[majestictwelve]

Yes, actually I did. That doesn't mean I can't take offense to what you said, meant in jest or otherwise.

[elektikakass]

I am not the type to ignore something that bothers me, sorry.

What's your position on gay marriage? I really couldn't give a s**t. However, to appease you I will say this much, the obvious answer to your question would be to say you're against it. But if that were the case you wouldn't be asking, now would you because it would be, well, a stupid question. So the logical answer is to say that you aren't against it. But then how could I know since you haven't told me? And frankly I don't care. I disagree with the things you say, the fact that you're pro/anti has nothing to do with my reactions to your posts it is the posts themselves.

[uncoodync]

Did just miss the last part of that paragraph? Apparently. Your actual standing on the matter has no bearing on my reactions to what you say, it is the very things you say themselves, they and they alone. I do not care what your standing on the matter is and it had nothing to do with how I responded to your posts. That clear enough for you?

[joanasevilyboaz]

C'mon Mike, stop fighting it and surrender to your true feelings. You love me as deeply as I love you. I can't stand to think of living another day without you for the rest of my life. Marry me.

While I am here, does anyone have an explanation for why all the threads in the serious discussion part of the member's lounge are now in the Europe Forum? Even American Issues are now in Europe? Has there been a shift in government that I don't know about?

[appletango]

What is even more clear is that you are unable to engage in a rational discussion with adults without flying into a rage.

Where do you people get this idea that I get into "rages"? I wasn't swearing, using too many ! marks to be at natural or anything like that. I wasn't even upset. You seem to be incapable have having a conversation were someone disagrees with you without thinking they're just off their rocker or "in a rage" just because they don't agree with you.

[JackieC]

Again just because something is said in jest does not mean people can't take offense to it. It's like bad race jokes, they're jokes but you can still get pissed over them. A joke in bad taste is still just plain bad taste joke or not.
Alright. You don't go into rages. Just tirades Ya know what, if you are seriously that hellbent on making me out to be a loose canon then go right ahead. But the truth of the matter is, you have yet to see me in an actual "tirade" no one here has actually. If you think the things I'm saying now are tirades then you have obviously never been witness to a real one. In all honesty, I think I might have had a right to blow a gasket at you but I didn't, I could have yelled insults at you but I didn't, I could have attacked you personally instead of keeping it to politics but I didn't. You have no idea just how nasty I can be and I've tried to keep it that way throughout this discussion. But you just keep pushing and pushing as though you want me to go into an actual tirade. Well sorry, you won't get your wish. 'Cause I'm not about to loose it over you.
And I still think the reason you wanna make me seem like a loose canon is 'cause you just can't stand the idea that someone in complete control of her faculties could possibly disagree with you. You seem to take disagreement highly personally when all it is, is disagreement, plain and simple. It's nothing personal and it doesn't equal someone having a temper problem either.

[bromgeksan]

That first paragraph comes across as more of a bate then sincarity.

If your opinions and mine are so "smiliar" then why is that we don't agree? In the end we both might support the same thing however that does not mean our actual opinions are the same.

And I am sorry that I cannot be a stone cold debater, truly I am. I wish I could just switch off my emotions, it would save me a lot of pain. But if I did that, that would make me no different from the bigots I so loath who can't see others as human beings just because they don't live the way they do and it would make me something less then human. So actually, now that I think about it, even if I could switch off my emotions I wouldn't. I would rather remain human then join those I stand against.
"Rationality and focus" I am rational and I am focused just not in the way YOU would like me to be. Just because someone is different does not mean they do not posses such things and just because they imploy them differently then you do does not mean they don't exist.

[Anneskobsen]

Emotions are quite fine to employ as a tool in debates or advancing social issues. Courts, jugdes and juries are often swayed by the emotions that come forth. They may give lip service to the evidence, but the emotions of a 6 year old child who bravely agrees to testify on the stand through tears while recalling a viscious rape from someone will sway the onlookers.

If the facts were the only thing that was valued, all juries would be supplied with just transcripts of the words.

That is but one example. There are many.

[chipkluchi]

Thank you. I needed that, truly. Thank you.

[arcalmanard]

I think the road to take is to change people's hearts and minds and institute change through the legislative process. Others, perhaps including yourself, see the matter as a fundamental human rights issue and believe the courts can/should find those rights embodied in some portion of the Bill of Rights.

When did I ever say that you could find the "right to gay marriage" in the Bill of Rights? You can't. But here's the rub, the Bill of Rights was written a very, very, VERY LONG time ago and if we went by the rights and only the rights in the Bill of Rights then I know a few women and blacks who would be protesting right about now. So, going by what you're saying, no right that is not in the Bill of Rights should stand as a human right. Which would leave us in an even more f**ked up world then the one we currently live in, which is a scary thought since the world's pretty f**ked as 'tis.

To increase the chances of changing their hearts and minds and thereby bring about the changes you desire, it is helpful to be able to present your side in a manner they are more open to listening to and more likely to be able to bring themselves to accepting. Tell me, have you ever been on the receiving end of homophobia? Do you know what it is like to be objectifide and not even seen as something human? Have you ever had someone tell you that you are going to hell with all the rapists and pedaphiles? Have you ever had people treat you as though you are no more human then the dirt in their yard? I'm sorry, but after having gone through that myself it is a little difficult for me to smile pretty for the camera, so to speak. And here's the problem, why are Christians going to listening to a morally bankrupt homosexual who's gonig to Hell even if she does present her case in the manner you think she should? They don't hear us, no matter what we say they won't listen. Because in their eyes we are nothing but sinners and perverts on a fast track to Hell.

As far as I personally am concerned, I admire your passion. I thought I had made that clear, but I guess I failed. No, sorry, that was completely lost on me. It's hard to think someone admires you when they're openingly bashing you. But hey, that could just be me. I'm sure there's lots of people who take insults as a way of showing admiration.

[Twendypreency]

You know, you're kind of annoying. Do people ever tell you that? 'Cause it's true, you are. I could keep trying to make sense to you but it's clear that unless I stoop to a pre-school level of explainnig things you're never going to get it.
We could keep battling our way around the Legal System all day and it won't get us anywhere 'cause we both know it too well and therefor can counter eachother perfectly.
But I still think the reason you insist I through hissy fits is because you can't stand the fact that someone might possibly think you're wrong. I didn't through a hissy fit in the incedent you're referring to, I just hit you with your own medicine. And if that classifies as a hissy fit maybe you should start looking inward instead of outward.
But I am sick of trying to get through to you and I am not gonig to waist anymore of my time on you.

[h0ldem]

Well, since we have a whole section to ourselves now (*roll of the eyes*)

The words "older" and "wiser" are not Synonyms for each other. Just because you have been around longer then someone does not mean you are any more mature or wise then they are and vise versa. Age and knowledge, wisdom, maturity etc don't go hand in hand. Matter of fact some of the most immature people I know are adults.

And you know, I said we BOTH knew our way around the system, that includes you. I credited you on your knowledge. But what did you do? Insult my knowledge and speak down to me. If I had done the same thing, well, I could just see the rant coming. But I didn't do that, now did I? You, on the other hand, went on a "I'm older then you so hahahahah!" ego trip.

Last bit of unsolicited advice on posting: Rich gifts wax poor when givers prove unkind.

[Caunnysup]

No. They got moved.

[zzarratusstra]

I think the reason why this was broken off was because the original 'homosexuality and gay marriage' thread had turned into something of a dualogue, so maybe someone thought that it might discourage other people from posting in the thread, so they decided to put your discussion in another thread.

I've forgotten what you were debating to begin with. Was it that Hyde thinks gay couples ought to be allowed (legally, I mean) to get married, and Mike doesn't? (Because I didn't get the impression that Mike is 'against' gay marriage... although I might be wrong... correct me if so. ^^) Or was it about a legal point relating to that? (I don't know the first thing about American/US laws... >

[Ornamiviant]

We're debating technicalities in the Legal System regarding Gay Marriage. As well as each other's core beliefs it would seem.

[Nafheense]

Ah. Technicalities in the legal system. No wonder I'm lost! *retires*

[herrdwq]

Do you know the meaning of the word "petty"? 'Cause that's what you're being right now.

I am not avoiding anything, the fact that I think you're annoying and am not afraid to say so does not mean I am avoiding anything. On the contrary. And yes, we were debating the legal system, like it or not.

And I can't make up my mind if you're trying to take a low blow at me or were just being ignorant with that last comment.

[CialisBestPrice]

First comment: If you don't wish to be misunderstood then find more intelligible and clear ways of stating your points.

Second comment: Because anything I post in the original topic seems to get bumped here anyway *points to top of page* See? But I can post it there too if it'll make you happy. And besides this topic got started because we were disagreeing about Gay Marriage so shouldn't the GM discussion continue on here as well?

[reaciciomarep]

lol

And Mike Cash, I can post that one post here if you wish (actually I did but I'm editing) but I swear it'll just get deleted or moved if I do so yeah.

[UKkoXJvF]

Mike- I can understand you perfectly, but I can't actually figure out what the focus of this offtopic thread must be. Perhaps if you two would start merciless slamming each other over eating meat or worshipping some other god, get really fringe strange conspiracy theory...or perhaps if you use the word nazi in some kind of new creative way-- we could understand why this has been moved here. It is not even clear why this is OffTopic or who moved it. I wish people would tell you why they do such things.