[durangotang]

Cultural marxists are making incredible headway in Brazil. First slut-walks, then criminalized hate speech, now this:

CNJ's decision, by a vote of 14-1, requires notaries to make gay marriage. [from Google translate]

Incidentally, I found this through Reddit today.

Here are some choice Reddit comments:





Move forward. Think forward. Lean forward. Lean in. Be open (to anything). Hope. Change. Progress. Anything else is racist hate speech, but thankfully you are probably old and dying. Are you a violent criminal supporter of the patriarchy? You must be homophobic. Hopefully you die. Don't worry, we are tolerant. You are a relic. Your beliefs belong in the past. We are the future.

[Alpha Hunter Zero]

You've got a masculine bitch as the president, this was going to come sooner or later. So much for Brazil being called a poosy paradise for much longer.

[speakeasy]

(05-14-2013 03:16 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

Move forward. Think forward. Lean forward. Lean in. Be open (to anything). Hope. Change. Progress. Anything else is racist hate speech, but thankfully you are probably old and dying. Are you a violent criminal supporter of the patriarchy? You must be homophobic. Hopefully you die. Don't worry, we are tolerant. You are a relic. Your beliefs belong in the past. We are the future.

I have someone just like this on my facebook. She's constantly posting about gay shit and cheering everytime another state passes gay marriage. I'm cool with her personally but that whole attitude really gets on my fucking nerves. Not just gay stuff, any liberal issue. She's one of those ultra SWPLs.

[jaakkeli]

The only thing I find more annoying than overly eager gay marriage advocates are people who actually find some reason to actively oppose it. Brazil has 200 million people so they'll probably actually find a few dozen gay guys to get married for a few months before they get back to their bath house orgies. Who cares, nothing is going to change, and everyone who thought the libruls capable of destroying society will once again get proven to be brain cell challenged.

Me, I'm the biggest supporter of gay marriage in the world just because it might actually become the issue that lets us drive the religious cranks and their useless, unwinnable fad causes out of the Right.

[kosko]

(05-14-2013 04:56 PM)jaakkeli Wrote:  

The only thing I find more annoying than overly eager gay marriage advocates are people who actually find some reason to actively oppose it. Brazil has 200 million people so they'll probably actually find a few dozen gay guys to get married for a few months before they get back to their bath house orgies. Who cares, nothing is going to change, and everyone who thought the libruls capable of destroying society will once again get proven to be brain cell challenged.

Me, I'm the biggest supporter of gay marriage in the world just because it might actually become the issue that lets us drive the religious cranks and their useless, unwinnable fad causes out of the Right.

I could care less what people do and whom they want to fuck.

But you can't tell me a Duck is a Chicken. Anybody whom thinks 2-men, and 2-women deserve the same legal protections in union as a Male and Female is messed. It can be a legal union with legal protections and rights but the LGBT community has to roll up their socks and figure out what specifics needs they would need factored in. I can smell the BS because they don't want any accountability or to ask any hard questions in sitting down and figuring out what rights and protections they need that would be unique to them. Don't come at me saying your shit the same shit as my mother and my fathers union because its not. My mother and father naturally produced me and and until Tina and Tammy, or Jack and Brock can do that they its not the same thing... sorry...

[2Wycked]

(05-14-2013 04:25 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 03:16 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

Move forward. Think forward. Lean forward. Lean in. Be open (to anything). Hope. Change. Progress. Anything else is racist hate speech, but thankfully you are probably old and dying. Are you a violent criminal supporter of the patriarchy? You must be homophobic. Hopefully you die. Don't worry, we are tolerant. You are a relic. Your beliefs belong in the past. We are the future.

I have someone just like this on my facebook. She's constantly posting about gay shit and cheering everytime another state passes gay marriage. I'm cool with her personally but that whole attitude really gets on my fucking nerves. Not just gay stuff, any liberal issue. She's one of those ultra SWPLs.

I hear that. When that gay marriage case went before the Supreme Court, my newsfeed was swamped with pro-gay articles and picks. That one pic of the Statute of Liberty kissing another woman was awful.

I had one particularly virulent SWPL - when Todd Akin had that ridiculous gaffe about rape - post over 100 posts about it in one day. Every site that talked about the issue she posted - she analyzed it to see if the writer "supported rape culture." Of course, just about every mainstream website failed. I gently suggested that his comment was more a bizzare interpretation of female biology than anything. In the progeny of comments that poured in after mine from her fangirls and fanboys, I was accused of hating women, supporting rape, being a white privileged male (even though there was no way to know race from my pic), etc. She deleted me off facebook, but not before telling me denying the existence of rape culture is the easiest way to support rape culture.

I should have known better - there is no reasoning with the beast.

[germanico]

Good for them.

It must be a great country if their most urgent concern is to decide whether or not they should let two guys marry.

[Hyperion]

Disgusting. Totally agree with Kosko.

[sheesh]

I don't really get all the fear of gay marriage. It is just ridiculous how fiercely people oppose gay marriage, something that doesn't affect them anyway.

I guess homophobia is the last form of acceptable "hate" in modern society. Racism and discrimination against other religions isn't any longer acceptable so homophobia is the last resort.
keep in mind that in the first half of the 20th. century many people thought the same about blacks,e.g. How ridiculous to think a black American should have the same rights as a white American...and now the US has a black president.

[durangotang]

(05-14-2013 05:57 PM)germanico Wrote:  

Good for them.

It must be a great country if their most urgent concern is to decide whether or not they should let two guys marry.

Not sure if serious?

(05-14-2013 06:35 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

I don't really get all the fear of gay marriage. It is just ridiculous how fiercely people oppose gay marriage, something that doesn't affect them anyway.

I guess homophobia is the last form of acceptable "hate" in modern society. Racism and discrimination against other religions isn't any longer acceptable so homophobia is the last resort.
keep in mind that in the first half of the 20th. century many people thought the same about blacks,e.g. How ridiculous to think a black American should have the same rights as a white American...and now the US has a black president.

I am not black, but I think it is an insult to black people to equate their civil rights struggle to gay marriage. And by the way, not accepting gay culture doesn't make you "homophobic" which is just a slur term created to demonize people with traditional family values. 100 years ago marxists of the time would use the term "counter-revolutionary" to politically demonize their opponents. Counter-revolutionaries were politically persecuted for their thoughts. These days modern day progressives (cultural marxists) label people racist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic, whether true or untrue, if they dare express dissenting opinion. Perhaps like your intellectual forefathers, you will succeed in stamping out "hate" from our modern society through hate speech laws. Long live the revolution comrade.

[sheesh]

(05-14-2013 07:09 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 05:57 PM)germanico Wrote:  

Good for them.

It must be a great country if their most urgent concern is to decide whether or not they should let two guys marry.

Not sure if serious?

(05-14-2013 06:35 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

I don't really get all the fear of gay marriage. It is just ridiculous how fiercely people oppose gay marriage, something that doesn't affect them anyway.

I guess homophobia is the last form of acceptable "hate" in modern society. Racism and discrimination against other religions isn't any longer acceptable so homophobia is the last resort.
keep in mind that in the first half of the 20th. century many people thought the same about blacks,e.g. How ridiculous to think a black American should have the same rights as a white American...and now the US has a black president.

I am not black, but I think it is an insult to black people to equate their civil rights struggle to gay marriage. And by the way, not accepting gay culture doesn't make you "homophobic" which is just a slur term created to demonize people with traditional family values. 100 years ago marxists of the time would use the term "counter-revolutionary" to politically demonize their opponents. Counter-revolutionaries were politically persecuted for their thoughts. These days modern day progressives (cultural marxists) label people racist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic, whether true or untrue, if they dare express dissenting opinion. Perhaps like your intellectual forefathers, you will succeed in stamping out "hate" from our modern society through hate speech laws. Long live the revolution comrade.

Please provide me with one logical reason why gay people shouldn't have the right to marry.

Are the people who marry affected in any negative way ? Does it violate the freedom/rights of others ?

"Traditional family values" is not the right category in such discussions imho. It really raises a red flag because that's the argument people usually resort to when they don't have any valid arguments. Most bs on this planet is being justified by tradition.

[NY Digital]

Why should gays have the right to marry? What the hell do they gain from it? Other than free shit.

A man and woman get married to have kids and raise a family.

2 men getting married is absolutely retarded. same with 2 women.

[Galnuc69]

(05-14-2013 07:44 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:09 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 05:57 PM)germanico Wrote:  

Good for them.

It must be a great country if their most urgent concern is to decide whether or not they should let two guys marry.

Not sure if serious?

(05-14-2013 06:35 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

I don't really get all the fear of gay marriage. It is just ridiculous how fiercely people oppose gay marriage, something that doesn't affect them anyway.

I guess homophobia is the last form of acceptable "hate" in modern society. Racism and discrimination against other religions isn't any longer acceptable so homophobia is the last resort.
keep in mind that in the first half of the 20th. century many people thought the same about blacks,e.g. How ridiculous to think a black American should have the same rights as a white American...and now the US has a black president.

I am not black, but I think it is an insult to black people to equate their civil rights struggle to gay marriage. And by the way, not accepting gay culture doesn't make you "homophobic" which is just a slur term created to demonize people with traditional family values. 100 years ago marxists of the time would use the term "counter-revolutionary" to politically demonize their opponents. Counter-revolutionaries were politically persecuted for their thoughts. These days modern day progressives (cultural marxists) label people racist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic, whether true or untrue, if they dare express dissenting opinion. Perhaps like your intellectual forefathers, you will succeed in stamping out "hate" from our modern society through hate speech laws. Long live the revolution comrade.

Please provide me with one logical reason why gay people shouldn't have the right to marry.

Are the people who marry affected in any negative way ? Does it violate the freedom/rights of others ?

"Traditional family values" is not the right category in such discussions imho. It really raises a red flag because that's the argument people usually resort to when they don't have any valid arguments. Most bs on this planet is being justified by tradition.

Gay marriage promotes androgynous gender roles, thus confusing gender identity, and straining gender dynamics. This results in lower marriage rates, lower birthrates, and higher out of wedlock births.

It is one thing for their behavior to be legal, free consenting adults should be able to associate as they wish. It is a whole other thing for the state to legally promote their relationships on par with heterosexual married couples. The state promotes heterosexual marriage because the husband and wife are the basis of the nuclear family. This unit is the most stable and beneficial to society for procreation.

[durangotang]

(05-14-2013 07:44 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

Please provide me with one logical reason why gay people shouldn't have the right to marry.

Are the people who marry affected in any negative way ? Does it violate the freedom/rights of others ?

"Traditional family values" is not the right category in such discussions imho. It really raises a red flag because that's the argument people usually resort to when they don't have any valid arguments. Most bs on this planet is being justified by tradition.

In an ideal world we wouldn't have the coercive power of the state interfering in every aspect of our lives. Unfortunately, we don't live in that world. I would 100% be in favor of getting the government out of marriage entirely. No more marriage licenses. No more tax benefits. No more marriage law (good luck with our common law system and legal precedents). If two men wanted to pretend to be married in that world, go right ahead. If they could find a church willing to marry them, what do I care. I imagine in such a world most people would look upon such "marriages" with amusement.

Again, unfortunately, we don't live in that world. If the state legitimizes such marriages then gay men will be adopting children and raising children because to do otherwise would be legal discrimination. I am opposed to that. I am opposed to equating a long term sexual liaison with marriage, the purpose of which is to form a union to raise children. The family unit is the basis of civilization as far as I am concerned, and gay marriage undermines the true meaning and purpose of marriage including the roles of the different sexes. It promotes androgyny and by logical extrapolation polygamy. It is a slippery slope and we shouldn't change the basis of our entire society to accommodate the desires of the 1-2% of people who happen to be born that way.

[sheesh]

(05-14-2013 07:46 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Why should gays have the right to marry? What the hell do they gain from it? Other than free shit.

A man and woman get married to have kids and raise a family.

2 men getting married is absolutely retarded. same with 2 women.

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

[NY Digital]

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

2 men or 2 women raising a kid isn't NATURAL.

It's literally unnatural. Evolution seems to disagree with you.

[Galnuc69]

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:46 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Why should gays have the right to marry? What the hell do they gain from it? Other than free shit.

A man and woman get married to have kids and raise a family.

2 men getting married is absolutely retarded. same with 2 women.

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

The primary purpose of marriage is family building(ie. procreation).

Even if a man and woman don't have children in marriage, they potentially can have children and still are the foundation of the nuclear family.

[sheesh]

(05-14-2013 07:58 PM)Galnuc69 Wrote:  

Gay marriage promotes androgynous gender roles, thus confusing gender identity, and straining gender dynamics. This results in lower marriage rates, lower birthrates, and higher out of wedlock births.

It is one thing for their behavior to be legal, free consenting adults should be able to associate as they wish. It is a whole other thing for the state to legally promote their relationships on par with heterosexual married couples. The state promotes heterosexual marriage because the husband and wife are the basis of the nuclear family. This unit is the most stable and beneficial to society for procreation.

So because of say 2 % gay marriages the rest of society will collapse and people will not be sure about their gender roles any more ? ?

[clever alias]

(05-14-2013 08:10 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

2 men or 2 women raising a kid isn't NATURAL.

It's literally unnatural. Evolution seems to disagree with you.

2 loving gay parents are far better than 2 shitty straight parents. you're reasoning that what is natural is inherently good is wrong.
vaccines are unnatural, therefore we were better off with polio.
my asthmatic brothet is better off without his inhaler because its natural.
every man/woman pair are automatically competent parents because its man and woman

[Galnuc69]

(05-14-2013 08:16 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:58 PM)Galnuc69 Wrote:  

Gay marriage promotes androgynous gender roles, thus confusing gender identity, and straining gender dynamics. This results in lower marriage rates, lower birthrates, and higher out of wedlock births.

It is one thing for their behavior to be legal, free consenting adults should be able to associate as they wish. It is a whole other thing for the state to legally promote their relationships on par with heterosexual married couples. The state promotes heterosexual marriage because the husband and wife are the basis of the nuclear family. This unit is the most stable and beneficial to society for procreation.

So because of say 2 % gay marriages the rest of society will collapse and people will not be sure about their gender roles any more ? ?

I never said collapse, children today and those yet to be born will certainly become more sexually confused as male feminization and female masculinization become codified into law. Though the normalization of homosexuality does coincide with the fall of a civilization

It is already promoted through mass media/social and education. 18 to 29 years old are 3 times more like than seniors(65 or above to be homosexual) and two times more likely than those from 30 to 49.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/158066/specia...-lgbt.aspx

[clever alias]

(05-14-2013 08:15 PM)Galnuc69 Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:46 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Why should gays have the right to marry? What the hell do they gain from it? Other than free shit.

A man and woman get married to have kids and raise a family.

2 men getting married is absolutely retarded. same with 2 women.

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

The primary purpose of marriage is family building(ie. procreation).

Even if a man and woman don't have children in marriage, they potentially can have children and still are the foundation of the nuclear family.

man has vasectomy. wife is barren from ovarian cancer. then what?
there are far more reasons to get married. inheritance, end of life decisions, somewhat important

[Hyperion]

(05-14-2013 08:10 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

2 men or 2 women raising a kid isn't NATURAL.

It's literally unnatural. Evolution seems to disagree with you.

It's always entertaining to see those who tend to brag about being pro-science completely forget basic human anatomy.

It is a chosen behavior, it makes no sense that a person could be born that way. Is pedophilia going to be the next cause du jour of the left?

I wish the West would model how the Russians handle this garbage.

[Galnuc69]

(05-14-2013 08:24 PM)clever alias Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:15 PM)Galnuc69 Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:46 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Why should gays have the right to marry? What the hell do they gain from it? Other than free shit.

A man and woman get married to have kids and raise a family.

2 men getting married is absolutely retarded. same with 2 women.

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

The primary purpose of marriage is family building(ie. procreation).

Even if a man and woman don't have children in marriage, they potentially can have children and still are the foundation of the nuclear family.

man has vasectomy. wife is barren from ovarian cancer. then what?
there are far more reasons to get married. inheritance, end of life decisions, somewhat important

Man and wife are the foundation of the nuclear family, so this would be acceptable. But this is nitpicking a very extreme example. One exception doesn't break the general rule.

You talk about inheritance, this ties directly in with procreation, I don't possibly understand how you could separate the two. When the couple dies, the property is passed along to the children.

[Hyperion]

(05-14-2013 08:21 PM)clever alias Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:10 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

2 men or 2 women raising a kid isn't NATURAL.

It's literally unnatural. Evolution seems to disagree with you.

2 loving gay parents are far better than 2 shitty straight parents. you're reasoning that what is natural is inherently good is wrong.
vaccines are unnatural, therefore we were better off with polio.
my asthmatic brothet is better off without his inhaler because its natural.
every man/woman pair are automatically competent parents because its man and woman

That's a strawman arguement. There's a reason you are naturally given a mother and father. There are consequences to life choices, if one chooses to live an alternative lifestyle then one of the consequences is that you will not be able to have children.

Two lesbians can't properly raise a son or vice versa. Neither of them are men. It's essential for that boy to have a father-figure and two lesbians simply can't provide that.

We've seen how well the state has done in replacing the father with the welfare state. I'm sure more totally unnatural social-engineering will work wonders for society.

[clever alias]

(05-14-2013 08:31 PM)Galnuc69 Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:24 PM)clever alias Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:15 PM)Galnuc69 Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 08:07 PM)sheesh Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:46 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Why should gays have the right to marry? What the hell do they gain from it? Other than free shit.

A man and woman get married to have kids and raise a family.

2 men getting married is absolutely retarded. same with 2 women.

Flawed reasoning. People can marry without getting children and do so every day. Some choose to stay without children willingly, other couples can't get children.

Are you going to deny a man or woman the right to marriage if infertility is known beforehand ?

Marriage is much more than rasing children. If gay people want to make the legal commitment to care for each other, then that is a good thing in my eyes.

The primary purpose of marriage is family building(ie. procreation).

Even if a man and woman don't have children in marriage, they potentially can have children and still are the foundation of the nuclear family.

man has vasectomy. wife is barren from ovarian cancer. then what?
there are far more reasons to get married. inheritance, end of life decisions, somewhat important

Man and wife are the foundation of the nuclear family, so this would be acceptable. But this is nitpicking a very extreme example. One exception doesn't break the general rule.

You talk about inheritance, this ties directly in with procreation, I don't possibly understand how you could separate the two. When the couple dies, the property is passed along to the children.

and if there are no children?