The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

"Coming out" guide for gay conservatives?

Kuli is right about Biblical marriage. In the Bible, marriage was allowed between a man, a woman, and his slaves or concubines. Even though Abraham was married, he was allowed by God to sleep with his slave girl to produce a male heir.

But hey, those evangelicals keep on fucking that "marriage cannot be changed" chicken, almost as much they keep beating that dead "if gays marry, then we'll be marrying children, dogs and furniture" horse. Because we all know that minors, animals and inanimate objects can give legal consent, right? Even my table agrees with me.
 
GiancarloC said:
No. Gay people don't have the same rights as straight people. A gay couple does not have the same rights as a straight couple. So what's your point? I'm tired of that ridiculous line "but you have the same rights... you can marry someone of the opposite sex!!!". And why would a gay person do that? Stop trying to tell gay people what they can or cannot do.
Click to expand...

Definitely.

"Marry" in Western culture these days means "we're in love, let's hook our lives together". It doesn't mean children, it doesn't necessarily mean "till death do us part". Straights can do that; they're in love, they can hook their lives together . . . gays can't do that.
 
JayQueer said:
Marriage in the United States, has been defined for the past 230+ years as the union between one man & one woman.
Click to expand...

If such a definition truly existed for 230+ years, why did marriage require a law to define it in 1996? If the definition already existed, no such law should have been required.


I rarely use the phrase "marriage equality" (which liberals love to use), because we technically already have "marriage equality" -- any gay man can marry any woman he chooses. If a gay man were to go to a county office to request a marriage license with a woman, no county clerk would ask "Are either of you gay? If either or both of you are gay, we cannot issue you a marriage license."
Click to expand...

Blacks like Rosa Parks also had equal rights with whites, so long as they sat at the back of the bus.


So yes, gays DO want a redefinition of the word & institution of marriage.
Click to expand...

The word "marriage" can be used in many ways that has nothing to do with a man and a woman. "The marriage of flavours", "the two car-parts marry together perfectly", "married to his work" etc. Words are not defined by laws or rules, they are part of a living, ever-changing language. Words are defined by the way they are used. Fifty years ago the word "gay" had a very different meaning to it's typical use today.


Maybe it's because gay men have a stereotype of being fabulous and clean and responsible. I don't know. But if a person specifically says in their housing ad -- "Females or gay men only" -- isn't that discrimination against straight men?
Click to expand...

50 years ago, single women would have only advertised to live with other single women. The intent hasn't changed: women often prefer to live in an environment free of sexual tension. The only thing that's changed is the recognition and acceptance of gay men within wider society. Plenty of straight guys prefer to live in houses with only guys too. Maybe they just wanna watch football in their jocks while eating pizza without plates, without having some girl whining about it. That's equally discriminatory.
 
GiancarloC said:
No. Gay people don't have the same rights as straight people. A gay couple does not have the same rights as a straight couple.
Click to expand...

Gay people in the United States may not have the same rights, but they do in Canada. That's probably the bigger problem for these retrograde conservatives. Why does equality work here? Not one church has been forced to perform a religious ceremony against its superstitions. And yet everyone enjoys the same options under the law regardless of sexual orientation.

And if you really want to fry the brains of the right wingers, polyamorists are even going to have their day in court.

Their arguments may not carry the day, but they are being taken seriously and will win or fail on their merits.

"Jesus never said nothin bout multiple spouses! How do I know which one to keep in the kitchen if there's more then one!"
 
It is really sad that once again. Jayqueer has created yet another thread seething with self hatred and homphobia....all presented under the bullet-proof guise of 'Hey Guys...what do you think?'

We get it, Jayqueer.

You voted against Homo marriage.

Your position....no matter how you seem to couch it...never changes. You are determined to continue to use JUB and this forum to defend the idea that marriage is a one man, one woman state...all the while crooning about how you want to be the perfect 1950's housewife, married to the manly man of your limited fantasies.
 
bankside said:
Gay people in the United States may not have the same rights, but they do in Canada. That's probably the bigger problem for these retrograde conservatives. Why does equality work here? Not one church has been forced to perform a religious ceremony against its superstitions. And yet everyone enjoys the same options under the law regardless of sexual orientation.

And if you really want to fry the brains of the right wingers, polyamorists are even going to have their day in court.

Their arguments may not carry the day, but they are being taken seriously and will win or fail on their merits.

"Jesus never said nothin bout multiple spouses! How do I know which one to keep in the kitchen if there's more then one!"
Click to expand...

Just bears repeating.

And bluntly, the nonsensical argument about homos having marriage equality has lost any potency at all. It is the refuge of scared straight christian women.

It is like saying that blacks always had the same rights as whites. They were still allowed to drink from water fountains and ride the bus in many states.
 
^ Strangely, in addition to Canada, the institution of marriage has not collapsed in Argentina, Belgium, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, or the Brazilian state of Alagoas, all of whom have legal same-sex marriage.
 
andysayshi said:
^ Strangely, in addition to Canada, the institution of marriage has not collapsed in Argentina, Belgium, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, or the Brazilian state of Alagoas, all of whom have legal same-sex marriage.
Click to expand...


I'm also not aware that straight marriage in Vermont, New York or Massachusetts, just to name 3 enlightened states I am very familiar with, is now being destroyed by homos taking vows.
 
It actually makes me sad. Just like evolution, anti-slavery, interracial marriage and God knows what else, it's just a matter of time before conservatives embrace same-sex marriage. The Catholic Church will eventually capitulate and claim the religious texts against it are just "allegorical"; other churches will reluctantly follow over another generation. If we hadn't seen it all before it would be understandable. But the reality is social progress must be bargained and fought for, and those who are against it will bitch and moan until they ultimately claim they were always for it.
 
andysayshi said:
It actually makes me sad. Just like evolution, anti-slavery, interracial marriage and God knows what else, it's just a matter of time before conservatives embrace same-sex marriage. The Catholic Church will eventually capitulate and claim the religious texts against it are just "allegorical"; other churches will reluctantly follow over another generation. If we hadn't seen it all before it would be understandable. But the reality is social progress must be bargained and fought for, and those who are against it will bitch and moan until they ultimately claim they were always for it.
Click to expand...

Kinda like, "But we think blacks are wonderful! Why, just last month we bought a matched set!"
 
Doesn't Tiffany or Bendel publish something that will do? AT least there, and Bergdorf, they can properly outfit.

(I was always a Bonwit Teller type. but those days are gone.)
 
bankside said:
Gay people in the United States may not have the same rights, but they do in Canada. That's probably the bigger problem for these retrograde conservatives. Why does equality work here? Not one church has been forced to perform a religious ceremony against its superstitions. And yet everyone enjoys the same options under the law regardless of sexual orientation.

And if you really want to fry the brains of the right wingers, polyamorists are even going to have their day in court.

Their arguments may not carry the day, but they are being taken seriously and will win or fail on their merits.

"Jesus never said nothin bout multiple spouses! How do I know which one to keep in the kitchen if there's more then one!"
Click to expand...

If my Grandfather was born in Canada and later moved his citizenship to US, does that make me have a dual citizenship?
I can hope can't I!
 
White Eagle said:
If my Grandfather was born in Canada and later moved his citizenship to US, does that make me have a dual citizenship?
I can hope can't I!
Click to expand...
I'm just guessing, but I think that if your father was born in Canada, you would be eligible; grandfather, probably not. Might as well check with INS anyway. ;)
 
chrisrobin said:
I'm just guessing, but I think that if your father was born in Canada, you would be eligible; grandfather, probably not. Might as well check with INS anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

Dang! You mean? I was just throwing that in to see what kind of response I'd get from them.
 
If you support the Republican Party, you are not a conservative. Period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top