『漫游』酷论坛>『海外生活』>[聊天]同性恋者也能注 ..
seyes@2004-02-18 09:40
我是中立的
但总觉得这些有反自然规律
beidog@2004-02-18 09:57
你们都～～～不过的确很多的说！到处都是啊～
但看到都是有点恶心！～PASS了议案的话～就没办法了！
morte13@2004-02-18 10:36
虽然我不是同人女，但是我决不对同性恋者抱有歧视。
楼主倒是说说他们哪里错了啊？到底哪里触犯了什么法律或道德规范啊？只不过恰好喜欢上同性，为什么不能结婚-__-
小伍@2004-02-18 11:29
动物不是也有同性行为么
人类也不例外
这种事情没什么好也没什么不好
飞天浆糊@2004-02-18 15:04
引用
最初由 morte13 发布
虽然我不是同人女，但是我决不对同性恋者抱有歧视。
楼主倒是说说他们哪里错了啊？到底哪里触犯了什么法律或道德规范啊？只不过恰好喜欢上同性，为什么不能结婚-__-
那你对于同性恋收养小孩的问题又如何看?他们是否和普通人一样应该拥有养育小孩的权利...他们的小孩(收养),出生在一个对于同性恋没有任何压力的社会,一个电视上充斥着同性主题的时代,生长在一个同性恋家庭里,成长为同性恋的可能性比我们目前的这个时代机会大很多...当某一天你自己的小孩收到电视影响,受到朋友影响,成为同性恋的时候,你自己是否感觉OK?当某一天同性骚扰成为社会问题的时候,你是否感觉OK?或者是当你步入中年,身边充斥着双性恋者的时候,你会不会觉得自己落伍,为没有尝试一下和同性交往而遗憾?
赌博,嫖倡,克隆人...是否应该合法化?
你可以说很多问题对于现在的我们没有影响,但当我们欣然接受,把他们培养成将来的问题时,那时的我们又只能说,这是一个社会现象,我们又能做什么那?
他们是人,他们有感受有自己的喜好,我理解,但我反对他们的行为
windy_elf@2004-02-18 15:14
真爱无敌，婚姻自主。
Harmatia@2004-02-18 16:09
引用
最初由 飞天浆糊 发布
那你对于同性恋收养小孩的问题又如何看?他们是否和普通人一样应该拥有养育小孩的权利...他们的小孩(收养),出生在一个对于同性恋没有任何压力的社会,一个电视上充斥着同性主题的时代,生长在一个同性恋家庭里,成长为同性恋的可能性比我们目前的这个时代机会大很多...当某一天你自己的小孩收到电视影响,受到朋友影响,成为同性恋的时候,你自己是否感觉OK?当某一天同性骚扰成为社会问题的时候,你是否感觉OK?或者是当你步入中年,身边充斥着双性恋者的时候,你会不会觉得自己落伍,为没有尝试一下和同性交往而遗憾?
赌博,嫖倡,克隆人...是否应该合法化?
你可以说很多问题对于现在的我们没有影响,但当我们欣然接受,把他们培养成将来的问题时,那时的我们又只能说,这是一个社会现象,我们又能做什么那?
他们是人,他们有感受有自己的喜好,我理解,但我反对他们的行为
First, why is homosexuality or bisexuality a problem for you to begin with?
Second, you are arguing from the basis that homosexuality is a CHOICE rather than an inborn preference, a claim which has ZERO scientific evidence behind it (and don't give me the BS about ex-gays, it's exactly things like these that make me want to rant against religious establishments).
飞天浆糊@2004-02-18 17:20
引用
最初由 Harmatia 发布
First, why is homosexuality or bisexuality a problem for you to begin with?
Second, you are arguing from the basis that homosexuality is a CHOICE rather than an inborn preference, a claim which has ZERO scientific evidence behind it (and don't give me the BS about ex-gays, it's exactly things like these that make me want to rant against religious establishments).
"a person's sexual orientation-sex identity as heterosexual, gay, lesbian or bisexual-is complex, it depends on the interaction of numerous factors. these factors which may be a combinition of social, biological, and personal ones..."(bryan strong, christine devault, the marriage and family 8th edition)
个人认为GENDER ROLE很大程度上就是SOCIAL CONSTRUCTED,最好的例子就是HAWAII有一个传统是凡家庭生五个男生以后,第六个就要当女生养,养大了的就是有女孩内心男孩外表的人...如果要说由来的话,可以从家长,PEER,MEDIA一点点说下去...
http://answers.google.com/answers/main?cmd=threadview&id=188394
koerner@2004-02-18 18:31
支持啊,正常规律的婚姻生活
无论怎样说都是一件好事
Exodus@2004-02-18 19:31
引用
最初由 Harmatia 发布
First, why is homosexuality or bisexuality a problem for you to begin with?
Second, you are arguing from the basis that homosexuality is a CHOICE rather than an inborn preference, a claim which has ZERO scientific evidence behind it (and don't give me the BS about ex-gays, it's exactly things like these that make me want to rant against religious establishments).
hehe, first of all, I would like to point out my post on last page, which stated my support towards homosexual marriages, however, I'm bored and would like to argue your point.
One problem with homosexual marriages: It doesn't take into account the impact on children. If same-sex relationships become the law of the land, then homosexual marriage will be presented to America's schoolchildren as the equivalent of heterosexual marriage.
Here's how and why it will happen. Right now, the vast majority of U.S. public school districts have put themselves in a very vulnerable position, one that conservatives have been warning about for years but few school boards listened. What they've done is add under their non-discrimination policies the category of "sexual orientation." It only remains for enough time to elapse – and for same-sex marriage to be legalized – for "gay" education activists to force schools to implement sweeping changes in curricular content.
Among those changes will be "diverse" textbooks that include same-sex couples as role models, even for little children. To refuse such content will be considered "discrimination," and the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal Defense Fund will take that district to court, as they have recently in order to force homosexual clubs onto schools. If not those two well-heeled groups, then the National Education Association will sue, as it has promised, on behalf of any teachers involved. Increasingly liberal courts, modeling themselves after the Supremes, are pretty likely to rule in favor of such plaintiffs.
That also goes for the "right" of teachers who are homosexual to wear wedding rings, talk about their homosexual spouses with students and introduce spouses at school functions. Your little Katie will learn in kindergarten that "Mrs." Jones is married to another "Mrs." Jones – and that she can grow up and choose to do the same if she wishes. It is, after all, her "right."
Grade-school and middle-school anti-bias units will now crank into high gear the focus on homosexuals and cross-dressers. Because marriage is now legalized, children will be persuaded in misleading material that anyone who objects to homosexual behavior is not simply biased, that person is breaking the law. The take-away for students from these shallow lessons will be that it is illegal to criticize homosexuality, and every person young or old should be protected from the mean conservatives. Standing up for equality in America will translate into the freedom to practice homosexuality for every student who "discovers" such inclinations.
Sex education will be required to take into account this new form of "family" and abstinence – until – marriage education will take a twisted new turn. Suddenly, it will be co-opted by Planned Parenthood and other liberal activists with their own unique spin. Every student will be taught that, of course, abstinence until heterosexual or homosexual marriage is fine if that's one's choice. But since pregnancy isn't a danger for homosexuals, sex can be a wonderful option for younger and younger people – as long as it's carried out "responsibly," of course – like brushing one's teeth. To not teach this would be, again "discrimination" based on sexual orientation. Condoms are always available for those who can't wait. Let's show you third-graders how this condom fits on this banana, just so you are prepared.
Expect a whole new crop of young adult novels featuring same-sex romance leading to marriage to appear instantly and be adopted just as magically by middle-school and high-school language departments throughout the U.S. Your 13-year-old Kyle will be required to read and give a book report on a novel where Bruce and Jason meet, date and get married. What won't be covered is how Bruce and Jason split up a year later after cheating on each other dozens of times.
And it gets better (or worse). This stop-gap standard will last for just a few years, until the inevitable next piece of the puzzle is in place. Hank and Jim will petition the courts to allow Mary, the biological mother of "their" adopted child, to become part of their marriage. After all, what business does the court have in their bedrooms, determining who they have a right to love? Along about this same time, Cindy and her partner, Luke (who is really Lucy, except that she dresses like a man) will demand that the law recognize Luke as a "husband" in spite of her biology. And so will emerge the accompanying new curricular materials reflecting the legalization of group marriage and transgender unions, making sure every U.S. school child knows that these are future options for him, her or them.
In such a legal and educational environment, what happens to religions that don't believe homosexuality is moral? Will those religions and their ancient teachings eventually come before some future Supreme Court and be told that they are guilty of discrimination? That their beliefs are no longer constitutional because of privacy rights?
If this sounds like lunacy, it's because it is. What we do in the bedroom has always been public, in the form of what we call a family. It becomes what we teach and pass on as wisdom to our children. And if we aren't sure what "wisdom" entails, by golly, you can tell us~
ST.TAIL@2004-02-18 20:04
我个人认为还可以接受
Exodus@2004-02-18 20:06
我倒, waiting for a response from Harmatia
kagari@2004-02-18 20:16
虽然个人不喜欢，但尊重人权:o
Exodus@2004-02-18 20:27
J'attendrai Harmatia's réponse avec l'impatience
Harmatia@2004-02-19 01:19
FT，楼上的当我一天到晚都HANG OUT在这里啊~等下来看
«123456»共12页
| TOP