context.

I agree. I get so sick of heterosexual couples demanding that special status be reserved for them and them alone.