Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Oh my gosh! Audioguru, what's really going on in Canada?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HarveyH42

Banned
I used to play pool with a lesbian who looked not disimilar to that :p

But her girlfriend (who you weren't allowed to talk to) was absolutely stunning :D

One of the reason why I don't drink much anymore... Was working on this very hot blonde at bar, when this chubby construction worker looking (thought guy) came up to me, trying to muscle in. Thought it was going to get a little physical, but the friends who brought to the bar pulled me away kind of quick, and they were laughing so hard. They eventually told me about lesbians. Least, I didn't need help when this kind ugly 'woman' was trying to put the moves on me. Turned out it was a dude, but even then woman that chase men are usually trouble anyway.
 

Thunderchild

New Member
Homosexuality has beed around for thousands of years, the spartans actually were fine with it in the army providing it was not carried back to civilian life.

I don't consider it "normal" and can't see why we should feel we have to. We are all here today because we are children of a mother and father and thats the only natural way in which children are born and the human race continues to exist. I don't have any particular issue with homosexuality in itself, there are always "abnormal" mutations in any species and we are a very complex being.

However I don't agree with all the fuss that is made. We seem to have passed the fine line these days of not being racist or prejudiced to actively trying to make something "normal" (or seem normal) just because some idiots can only think up silly things to occupy their time instead of letting life be what it is. If two gays want to live together: fine by me, if they live their lives as a married couple then yes it makes sense to consider them a couple in some aspects of the law etc, but all this fuss about marriage is beyond me. Religeon will probably always condemn it and to be honest if it is to go by the bible in their view rightly so (after all God destroyed a gay town ! because it was gay). Marriage in my view is more about a straight couple and the fact that they may have kids and they should be married if they have kids, what most people want to do with their relationship lives is up to them, marriage is more of a religeous thing although it has validity before law particulaly where kids are concerned.

I'm a live and let live person, providing you don't throw your ideas at me and demand that I beleive in it too or say that it's normal in my view you are welcome to do as you please with you own life.
 

HarveyH42

Banned
Part of marriage is to help keep genetic lines separate (avoid inbreeding). If a gay couple wants children, they would need to adopt (in case of men). The child's parentage might not even be known, or sealed. If they child doesn't learn to be like the parents, would need to get some genetic testing done, to avoid reproduction with a close relative. Most children of married couples, already know who they are related to, and know it's not okay, but some still do.

Thing about gay marriage, is that all the issues they claim to deserve, can be obtained through a lawyer, or the courts, without being married. But being legally married also gives them many things they can't use, or won't need, and that's why it shouldn't be granted. There is nothing stopping them from having the ceremony and celebration with their friends, changing their names, drawing up a will, power of attorney, adopting children, or most anything else a legally married couple can do. They don't get to file income taxes jointly (but many married couples don't either), they don't get Social Security benefits as a surviving spouse, maybe a few other things I can't think of at the moment, but none are a huge benefit.

The thing is, marriage is about a family, meaning raising kids, whether intentional, or just doing the right thing (avoiding 18 years of child support), and usually one spouse must take a lesser income earning role, to make time to take care of home and kids, and deserves something for that, it is work after all.
 

Thunderchild

New Member
personally I am against gay couples adopting, sorry it's just not right in my opinion - sorry life is not "fair" or at least what some people expect fair to be.
 

Hero999

Banned
Part of marriage is to help keep genetic lines separate (avoid inbreeding).
I don't see how marriage prevents that.

Women commit adultery and have children with other men and if the man is impotent then she can have IVF with sperm from an anonymous donor.

personally I am against gay couples adopting, sorry it's just not right in my opinion - sorry life is not "fair" or at least what some people expect fair to be.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

Mine is that although it's best for a child to be raised by a man and a women, gay adoption is better than a single parent family. I think that two men or women who are from wealthy backgrounds and live in a nice area will make far better parents than an unemployed single women living on some horrible council estate.
 

Thunderchild

New Member
Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

Mine is that although it's best for a child to be raised by a man and a women, gay adoption is better than a single parent family. I think that two men or women who are from wealthy backgrounds and live in a nice area will make far better parents than an unemployed single women living on some horrible council estate.

I'd agree on that but then we go back to what I said in another topic you started about making sure that people in the wrong situations are not encouraged to have children.
 

BrownOut

Banned
I'm not concerned about offending religious people. Religion has been oversued to deny rights to minority groups, and I don't want any part of that. Gays should be able to marry, serve in the military, adopt children, or have any right and anyone else has. I find the whole discussion to be silly. It's the same discussion society had about black people way back when. But society didn't fall apart when blacks won thier full rights, and it won't fall apart when gays wins there's.
 

Thunderchild

New Member
I don't think anyone is over concered about their "rights" I think we all here accept that they are welcome to take part in society like all the rest of us, i think people have issues with the "our differences should be considered normal" for example there have been gay people that have had children by artificial means, this for me is a big NO, nature has catered for the continuing existance of man for countless years, I don't feel we should mess with certain things, just becuse we can do something does not mean we should
 

Thunderchild

New Member
Well, part of accepting and welcoming is insuring their rights.

and people have different opinions on what those rights are. while I'd say it is unreasonable for gay couples to expect to "have children" I have nothing against them having the same basic rights as the rest of us and like people of other cultures do, seems fairly obvious to me.

For example taking the previous upheavel of racism, so these days people of other cultures are accepted and treat like the rest of us: fine but to call someone racist for aknowledging and recognising that they are of a different race is wrong, I'm sure that the "society of white xxxxxxx" would be called racist but all I here of is that we have the "association of black policemen" locally we have the "associan of young black fishermen" (or some similar name its a childrens association for black children to go fishing - why do they choose to keep aprt from the rest ?), the "black consortium" cosider the uproar there would be if these existed as the "white xxxxx". While white people have been expected to accept blacks and treat them as equals (which I have no problem with) there are many that actually put up the barrier and we are afraid to point it out becuase we (whites) would then be called racist, we were asked to accept, but often they make sure that the differentiation is made. I put this as a parallel of what could happen with gay people (male/female) and or any other new culture, movement, religeon or even some bunch of crackpots deciding they want to depart from the rest of us in some way but then be treated as "normal".

As far as I know mjost people are allowed to live pretty much as they like these days, but sometimes we go beyond granting them "normality" to allowing unreasonable/abnormal rights, we have gone from the aknowledging and accepting to the over the top catering for and bothering to give some people the undue attention they want
 

BrownOut

Banned
As far as I'm concerned, the rights issue is simple. Everyone has the same rights regardless of race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc.
 
Last edited:

Thunderchild

New Member
As far as I'm concerned, the rights issue is simple. Everyone has the same rights regardless of race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

precisely but would you say that having children is a right ? I don't but many would, some people seem to think that they are entitled to the impossible
 

Hero999

Banned
and people have different opinions on what those rights are. while I'd say it is unreasonable for gay couples to expect to "have children"
I don't see anything wrong with alowing gays to adopt as long as they've been vetted to make sure they're suitable parents.

Heterosexual couples can have children and they're never checked to make sure they're suitable unless they adopt someone else's.

I'm sure that the "society of white xxxxxxx" would be called racist
That's because those kinds of organisationsa re invariably racist.

but all I here of is that we have the "association of black policemen" locally we have the "associan of young black fishermen" (or some similar name its a childrens association for black children to go fishing - why do they choose to keep aprt from the rest ?), the "black consortium"
I seriously doubt any of those organisations have rules that prohibit white people from joining.

If you feel so strongly about this then maybe you should join a black peoples association? If they don't allow you to join because of your skin colour you have every right to accuse them of being racist and report them to the equal opportunities commission or whatever it's called.

The BNP (a far-right wing party for those who don't know) used to say those sorts of things to justify not allowing black people from joining, yet I never saw any evidence to support that any of those organisations were discriminating against white people.

Anyway, I think there's too much talk about human rights these days and not enough about responsibilities. Every citizen is responsible for abiding by the law of the land, doing their best to prevent others from breaking the law and pushing the government to change in the law if they disagree with it.
 

Thunderchild

New Member
Yes, having children is definitely a right.

ok, why ? and in what sense ? if a woman is baren it's an act of nature, it's nobodies fault, now I can't see an awful lot wrong with a woman that cannot have children being helped to have a child but, it is nothing at all normal for a man to have children is it ? so you say that having children is a right, that in some peoples minds may spell that a bloke can decide he wants to bear a child which (omitting technology and medicine) is IMPOSSIBLE. if you are saying that every "normal" couple has the right to have children then yes I would certainly agree.

On this sort of thing i take the line that you have a right to what is natural, if you are demanding something that would not be but for technology/medicine as a right then you need to sit down and have a chat with yourself and straighten a few things out in your head !
 

BrownOut

Banned
Good grief! You sure went into orbit! Defining a "right" is nothing more than defining a "liberty." We are a free society, and as such, have basic rights, and having and raising children is one of them. Altering one's body in a transgender manner is obviously NOT what I'm talking about. I said nothing about a man bearing a child. But having children, having a family, is a basic right. Any right afforded to heterosexual couples are inherent rights to all couples (at least they sould be)
 
Last edited:

Thunderchild

New Member
That's because those kinds of organisationsa re invariably racist.

but how would you know that for certain, to assume that is to judge before knowing ? and you could say the same for the "black xxxxx" but nobody dares.

I'm not hugely bothered but I think there are too many policies made to "control" how and what we think on issues like this. have not forgotten the muslims that went to Italy (the centre of cristianity) and then objected to the cross being diplayed in classrooms - not that anyone was forcing christianity on them, it is quite normal in Italy for there to be a crusifix in every class room and nobody thinks twice about it. Nope not good enough, these people had to come along, expect to be accepted which they were and then lay the law down to poeple that were not putting upon them in any way at all. Of course these people also expected their girls to go to school wearing a veil and to sit through 5 hours of school without revelaing their faces, totaly out of line with the culture they were living in. Hey they had a choice they did not have to move to Italy. I forget the outcome.
 

Thunderchild

New Member
Good grief! You sure went into orbit! Defining a "right" is nothing more than defining a "liberty." We are a free society, and as such, have basic rights, and having and raising children is one of them. Altering one's body in a transgender manner is obviously NOT what I'm talking about. I said nothing about a man bearing a child. But having children, having a family, is a basic right. Any right afforded to heterosexual couples are inherent rights to all couples (at least they sould be)

sorry to go a bit OTT, yes thats right but you say that "Any right afforded to heterosexual couples are inherent rights to all couples" but to what extent do you take that ? and as for adoption I am sceptical, although as Hero said it could be much better to have good adoptive gay parents than antisocial down and out "normal" parents, the next problem is who be the judge of that and on what guidelines, and we come back to other social issues of why are people allowed to live the way they do.

There was a case in the UK (I beleive it was the UK) where a "normal" couple decided that the man should bear the child, so through artificial methods they made the man pregnant. Well it may be a medical break through, it may be cool to be able to do but I would not want to see it done as a "normal" thing, in fact I would start to reconsider calling this "normal" couple a "normal" couple. and no I do not think that it was their right to have it this way but if the medical world has to prove it can be done i suppose at least one couple gets the oportunity to "have a go".
 

Hero999

Banned
but how would you know that for certain, to assume that is to judge before knowing ? and you could say the same for the "black xxxxx" but nobody dares.
Why don't you start your own white peoples organisation and make sure it's not racist?

I'm not hugely bothered but I think there are too many policies made to "control" how and what we think on issues like this. have not forgotten the muslims that went to Italy (the centre of cristianity) and then objected to the cross being diplayed in classrooms - not that anyone was forcing christianity on them, it is quite normal in Italy for there to be a crusifix in every class room and nobody thinks twice about it. Nope not good enough, these people had to come along, expect to be accepted which they were and then lay the law down to poeple that were not putting upon them in any way at all. Of course these people also expected their girls to go to school wearing a veil and to sit through 5 hours of school without revelaing their faces, totaly out of line with the culture they were living in. Hey they had a choice they did not have to move to Italy. I forget the outcome.

Well I agree there.

That goes back to the responsibilities issue I was talking about earlier.

If you or I go to another country, we have the responsibility to engage with the people and fit in with the culture as best we can. It's all about compromise, we should tolerate people from other cultures just as they should tolerate ours.

The thing is, I doubt that all Muslims were like that, the chances are it was a small minority. The trouble is small minorities of any community behaving badly promote fear and racism whether it be the Islamic extremists or British right-wing thugs.
 

HarveyH42

Banned
I'm not concerned about offending religious people. Religion has been oversued to deny rights to minority groups, and I don't want any part of that. Gays should be able to marry, serve in the military, adopt children, or have any right and anyone else has. I find the whole discussion to be silly. It's the same discussion society had about black people way back when. But society didn't fall apart when blacks won thier full rights, and it won't fall apart when gays wins there's.

How does one choose what race they are born? You do have a choice in lifestyle. Gays already have the same rights as any other individual, in this country at least. Their chosen lifestyle is what carries and potential limits, but shouldn't entitle them to more rights, because of their choice.

Some people choose a lifestyle that includes the excessive use of drugs and alcohol. Should they be allowed to serve in the military as well? If they aren't using while on the clock, what's the difference, right?

Lifestyle choices are usually self-serving, and generally don't give anything back. Marriage usually produce children, which are an investment for the future (they get to clean up our AGW mess).

The main point on lifestyles, is a line needs to be drawn some place. Society can exist, if everyone is allow to do anything and everything the pleases them. Same-sex relations are between consenting individuals, seems harmless enough. But how about close siblings, or other closely related individuals? Incest happens, both usually consenting, and pretty much the same choice as being gay. Will that eventually become acceptable and welcomed (warmly) into your world as well. Have heard stories about about people having close relations with pets an farm animals, will buggery be okay as well. And I've been a little concerned about all those hole-boring Climate scientists as well...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

EE World Online Articles

Loading
Top