America isn't at the vanguard of the gay rights movement; the issue is far less controversial in the EU. If China were copying the US, gay marriage would be allowed in a few provinces and cosmopolitan urban areas, but still generally illegal.
I don't think gay marriage will eliminate discrimination against gays; in fact, the inconvenient imposition of the gay marriage debate was one of the things that helped get Bush elected a second time. OP's poor reasoning notwithstanding, my unequivocal support for gay marriage is noted.
Oh yeah, with Dando’s rich reasoning, the question is hereby amended; “Should China legalize same-sex marriages in some provinces?”
Why the word "should"? I don't think it is the government's business unless the legalization can help protect this group from public insultation. The affection between people is not something that can be regulated by law. Maybe this should be put in the law: Encourage heterosexual marriage for the prosperity of human beings.
I should mention that I'm against marriage in general. But if straight people should have to suffer the existence of such an institution, so to should homosexuals.
Legalizing same-sex marriage would do more than protect homosexual couples from insults. Example: presently, a person in a homosexual relationship is not legally entitled to visit their life partner in the hospital. It sounds like a small thing, but if you were in a relationship like this, you would probably prefer that the government treat your homosexual relationship with the same respect as heterosexual ones.
So, like the fiendish contrarian I am, I submit the opposite of Mengmeng: Abolish heterosexual marriage because it is artificial, anachronistic, and utterly antithetical to romantic love. People don't need additional motivation to procreate, so the government shouldn't be involved.
Besides, heterosexuals already have plenty of comparative social advantages over homosexualities. They don't need the additional benefits of marriage.
Danzo,I told you before to stop asking. ;)
@Dando, I used to share the same opinion with you, but after a second thought, I changed my mind:
Why marriage should be writen in the law, it's more about a moral thing than about cold law: to promote the equility and the possibility that everyone can find their lover. Why? monogamy can minimize the possibility that one person has more mates. In this way, most men and women around the world can finally find their mates rather than some has many but some has none. Though this may not work ideally, it's the best so far.
truely, love should be the motivation for marriage, but everyone should share the responsibility to prosper our species. Though it can be done with modern tech, but it would be great if the offspring is the outcome of love between a man and a woman. Like the story in Rio or Ice age.
@Mengmeng, Exactly what part of my unique brand of homespun insanity did you once agree with? I think you're being falsely diplomatic. Nobody will take you seriously if you say you used to agree with a Dando. It's like saying you used to be crazy, but now you're medicated.
Polygamy, or having more than one spouse, is evil, but not because a person is fucking more than one mate, but because the power relations between those mates is unequal. What you say about monogamy being a solution to the problem of polygamy is only true in China, where less than a century ago polygamy created widespread inequality, especially for women, who were treated as little more than property of their spouses.
Did monogamy finally make women equal in China? Survey says: fuuuck no!
Even in China, there's absolutely no truth to the idea that heterosexual marriage ensures that everyone will have a mate. This is absolutely ridiculous. With there being more men than women in China, it stands to reason that the only way it would be possible for everyone to have a single mate is if homosexual marriage were legal.
Really though, the entire argument against gay marriage is predicated on the idea that the species cannot prosper through man-man or woman-woman love. Cutting edge technology isn't even necessary if you just allow them to marry and adopt (although in China adoption has a stigma altogether separate from homophobia). Homosexual couples are equally capable of raising children and teaching them moral values. You would appear to believe that they suffer from some sort of moral deficiency, and no amount of politeness or diplomacy can obscure the plain and simple homophobia of this pattern of thinking.
Mengmeng said: "Like the story in Rio or Ice age."
Fictional. Cartoon. Animals.
Last post on this topic:
I didn't say monogamy can solve the social problems, but it helps in a certain degree.
Homosexual and heterosexual marriage is really the business of the couple themselves, it's their lives, not the business of celibatarian like me. I hold no phobia for any of them. I think children are the gifts to human beings, I WISH they can be raised up by their biological parents. I am not against adoption, there are many poor babies around the world, it would be great if more people think about adoption. I planned to adopt one or two when I have enough financial income.
@Dando, seems I shouldn't humilate you by having had the idea of against marriage in whatever form. But you got your revenge by biting me so hard. So no need to further humilate me with the word diplomacy which I hate very much.
Cartoon is the works of man, it conveys the genuine thoughts of man.
Talking about human right in EU and the US... well, it's like a pot calling the kettle black.
As for respect of privacy,hmmm, News of the World... Murdoch has just made headlines.
Gay marriage..., please go ahead.
"I didn't say monogamy can solve the social problems, but it helps in a certain degree."
It helped in China. Now, its value is strictly moral, and therefore there is no "certain degree" to which it remains beneficial to society in a strictly utilitarian sense. You can try and cite corrolation statistics about married people being happier or living longer, but as any sociologist will point out, that's usually incidental to married couples having relatively higher socioeconomic status. When you adjust for income, there is no evidence at all showing that marriage is a net positive for society.
Moreover, there's a lot about the institution that remains archaic and unequal.
Even granting that it is beneficial, you're dodging the question, and not gracefully. The government is ALREADY involved in sanctioning heterosexual marriages. If you can accept that, then why not extend the same rights and privileges to homosexuals? If you can't accept that, then why not abolish marriage altogether? Why do you think straight couples need further encouragement to procreate? What makes you think that straight biological parents are more fit than gay adoptive parents?
Unless you think gays are inferior, what possible reason could there be for preferential treatment? Whether you'll admit it or not, this is homophobic reasoning, and I feel no shame in ridiculing someone for holding such a view.
Pornography is the works of man, it conveys the genuine thoughts of man.
"I do not agree with legalizing same-sex Marriage because if it was so I would not be born"
How would gay people getting married prevent your parents from having sex with each other and conceiving you?
"as a belieber"
And do you believe in the tooth fairy as well?
@Swag, [...] Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay and Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all sorts of bizarre behavior [...]
Your words confirm my suspicions, your repressed homosexuality. Seems you are afraid to become gay, your heterosexual tendencies don´t seem enough stronger and you need the society coercion in order to remain ¨heterosexual¨ .... huh?? maybe you just have a heterosexual leanings...
But you are wrong, because If you would even taken the trouble to ask some people with this sexual orientation, you would have known by their own words that gay people born gay, they don´t become gay through environment. Or in other words, be gay is not like a virus, you don´t become gay by a kind of infection ...
If you take a look to the human history, you will notice that this called -environment- most of the time is what bends the natural tendencies of the people, including their sexuality.
For example, you can look for information about some of the organizations of ex-gays, and then you will see that they achieved it using -classic conditioning-. Old trick. These people needed strong efforts to cease to be gay, but... (here is the important thing) they needed do something to be gay in the begining ????
Be gay is not
Contre nature, deny your own tendencies, yes !!
Swag, The Bible never mentions gay marriage. It condemns homosexuality as adultery, but the possibility of gay marriage is never discussed.
"Talking about same-sex parenting: A man and a woman are so far necessary to conceive a child biologically, it would be unnatural and therefore wrong to develop a homosexual or same-sex parenting descent in any context whatsoever."
This reasoning would also condemn heterosexual adoption.
"oh yeah, I also heard that children can not succeed without a male model and female model at home. That's why single parents are not allowed to raise children.Can anyone tell me if it`s true or not?"
I heard that Christians have a lower IQ compared to similar populations of atheists. That's why their opinions can so easily be disregarded. Can anyone tell me if it's true or not?
I heard that Christians have a lower IQ compared to similar populations of atheists
I guess someone is unwittingly inviting the wrath of our Archbishop and High priest here.
I’ve not heard from the Arch lately. Anyone knows his way about?
@Micky, It would only seem as though I did that unwittingly if you are utterly bereft of wit yourself.
I was responding to Swag's assertion: "I also heard
that children can not succeed without a male model and female model at
home," which is unbelievably fatuous and insulting not only to homosexuals but single parents because it implies a deficiency. Not to mention it's been refuted by sociologists.
I deliberately rephrased the statement substituting another insult disguised as an observation to point out how unbelievably fucking stupid and insulting it is to conclude that homosexuals are poor parents without presenting any evidence.
Here's the twist: Atheism and IQ are positively correlated (in the US, anyway). But there is no scientific evidence, however, showing children adopted by homosexuals have diminished opportunities, (but that's probably because only wealthy and privileged homosexuals are currently able to adopt).
@Jorrit, True, but so were adulterers, so there's the moral equivalence. Adultery is also more widespread than homosexuality, but we aren't nearly as zealous in maintaining obstacles to it.
Why is homosexual marriage considered more of a threat to the institution of marriage than heterosexual divorce or adultery?
Eh. But I suppose I was trying to troll the crosstitutes more gently. Oh well.
We need States to legalize bestiality too. We are in the world of freedom.
My scriptures I've been scrutinizing this morning tell me that homosexuality is unnatural not adultery. It's in the Bible, Romans 1:26-27, NIV. "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
Gay are born gay...? I have lived in a country which got a majority of gay population, I saw young people getting converted to gayism..
It's rediculus when someone gives his opinion about homosexuality to be labeled homophobia.
I see no point in being polite to people who dehumanize others on the basis of sexual orientation. There is no equivalence between homosexuality and bestiality. Animals aren't sapient. To make such a comparison is beyond crude and I really don't need to add further insult to High Priest's self-injury.
"I have lived in a country which got a majority of gay population, I saw young people getting converted to gayism.."
Evidently, homophobia is the least of your mental problems.
I'm not racist, but black people shouldn't be allowed to have kids because they are predisposed toward single motherhood.
Omit homophobia, substitute racism. It's the same ugly prejudice, and you negros should be ashamed of yourselves for throwing another oppressed minority under the bus just because the thought of buttsex puckers your poopers.
From Biology and sexual orientation (wiki):
"No simple, single cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, but research suggests that it is by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences"
Or, if that's too much reading for Swag:
No one is born straight. All scientific studies including those by straight scientists, have not found any straight gene or straight brain center. There is no medical test for a straight gene. There is no scientific or DNA test for sexual orientation. Numerous examples exist of people who have successfully modified their sexual behavior, identity, and arousal or fantasies.
That said, homophobes could certainly demonstrate the ability for people to adjust their sexual orientation if they would just go fuck themselves.
I do not know where to lodge my complaints. Anytime I raise a topic you guys will fight and fight over nothing..
Why you guys can’t see the question. "Should same-sex marriages be legalized in some Chinese provinces"? Yes or no with reasons
From Swag -I also heard that children can not succeed without a male model and female model at home. That's why single parents are not allowed to raise children.
From Dando - I'm not racist, but black people shouldn't be allowed to have kids because they are predisposed toward single motherhood.
hahaha I even had no troll-balls to say that.... fucking Dando HAHA
What? What's wrong? Did I just shit in someone's corn flakes?
I just want everyone to be clear that I'm not racist. And you know this because I prefaced an atrociously racist statement by saying "I'm not racist," just like Swag and High Priest always do before they say something homophobic.
@Micky, are you honestly surprised that your controversial topic would attract... controversy?
inb4 Dando = skinhead neo-Nazi shitstorm
That's unfortunate, Swag, because I really do want this topic to turn that way. Prejudice is prejudice whether it's done on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, or skin color.
There are historical parallels between opposition to gay marriage and opposition to miscegenation (race-mixing).
Winning, for me, would mean that you and others stop speaking of homosexuality like it's a disease or otherwise indicative of a deficiency of human character.
"I'm not racist, but black people shouldn't be allowed to have kids because they are predisposed toward single motherhood"...Dando Z
You have daddy issues huh?!?!
Don't rely upon your statistical nature, evolve and get a big one. The subject of Black men is something that you are unfamiliar with , especially American ones. Too irrelevant 4 me.
My brothers live and work hard for their wife and kidz. What about you anchorman? You probably have a lot to say yet do nothing.
I guess my first comment was censored : ( Thank you very much for stopping my opinion from being published......
Are you kidding me? There are no gay people in China! "Sarcasm"
@Swag and @High Prist take a look to these two gay blacks, they are enough pretty to use their real face on internet, no like u 2 hahaha both of u r ugly on the outside and inside !!!
now, shut up your mouths!! smells shit when you two speak!!
I just want everyone to be clear that I'm not racist
I'm not racist, but black people shouldn't be allowed to have kids because they are predisposed toward single motherhood.
What? R u guys astonished by these statements? I've said this b4 here.. Well, this the Neo Nazist of the Wlib.
I really can't see who is talking Swag! WHo is this? ha ha, God have mercy.
I really can't see anthing brother...Nothing, really nothing.
@Coco, "If you legalize same-sex marriage, it will undermine our core traditional value"
Will it really? If so, how? And would it undermine traditional values more or less than divorce or adultery?
@Virgil, This isn't about me. I'm not gay or black. All I did was point out the parallels between homophobia and racism. Clearly, it has struck a nerve, because instead of acknowledging the logical connection, you've decided to take what was a clearly ironic statement personally and use it as an excuse to fling a couple of piss-weak insults.
Daddy issues? Nah. My parents divorced, but I was pretty close to my dad, as well as my stepfather and grandfather. Perhaps it's because I come from a broken home that I can empathize with gay couples and single parents. We tend to overstate the importance of biological ties. What's more important than being biologically related to one's parents is to be loved by one's parents. Accepting the idea that gay couples are less capable of loving their children is absolutely indicative of homophobic prejudice.
(African-Americans are in fact more likely to come from single-parent households, but they're also more likely to be closer to their grandparents and extended family. As they say: "it takes a village to raise a child.")
By the way (and I only level this criticism against people who are or pretend to be native speakers): your English sucks pustulent horsecocks. It's even worse than a number of non-native speakers on this site. If you're going to claim that you speak
on behalf of African-Americans, you should set a better example. Presently, your inability to articulate yourself properly is utterly disgraceful.
in after Dando is a neo-Nazi.
"I really do not understand what you mean by this, but there’re more divorce stories in US than in China"
That's only because there is a huge social stigma attached to divorce in China. It isn't because your marriages are "better" or "happier". Not to mention that divorce has little or nothing to do with gay marriage.
What Dando is saying is that adultery and divorce already occur in China - in straight marriages. Do adultery and divorce "undermine traditional values"? If so, then you guys are already screwed.
You don't even need gay marriage to undermine any values - you guys are doing a fine job undermining them yourselves. 小三, 二奶...yeah. You guys REALLY care about those traditional values over here.
@Coco, "I really do not understand what you mean by this, but there’re more divorce stories in US than in China;"
There are more prostitution stories in China than in the US. So what? This is irrelevant.
I asked the simpler questions first, but I didn't expect you'd be able to answer them anyway, because you can't. There really is no evidence that gay marriage will undermine traditional values. It's pure fantasy dressed up as conventional wisdom.
And it's insulting; you believe that homosexuals lack traditional moral values. That's homophobic reasoning.
Even if this "gay threat" weren't total bullshit, it begs the question: since divorce and adultery are far more widespread than homosexuality (in ALL countries), then why aren't there more laws forbidding divorce and adultery? Why do you think homosexuality is a bigger threat than divorce or adultery?
Furthermore, stop talking about "cultural differences" as though China is the only place in the world with a traditional values system. It's not. In fact, since most Chinese people are atheists, the argument can be made that their traditional values system is not as deeply ingrained as that of the Judeo-Christian West.
"We foreigners" have fundamentally identical taboos against adultery, divorce, and homosexuality compared to Chinese people, and fifty years ago Western conversations about these topics would be far less civil; today, we can talk about these topics politely because our educational institutions are more able to examine controversial social issues calmly, rationally, objectively, and empiricically.
So where you see cultural differences, the developed world sees differences in the development of education institutions.
Of course legalizing homosexuality undermines traditional values. Why in most societies homosexuals were regarded with detest and digust? It's because it's something unnatural and contrary to normal way the nature works. This is pure perversion, simple as that(My opinion). In some societies, for instance in the US before the 60s, people were against gay couples, and people hated them an there were acts leading to violence and a hostility against this group of people.. there were organized hate groups that really have veciously attacked gays and to procecuted them. That's why, society's rethink of sex orientation was crystalized in the term of homophobia...this is just in the 60s
If people say that people are born gay and upso facto they are allowed to do whaterever...Today am asking for bestiality to be legalized because some are born so and we need to recognize that they human and they have made their choice and we need to respect it.
You guys make this shit too easy:
Of course legalizing miscegenation (race mixing) undermines traditional values. Why in most societies mixed couples were regarded with detest and digust? It's because it's something unnatural and contrary to normal way the nature works. This is pure perversion, simple as that(My opinion). In some societies, for instance in the US before the 60s, people were against white-black marriages, and people hated them an there were acts leading to violence and a hostility against this group of people.. there were organized hate groups that really have veciously attacked miscegenators and to procecuted them. That's why, society's rethink of miscegenation was crystalized in the term of "show us the birth certificate"...this is just in the 60s
Homosexuals are people. Animals are not.
You know what other historically oppressed group was dehumanized through comparisons to animals? You get three guesses. The first two don't count.
High Priest and Swag's comments, although disgusting, are not without precedent.
A similar comment from U.S. Senator Rick Santorum:
In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —"
(At this point, Jordan commented, "I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out," coining a phrase widely used in connection with this incident.)
Thanks to homosexual rights advocate and noted advice columnist Dan Savage, Santorum's name became a neologism meaning "that frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex".
To celebrate Gay Pride week, I propose that we come up with an equally abhorrent neologism for our beloved High Priest "Desmond".
@Scott, why do u think my idea is retarded and urs is advanced? I'm not interfering in people's Biz, aren't we sharing opinion here? Sure, admitting that those guys were assaulted, and that the original connotation of homophabia originated...When we talk about racist we can see the likes of KKK. Scott I got gay friends...but that doesn't change my me idea of seeing such practice as unnatural.
@Lao Lee, yes, we legalize everything, since people say people are born gays....why not , legalize necrophilia and pedophilia...why not that?
I strongly agree with the Senator Rick Santorum, he is totally right. Marriage is an alliance (not at contract) Between a man and a woman. All other definitions, are false.
Hear that, folks? Our High Priest is firmly committed to spreading santorum.
Let's reward him with a sort of earthly immortality which his imaginary friend in the clouds cannot, because we're all going to rot in the ground when we die, the end.
desmond (in the rough),
1.) n.- solidified fecal matter or foreign objects contained in the rectum which may alternately impede or enhance anal sex
"He said he was constipated but I threw it up his pooper anyway because I thought maybe my meat missile might meet a desmond in the rough."
2.) n.- a person, thing, or idea which is utterly contemptible, foul, or disgusting, which nonetheless possesses charming idiosyncrasies, yet not enough to redeem
Please enjoy the following statement from the American Psychological Association:
Lesbian and heterosexual women have not been found to differ markedly in their approaches to child rearing (Patterson, 2000; Tasker, 1999). Members of gay and lesbian couples with children have been found to divide the work involved in childcare evenly, and to be satisfied with their relationships with their partners (Patterson, 2000, 2004a). The results of some studies suggest that lesbian mothers' and gay fathers' parenting skills may be superior to those of matched heterosexual parents. There is no scientific basis for concluding that lesbian mothers or gay fathers are unfit parents on the basis of their sexual orientation (Armesto, 2002; Patterson, 2000; Tasker & Golombok, 1997). On the contrary, results of research suggest that lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children.
Once you've enjoyed that, please enjoy this quote from the Journal of Marriage and Family:
Because access to legal same-sex marriage is so new and rare, we do not yet have research that compares the children of married same-sex and different-sex couples. Even so, scholars have achieved a rare degree of consensus that unmarried lesbian parents are raising children who develop at least as well as their counterparts with married heterosexual parents (e.g., American Academy of Pediatrics, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001; Tasker, 2005).
And, for good measure, here's one more tidbit from the APA:
Results of research to date suggest that children of lesbian and gay parents have positive relationships with peers and that their relationships with adults of both sexes are also satisfactory. The picture of lesbian mothers' children that emerges is one of general engagement in social life with peers, with fathers, with grandparents, and with mothers' adult friends—both male and female, both heterosexual and homosexual. Fears about children of lesbians and gay men being sexually abused by adults, ostracized by peers, or isolated in single-sex lesbian or gay communities have received no support from the results of existing research.
(Enjoy Gay Pride week, everyone!)
This thread is kinda gay.
Speaking of imaginary threats to traditional values...
We got plenty of those arguments blogged online and yet, they don't prove that homosexuality is natural. Dando, u even try to quote the Bible saying that homosexuality is considered as adultry, which is false. U r the heavi wheight champion
I often tell u to be tolerant and give prove to ur audience that u r right with what u say. U might write much but yet, saying nothing than using big word which these girls u r luring can't understand u. Intolerance is what makes u insult others in each comment u post here. Everyone knows ur theatric antics.
Now u r against Senator Senator Rick Santorum understanding of of marriage, here it's not about marriage topic anyway, what was ur definition? U quoted him as if he pooed in the public market, yet that definition is known to be natural since the danw of time. But I do understand that pervert and immoral like u have got nothing than embracing any wind that comes each way. But that can't stop me to share my true perception.
I stand firm and still, most States can legalize gay marriage, that's fine, though I won't vote for it. But, we go further to legalize bestiality, and others that Lao Lee mentioned.
Legalize Bestiality too.
You know what else isn't natural and is also mentioned in the Bible as an abomination? Polyester.
Keep my decrees. Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
Take off your shirt and check the tag. You might be committing an abomination equivalent to homosexuality.
I said it before and I'll say it again: there are many animals which practice homosexuality. It occurs in nature. It's not supernatural (even if you call them fairies). Ergo, homosexuality is natural.
Now prove that it's unnatural. What, huh, how, because dicks shouldn't go into butts? Please. God gave man prostate glands for a reason.
If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die.
Adultery is still permitted by law. Why not homosexuality?
Miscegenation was once compared to bestiality and described as unnatural. Black people were once considered to be less human than animal. When WLIB's black population expresses such virulently homophobic attitudes, it makes the baby Jesus cry go on a heroin binge.
@High Priest, bestiality is already legalized in many countries, by definition is when a white woman marries a black ugly guy like you... fucking ape!! A guy from the KKK told me that...
btw, thanks for give a free ticket to say whatever I want !!!
why? I quote your words: Why in most societies homosexuals were regarded with detest and digust? It's because it's something unnatural and contrary to normal way the nature works. This is pure perversion, simple as that (My opinion).
Fucking shame on you!! what a lame excuse!!!
Terminator@aka ugly colored moron......an ass is an ass, no matter female or male, look at the pic of my new pillow-biter, is fucking ugly, right?? but he is real tender on the bed. You seem that u r looking for a black ass, try with him, @swag and @Morticia know him, so maybe they are also gay, bi ... im following here what @High priest said upstairs, if you hang out with gays, you become gay, listen to him he is the wisest ape from his tribe
his profile and pic:
@Terminator, you flatter me, but I don't fuck with apes from Senegal or Nigeria, Sorry man, but u can try with @Yes sir or @Bedtyger, they are without charm and fucking ugly, but they are poor enough to sell their asses in BJ and ....... @Bedtyger doesnt spit !! swallow !!! that´s nice :D
@terminator, You seem a newbie here. if u need a guide about the brothels in beijing, ask @High Priest (although u 2 probably will end in the zoo, fucking monkeys, homesick, u know?) , If u need some drugs, ask @Bedtyger,
if u need hang out with a retard, ask @Swag.
They are (among others) the garbage gang... u didn´t know it?
sorry uncle DD, I thought was clear, because if u think about garbage... and u think about the opinions of some members in this forum..... bright conections appear
First, I'm always the butcher, never the pillow-biter
Second, I don´t hang out OR FUCK with dogs from senegal or nigeria, i don´t want fleas, genital warts or AIDS... U understand?
(continued) ... hahahaha ... T ... you mean the part that I am stupid, or the part that I am not normal? either way, thanks, but if even I can tell that some of those idiots above are really idiots, then they would have to be idiots ... right?
... nice timing by the way, where did those idiots disappear to? is it some sort of tag team or secret identity?
@Terminator.... go to grab some chicken in the nearest KFC AND full ur mouth, asshole!!! :D
if you don´t have money... well, fuck u poor scum!!
what u say to this, huh?
@Terminator, bro, don´t forget the other niggers: @High Priest, @Godfather, @Swag and @Bedtyger. Holyshit!!! what stupid names they choose for their fake profiles!!!
Oh my good Lord; Uncle I've been wondering where you have been. Thanks for putting some salt into my soup.
Hope Godfather and Archbishop wont be around to sour the soup. did I step on anybody's toe?
@Mini, Where are you originally from?
@terminator, my name is not super good, is super cool, i took it from the stupid name of @yes sir, and added
mini-, this mean that I´m less stupid that all of you... u dig me? not even a little, huh
btw, I have enough money, I don't need sell my body like your sisters and mother, sorry if your daddy left his family or died fighting with a lion or was raped to death by a gangbang of gorillas in heat.... I really sorry about that
if u need money to live in BJ, u can ask @Bedtyger, he can give u a job (selling drugs) or If u want fast money, u can suck the @high priest´s dick.
@DD, do not be curious; In some provinces cause same-sex marriages are legalized in some states in US; which includes Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and the District of Columbia. New York is the sixth and largest U.S. state to allow gay marriage
@terminator, listen carefully, maybe is a common bussiness in your tribe exchange sex for money or beads, but is not normal outside of your own kinky folks. I´m not in sell like ur mother.
@Mini, Please don't use the word "nigger" as a pejorative label. I'm not one of those Politically Correct liberals who says it's never acceptable, even from black people. There are times in which it is acceptable to say "nigger," though. To wit:
That's it. No 'etc.' No exceptions.
Really, dropping the N-bomb is a few orders of magnitude worse than my "I'm not racist, but..." comment about black single mothers. At least what I said it was to illuminate the irony of black dudes copying the rhetoric of white supremacist racists and applying it to homosexuals.
Also, you and Terminator should cease your jailhouse heterofaggotry this instant or GTFO and solve your problems like Real Men--at the glory hole. Also, remember the solemnity of this occasion: during Gay Pride Week, we're all pitching AND catching.
@Dando, my bad!!! after read some comments of @High Priest and @Swag in this thread, I thought that we were in a comedy club, where
anything goes in order to mocker. homophobia, racism...whatever
well, I didn´t get it. Therefore, I suppose that I´m out, because I don´t find any pleasure in build rational arguments with the purpose of try change the mind of such idiots like @HighPriest and @Swag, you still didn´t realize that they are impermeable to reasons... I think that the best way to teach them is through slaps.
Gays will be gay no matter what the law says, so why not let them openly be together in marriage? Does turning your head and refusing to acknowledge their existence serve any purpose?
I don't think so.
I don't think anyone expects Swag or High Priest or any other pigheaded crosstitute to change their minds about homosexuality. Their hearts are already hardened. The Holy Spirit cannot enter a closed vessel. However, they do serve as convenient straw men. They are effluent effigies, eager to burn.
At the risk of sounding silly and self-important I would like to express an earnest hope that, at the very least, the violence of my troll-fu is a little informative as well as entertaining. If I can provide some cheap laughs and a new perspective for even just one spectator, I feel like my archdickery has paid off, and I can sleep well at night knowing I have done the Lord's work.
On the other hand, getting mired in the Biblical bullshittery does make the conversation a little inaccessible to the locals. We should've been talking about same-sex marriage in China, where nobody even gives two squirts of piss about what our imaginary sky daddy says about buttfuckin'.
Chinese people just know that ZOMG HOMOFAGS WILL FUCK ANYONE OR ANYTHING, EVEN DOGS. OR 凤姐. THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED WITH THE YOUNG ONES.
And of course this is quite silly, because we're talking about conservative gays who are eager to start families. Family fags don't fuck around!
Sexually promiscuous queers do exist, but, like yours truly, they're not clamouring to get married, because that would be absofuckinglutely moronic. Why buy the cow/bull when you can have the milk/dick for free?
In China? are you kidding??? you legalize the freedom of speech at first, ok???!!! Nuts!!!
And what is wrong with homophobia? That's normal--to keep the entire human race from extinction~~fuck you, gays and lesbians!!!
And agree with Dandoz: “shitty” poeple (such as "tramps" having no regular income, irresponsible sex-maniac negros, those living on social welfare, etc) should be denied the right of having kids~~
@ Undermoonlight - It's that inferior, human-phobic thinking that denies you more than one kid in your own Country.... Oops, BTW you're not a "shitty" person (such as "tramps" having no regular income, irresponsible sex-maniac negros, those living on social welfare, etc)...But you're still as restricted as a mouse in a shitty hole.
If you can manage to upgrade yourself to a normal free human (such to whom freedom of speech beyond a forum wouldn't be a luxury item), Then I will be able to move on to the next stuff: To wonder what you would do if you happened to be God!
Let Gays be Gays, Let Lesbians be Lesbians, Let Wishes be Wishes and Let Laws be Laws... In the End, what will be will be!
Many people in other countries suffered long and died hard in order to secure freedom of speech for their descendants. That you don't yet have it here is evidence that your ancestors never gave a fuck about you. So why hold it against the queers? Do you really think freedom is so finite that it must be rationed out?
Faced with any sort of malignant social problem, you'll groan, say "中国有很多人," throw your hands in the air, and claim there is no solution, but now all of a sudden you're worried about extinction? Why is every social problem in this country so readily reducible to crude Malthusianism (with Chinese characteristics)?
Yes~ok~let African savages and jewish rascals do their tricks~I don't know what kind of pople would assert the size of their dicks in order to gain a sense of..whatever~~
Ok, i agree with your strawman satire~`but what do you know about China? where do you get your knowledge? from the prosptitute or prostitute-like country-girls that you have fucked with??~Pretence will never get you any real sense of pride, but more inferiority~~you know what？you are a joke~we talk to you, stimulate you, just to see how amusing you can be~~
And one thing i have to admit that the current status of the communist party goverment restricting people's freedom of speech (and free access to info sources) is really "playing into the hands of many foreign consmen"--they come to China and sell what poeple can actually get freely given the free access~~esp. those so-called consultants~~
In the same token, no one expects a pervert as Dando to get things right. Intolerance and arrogance
I have said this before to our Reverend Dando that his showboating he displays here seems to me that he's got some upbringing issues. But if not mistaken, he just tesfied that he grew up from a broken family, but went to connected much the father.
Hillarious, so kids born from whities are likely to grow up with a single father then:)
Research suggests that, women are the most suitable people to bring up a child. They've got more patience than men, thus, kids they bring up are mannered and well behaved.
Dando doesn't have a mother? That's high-larious. Don't ever change.
I've never had enough money to spend on sex, so then why have my last two ladypals been Beijingers from far higher on the socioeconomic ladder than me? Probably because my natural talents at self-effacing false modesty are incomparably superior to those of face-conscious local dudes, and my faceless existence affords me the luxury of making plenty of jokes at my own expense.
I'm the humblest motherfucker in all of motherfuckingdom.
Here's a poem I just wrote. It's called "This Fucking Thread".
haters gonna hate
faggots gonna fag
ain't even gotta brag
Don't brag for getting girls who will buy ur Mcdonald all the time because they are Beijinger or from higher socio-economic ladder. U should ur your talent to make money. If not it's another form of prostitution. They are buying you. Trust me my bother, wake up don't be lazy, use your talent and make a better use of it then fucking these small girls. Knowledge itself is power, only if we use it wisely, you luck wisdom. No worries am praying for u.
But, no one can stop u as those nymphomaniac know u r the best.. they see ur angelness side each day. Go ahead.
DD, am the most riduculus ole guy on the Wlb
__The fucker of two beijing local girls/possibly old women (usually foreigner-ass-kissers, and it's typical among beijing girls living in Hutong now or brought up in Hutong areas/slums): I'm not local, I was born in Macao, okay?
About face-saving actions I've taken--Yes, it's on purpose, because i hate to see those stupid Chinese kids blindly embracing any foreign (western) items (ideas, fashion, goods, etc.)~~and i'm an educator, and i think i have the responsiblity to remind my own coutrymen of respecting our own cultural identity~~~
Hahahaha ... yes, yes, yes ... I am, aint I? My point being that, you are BOTH funny and ridiculous ... I did not say that you are the most ... read, can you?
That's further info I gave u. Aren't u happy? lend me ur eye glaces then
Hahahahaha ... yes, yes ... you are funny ... you must have come from some funny farm ...
Correct, and which ditch are u coming from too?
So, Lao Lee, you dare to represent the entire foreign population in China? What a philosopher of "universal vision (over-generalization)"!!!
I think you two are either too blind to see the word "blindly" in the statement i made or deliberately mess up with me~~anyway, I'm not talking and responding to you~
So you used my opinion to launch compaints against me??~~and you think you are more avant-garde than me?~~what are you talking about? deliberatly making fun of chinese people for what they actually not do or say? what's your purpose? threaten me?~~I'm not responsible for explaining everything, and i certainly want to preserve the pride--what a nonsense--talking to people who have no sense of reasonableness~~
Chinese poeple are "too not proud" of their culture~~is about to lose their identity~And I don't know what kind of place you stay (in China)~"lao wai this, lao wai that"--that's what uneducated countrymen and those who get a position in the Chinese social system because of the failure of the communist party would do~~okay, I'm gonna shut up~the sole purpose of my responding to you is that i don't wanna some young college students generate any misunderstanding out of my words because of the influence from you guys...
All right~So, Conscience can be bad??!!~What is evil or good? are you preaching christianity in this modern world??~so you transit from multi-culturalism to dualism over a moment of inspiration or jokingly impulse??
Hahahahahaha ... Priest ... you are either ridiculously stupid and has no idea what you said ... or you are a comedian ... either way, your parents should be so proud ...
Undermoonlight ... you said that you came from Macau, right? I myself originated from Hong Kong (transited through Australia), so I understand what you said here ... I dont believe Chinese would ever lose identity, at most, evolved in the international sense, similar to HK and Taiwan ... and the "not too proud" thing? it's defnitely not true, otherwise, you (and many others like you) wont have said what you did ...
... I dont disagree however that a population of Chinese is misguided about the western culture, there are two main groups here:
1. those who has little or no knowledge of the language, but only heard about it via local news that might have been badly translated, and often think that the moon is rounder over there ... that, as you know, had happened for more than a century and it is still happening ...
2. those who get exposed to western's real life via "Sex and the City" or "Big Bang Theory" or similar ... they, interestingly, somehow mixed entertainment with reality ... which, I believe, had led them to attempt a western life style in China and hence confused the hell out of them ...
So, chill ... China is still China, certain things will not change, while some will evolve and some will be thrown away ... yes, one might say that it is being "corrupted", like that they with the old Hong Kong, but that's part of the harsh reality of a culture's evolution ...
He's from Macau? That would explain the homophobic butthurt. I'm pretty sure that's the only place with a CPC office that's painted pink. I'm not even kidding. When you visit Hong Kong and Macau back-to-back, it becomes readily apparent which island was colonized by Protestants and which island was colonized by Catholics.
But hey. We're talking about gay marriage here, so the Chinese culture conversation is a bit of a red herring. Homosexuality wasn't invented by the West. It has nominally been a part of Chinese culture since ancient times.
It is also remarkable that many Taoist gods and goddesses live alone or together with some equal deities of the same sex. The very common example is Shanshen (山神, mountain spirit) and Tudigong (土地公, "keeper of earth", i.e., local god). Every place has its Shanshen and Tudigong, and they sometimes live together. Shanshen and Tudigong are often both males (Tudigong is always a male). More intriguingly, they sometimes manifest themselves as an old man and an old woman (such appearances are described quite often in the classical novel Journey to the West). On top of this, the philosophy of Zhuangzi puts an emphasis on freedom and carefreeness, so anything that is seen as 'out of the ordinary' is really 'ordinary' according to the natural way of things. (source: wikipedia)
While these conventions make explicit mentions of homosexuality rare in Chinese literature in comparison to the Greek or Japanese traditions, the allusions which do exist are given an exalted air by their frequent comparison to former Golden Ages and imperial favorites. A Han Dynasty poem describes the official Zhuang Xin making a nervous pass at his lord, Xiang Cheng of Chu. The ruler is nonplussed at first, but Zhuang justifies his suggestion through allusion to a legendary homosexual figure and then recites a poem in that figure's honor. At that, "Lord Xiang Cheng also received Zhuang Xin's hand and promoted him."
Homosexuality is certainly unfilial according to Confucian traditions. But that still doesn't explain why it should be illegal. Plenty of unfilial activities are perfectly legal in China.&#
Homophobia isn't unique to China, either.
"And what is wrong with homophobia? That's normal--to keep the entire human race from extinction~~fuck you, gays and lesbians!!!"
This isn't exactly homophobia with Chinese characteristics. If one could credibly say that Chinese people are at risk of extinction, it would be due to environmental devastation, and buttfuckin' ain't contributing to that at all.
Unless, of course, you think homosexuality is like a disease that might rapidly spread throughout society if not prevented through the imposition of social inequalities. In that case, it seems more like you're afraid that the homo lifestyle is more attractive to the average person, who only stays straight for fear of alienation.
In any case it's just rehashed zero population growth fears ripped off from Western homophobes. In the end, this sort of obtuse fuckheadedness just drives home the point about Chinese people uncritically adopting the worst aspects of Western culture. Viewed through this myopic lens, perhaps homophobia, like racism, was invented by Westerners. All he's doing is copying.
I'm in complete agreement with our fenqing's objections to foreign worship. I came here hoping I might get a respite from American ethnocentrism--imagine my disappointment that Chinese girls can't get enough of Eminem, Michigan's most beloved misogynist, and now in the mediocre twilight of his career!
On the other hand, I think Chinese people are unsophisticated consumers of their own culture. The whole problem can be summed up with a quick glance at the medical system: unscrupulous doctors over-prescribe antibiotic medicines for minor infections, giving rise to antibiotic-resistant superbacteria rarely seen in Western countries of the medicine's origin. And then you've got Chinese traditional medicine perverted into a completely ineffective, superficial, and superstitious stopgap measure for the institutional shortcomings of the medical care system.
The really cute thing about this analogy? Chinese and Western medicine aren't so easily distinguished, because early Western medical doctors copied and refined Chinese traditional herbs into the drugs we still use today. Often, the only difference is in how the medicine is ingested--whether you drink herbal tea or swallow a pill, your body doesn't care.
However, it would appear as though the bitter taste seems to linger in the mouths of the tea-drinkers...
Associating Comrade Deng with Stalinism is a little problematic. Deng's market-oriented policies more closely resemble a rightist tendency, but I catch your drift. You're talking about totalitarianism, and the more apt comparisons to Hitler, Nazism, or fascism would put you on the wrong side of established Internet Lawl.
Mao, with his cult of personality, is more the Stalinist, though, not the least because his love of Lysenkoism resulted in disastrous famine. The Sino-Soviet split was largely because the Maoists thought Khrushchev wasn't loyal to Stalin's vision of Marxist-Leninism.
Deng's ascension was the nail in the coffin for Chinese Stalinism.
I have a close friend back in Michigan who's a Stalinist. He earned his history PhD around when I graduated. Alcoholic nudist. Gentlest guy I've ever met. His Stalinism was more about the united/popular front youth organization tactics of those premature anti-fascists who would later be denounced as communists and comm-symps for opposing Hitler before it was cool.
@Scott, Aye. Like I said, I got ya. "X with Chinese characteristics" is a meme I trot out rather frequently. I just can't pass up an opportunity to wax propagandistic.
I see wut u did thar. I'm okay with this. Why hadn't I thought of it? From now on Michiganders are Michigunners.
@Borja, Kill yourself.
@Pete, It's pretty easy for anti-marriage people like me to dismiss the cause for similar reasons, but one ought to recognize that there are advantages to marriage. A person in a homosexual relationship has no legal right to visit their life partner in a hospital if hospital policy stipulates that "only family members and spouses" may visit.
I know I sound like a broken record when I trot out that example every time this issue comes up, but I ain't gay or married, so I can't readily present the myriad of other privileges of marriage.
@Scott, Shhhh! Don't ruin the moment.
I got a few questions. Why are some male gays walking with big bags? What do they contain? Diapers?
@Ayiela, would you mind telling me, in lesbian world, as you stated you had a wife, does that mean u were her husbad isn't it? What's the role of a Lesbian husband, in real life and bed? My question might sound stupid, but stupid guy like me would like to know.
.....When you look down from heaven and see it burning it is a symbol of our love, of what we always had and what we always will...
I Wonder Ayiela, are u a believer or a converted atheist as Reverend Dando? If u are a believer as u talked about heaven, your dead wife isn't in Heaven, thus, she can't look down from heaven to dee the fuming scent...
"I Wonder Ayiela, are u a believer or a converted atheist as Reverend Dando? If u are a believer as u talked about heaven, your dead wife isn't in Heaven, thus, she can't look down from heaven to dee the fuming scent..."
It's a failure of logic, faith, and basic human compassion that you would conclude that the wife of an atheist lesbian should end up in hell. You don't know anything else about her other than her sexual orientation and relationship with Ayiela.
For once, I'm at a loss for words.
Don't even use homosexual slurs against him, @Jorrit. There isn't a bag of dicks on earth that he's worthy of sucking.
@Jorrit, being not a gay, I can't help sucking ur cock, I'd suggest u to see Moron Yes sir or Dando Zeroed. But would u answer my question...
Reverend Dando, take it easy with your fucked theology. I said she isn't in heaven, it's true because I know what am talking about, it's in the Bible. I didn't say she is in Hell, There's no hell yet if you know how to read the scriptures correctly.If you thought I refered about Hell, you have insulted urself and shame on u. How would u prove to people with backed verses that she is in Heaven? Shitty reverend. I can prove to u that she is not in heaven nor in Hell.
Fumes below refers to sulphur. You were alluding to hell.
Besides, heaven and hell aren't exclusively Christian concepts. They're mentioned in nearly every religion. I'm not getting into a theological debate with you again, as I've schooled your bitch ass every time I've bothered to do so. Everyone knows it, and I'd wager they're tired of it. I've run out of jokes on the matter.
Moreover, Ayiela being an atheist, if it were true, wouldn't mean her lover wouldn't get to heaven. Your logic is utterly flawed.
I don't think any religious authority on earth would excuse you for what you said to Ayiela about her lost lover. That's unbelievably cruel, in poor taste, and worst of all, not funny enough to justify the manifest stupidity of it.
ha ha, u r funny scum bag, I ain't time for u today nway, you need help.
"I've run out of jokes on the matter."
Hey HP - can I ask you a question about the Bible? It's a one-word question.
Was that in the Bible?
@Michael, your question is basically about evolution. I'd suggest to read this article which sounds well balance.
While we understand from Genesis 1 that animals and mankind were created on the sixth day, there remains a question among theologians and scientists about the origin of dinosaurs. Some believe they were part of the sixth day of creation activities. Others take the position that they resulted from hybridization of some reptiles God originally created.
Some people think the references to "leviathan" (Job 41:1), "behemoth" (Job 40:15) and dragons (many texts) are references to dinosaurs. Most Bible scholars suggest that the descriptions in Job are of crocodiles or hippos. Both lived in theNear Eastin those days. It is tempting to think that dragons are a faded memory of dinosaurs but we cannot be sure. We can only speculate.
Those who have collected dinosaur remains in the Midwest plains ofCanadaand theUnited Statesor in the Colorado Plateau region have no lingering doubt concerning their reality. Thousands of specimens have been found and excavated.
The fossil remains of these reptiles indicate that they were indeed a highly diversified group, ranging in size from that of a rabbit to tremendous beasts 20 feet high, 85 feet long, and weighing up to 50 tons. It appears that some were relatively light-footed and had bipedal locomotion, while others were quadrupedal and moved about in a slow and cumbersome manner. Some were carnivores and others herbivores. Certain types were well suited for aquatic habitat while others remained on land.
The sudden extinction of the dinosaurs, as shown by the geological records, is a mystery that evolutionary paleontologists have considerable difficulty explaining. What happened? Change of temperature? Change in the plants? Blasts of heat from a meteor; mammals eating dinosaurs eggs; hyperpituitarism; change in oxygen concentration; over-specialization and senility of the dinosaur stalk; etc. These are some of the rationalizations of scientists. The current dominant theory is that a large object from space hit the Earth and blasted up so much dust that the sun was obscured for months and the plants and animals died. However there are problems with this theory also because the extinction was selective. Some plants and animals (including fragile ones compared to dinosaurs) did not become extinct.
When God directed the animals into the ark, He no doubt directed only those that were like His original created types. There is little evidence that dinosaurs were taken into the ark. That God did not preserve them in the ark and that they died as a result of a world-wide flood is as good an explanation as any.
Why did God not take dinosaurs into the ark? In Genesis 6:12 we find the statement, "And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." Satan, the being who rebelled against God, cannot create, but he can change (even as modern scientists can produce change through mutations, hybridization and genetic engineering). The entrance of sin into the world allowed Satan to corrupt humans and other living organisms. Now we have leaves changed to thorns, teeth changed to poison fangs, genes changed into viruses and useful bacteria into disease producers. Satan corrupted some of the reptiles God originally created into the bizarre creatures we call dinosaurs. God chose not to save them at the time of the Flood. Perhaps God also saw that feeble post-flood humans would not be able to control such large animals. Thus we suggest that God preserved the air-breathing, land animals except the very large animals and the corrupted ones.
"The entrance of sin into the world allowed Satan to corrupt humans and other living organisms."
Is that why you're such a huge prick?
Anyway, I wasn't referring to any of the quasi-scientific bullshit you just posted. I guess I should've added a couple of words to my previous question: carbon dating.
How old is the Earth, HP? Riddle me that one.
Michael, I hope u r sober enough, it's still noon. I've got no time wasting trolling MJ (Michael Jackson__ sorry Jackass)
Right. So you'll agree that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, then? Cos it is. Regardless of what your magical storybook might tell you. Carbon don't lie, son.
Damn it Michael !!! look what you´ve done, now the
high priest will stop to copy/ paste creationist bullshit....
Is so fucking hilarious when he spreads biblical quotes with his own comments full of insanity, while he takes that serious attitude of I'm writing here The Definitive Truth, read it and enlighten you !!
Poor guy, he seems very limited, even more than Bedtyger.
Dinosaurs and humans never co-existed. We all learned that in elementary school. What was High Priest doing back then? Sniffing glue? Eating paint chips?
@Dando, who was ur teacher back then?
@Ayiela, sorry for my indecency and immorality.
[...] sorry for my indecency and immorality.
@HP, I think your problem is not that. You are full of morality, and empty of kindness-benevolence... that´s the problem.