Seeing as I've already answered that, I think you and I are done.
Hey if you want to deem yourself 'right', go ahead, knock yourself out.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Among 60 Companies to File Statement with U.S. Supreme Court Backing Gay Marriage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Seeing as I've already answered that, I think you and I are done.
Hey if you want to deem yourself 'right', go ahead, knock yourself out.
Sorry gay people...us straight people were also born this way too...we feel what you do is unnatural. Seeing as nature gave you lil soldiers yet you have no desire to use them tells me you were not as nature intended.
Stop trying to make it anything other than that. You aren't inferior, just unnatural. Seeing as you feel there is no God, and we are just animals, then why expect us to somehow feel different or be open to your logic? Since its unnatural, we were born to be opposed to it. It's all biological Baby!
You guys are being hypocritical to force this down our throats. This has nothing to do with the bible and everything to do with simple biology.
Stop trying to make it anything other than that. You aren't inferior, just unnatural. Seeing as you feel there is no God, and we are just animals, then why expect us to somehow feel different or be open to your logic? Since its unnatural, we were born to be opposed to it. It's all biological Baby!
You guys are being hypocritical to force this down our throats. This has nothing to do with the bible and everything to do with simple biology.
No, you feel its unnatural. Im straight and I don't agree with you at all, nor do many others. Please don't speak for anyone but yourself.
Who's we? I'm straight and I don't feel what they do is unnatural. And as a straight person, I have absolutely no desire to have children. Am I unnatural too?
I need the help of some enlightened being. Can you please point it out? Failure to do so will result in confirmation that you are full of it.
No, you have written some nonsense about relating pubic hair shaving with not having male roles, nothing more.
You cannot seriously think that you are part of some majority and that gay marriage is only banned because our current government is full of right wing Christians making Americas choices based on good, Christian values...could you?
So why else do you think it still isn't accepted?
Furthermore, alot of you people all seem to think this is a Christian based issue. Why? Society, all throughout history, hasnt accepted it. Long before Jesus became cool. There are reasons that go much deeper than people's "silly" religions.
Last edited:
Recognition of same-sex marriage is only banned in some places (fewer and fewer as time goes on). Since you've ruled out right wing Christians being in charge stopping it, I expect the acceptance to continue to expand.
Reading through this thread it's even more clear to me why Apple and the other companies mentioned should stick to running their businesses and leave issues like this to the people and their politicians to decide. Apple is already far too interfering in the way they police the AppStore without adding to it. This law does not impact on Apple whichever way it goes and as such they have no business interfering in the democratic process.
The percentage of Americans who support gay marriage as of late 2012 was 51% and growing. That's up from 39% just four years earlier. Among young adults it is an even more impressive 73% in support.
It is inevitable that those who oppose gay marriage will find themselves increasingly marginalized in the not too distant future.
Anyone can go find a statistic to fit the bill. If they are for it, why arent they voting for it on the ballots? Seems if 51% were for it, they would have also voted for it.
How about you forfeit health care and tax incentives? Then we will see how bad you want marriage.
silly
That's just silly. What "barrier" is being breached here? Religious? That's easy, the government shouldn't be dictating which religion to follow, nor what each religion should believe.
Just because we are not accustomed to a different social more doesn't make it "wrong."
I personally believe "marriage" is a term for religion, "civil union" is a term for government. And if a person is willing to COMMIT to another PERSON (no animals, that's just silly), they should get all the rights and tax breaks as anybody else. Gay or Hetero.
It's not gonna rip a new anus in the fabric of space and time. And what people wanna do in their own homes... if it's legal and harmless, who the hell cares.
My heterosexuality is not threatened by another's homosexuality. They got theirs and that's fine by me.
That's just silly. What "barrier" is being breached here? Religious? That's easy, the government shouldn't be dictating which religion to follow, nor what each religion should believe.
Just because we are not accustomed to a different social more doesn't make it "wrong."
I personally believe "marriage" is a term for religion, "civil union" is a term for government. And if a person is willing to COMMIT to another PERSON (no animals, that's just silly), they should get all the rights and tax breaks as anybody else. Gay or Hetero.
It's not gonna rip a new anus in the fabric of space and time. And what people wanna do in their own homes... if it's legal and harmless, who the hell cares.
My heterosexuality is not threatened by another's homosexuality. They got theirs and that's fine by me.
Children have the right to parents that love them. I said this earlier in the thread, but I'll say it again. Can we stop focusing on who the parents are, and instead focus on how good they are?
I have two children - two healthy, happy, intelligent, loving children. They have plenty of male influences that surround them. 3 Grandfathers (though, one has since passed away), 2 uncles, many cousins, and many of my own friends.
Having 2 parents doesn't automatically equate into good parenting. Having a male influence doesn't autmotically equate into being a good influence. If Casey Anthony gets married and has another child, do you honestly believe that her kids are better off than mine? That's one example, of course - but raising children isn't something that should be generalized. And there are a million examples of bad parenting coming from heterosexual families. There are also a million examples of children being hurt by divorce. Why not campaign against divorce?
----------
In the November elections, all 4 states that had it on the ballot voted for it.
Times, they are a changing....
You're calling homosexuality unnatural?
I say it's a species-wide response to overpopulation... studies of mice show the incidence of homosexuality increases exponentially when they become overpopulated. Stressor hormones produced by the mothers (under duress from crowding) interferes with typical hormonal activity that's part of fetal development. One could ARGUE, quite rightly, that natural selection has created within all mammalian species the ability to birth a certain percentage of non-breeders within the population during times of overcrowding. It's quite elegant, really.
Our gay brethern and sisters are "taking one for the team" so to speak. Most of them lack the drive to procreate with the opposite sex, slowing population growth (to an extent).
So... it's NATURAL. Just not what you're used to.
Yet it passed on all 4 ballots it was on this past November. Of course, 51% can't vote for it as it isn't on the ballot in all states. But it was a nice try.
Clearly you don't understand what this issue is about, so I'll spell it out for you. It's about civil rights. It's about gay people having the same marriage rights and all the benefits that go along with it as straight people. Why are you afraid of others having the same rights as you?
Gay marriage has in fact been approved by the voters in several states. The number of which is likely to grow over time anyway. The bigger issue here is federal law. Even with the majority of Americans against it, the minority elected Republican house continues to try and defend DOMA.
Okay, please stop assuming that someone has to be gay in order to support the idea of gay marriage.
Yea, okay. Then why do they have lil soldiers and still have the drive to HAVE SEX? I may look like a bigot, but after your commment, you look like a proper nut.
Aside from the reasons that most are opposed, I am also opposed to you guys getting tax benefits. There, plain and simple. Same reason why I am opposed to illegal immigration. Tax reasons.
Have fun, not being married. Im out.
You don't look like a bigot. Your posts are bigoted though.
And those with defenseless positions do what they usually do, post bigoted responses and when called out on them, they take their ball and go home.
Why do men have nipples? They don't need them. They have no functional purpose (except perhaps to be the bane of creationists).
Again with the "you" thing. You just refuse to accept that many straight people support this.
Im not bowing out of this because I was called out, Im leaving because the discussion is turning straight up rediculous. Next I expect to read theories related to extraterrestrials and how gays actually more than human, or some such BS along those lines.
There is no bottom to this debate, so its pointless to continue anymore. Both sides are at a stalemate, like I figured. Plus, I have work to do. Also, my iPhone battery is getting low...
Business really ought to **** about issues like this, especially when they are publicly traded.
Good luck finding happiness.
----------
What else would they have there?
Seriously, why only two arms when three is much more useful? I agree many straights are for this, but not the majority.
Well, yes. But I was keeping it within the context of sexual activity.
Some people choose to incorporate the two in sexual activity, but again, this is deviant to the purpose of the organs' functions..
Even as an Apple fan, I disapprove.
Don't worry, we'll make sure those people don't intermingle with our people.
Oh, I thought we were talking about inter-racial marriage. What decade is this?
You are the one who brought up 'male and female role models' without any suggestion of what that means. Again, the 'weasel words' you complain about are just saying I don't know of any 'roles' that are strictly male or female or provided by males vs females.
So the first clarification are what you think these role models are? Not some Ozzie and Harriet fantasy I hope.
And what it has to do with civil marriage - since kids are going to be raised by parents regardless of if they are civilly married or not I don't see how the 'role model' complaint applies to the current topic.
We can agree that no matter what child rearing situation you think is best, it is universally better for kids to have civilly married parents than not, right?
As such, what do the kids you injected in the argument have to do with it?
- Status