Ellen DeGeneres to wed after gay marriage ruling
-
ellen and portia. is there a "male" and a "female" in the relationship? Or I outdated liao... whahahhahha
-
Can tell who wears the pants in this relationship liao
-
Congrat Congrat...
-
she doesn't look butch mah
nowadays lesbian couples no need to have butch one wat
gays oso... both can be bery man.... or bery niang.....
they happy can oredi lor -
Say NO to Homo's , lesbos , butches and psychos !
-
i want her wife !!!!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
The world is bloody screwed up these days.
I think you are the one that is screwed up.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
so if someone love his/her dog, means can marry his/her dog and have carnal relationship?US is quite a fark up country, seems like anything to anybody's fancy is alright even if it goes against norms.
YOu have just shown how retarded you are by comparing a human to human relationship to a human to animal relationship. I suppose its alright to compare your brains with bird brains. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
but seems like these days, the main criteria for justifying questionable action(s) is, "if it makes you happy, you would be right in doing whatever you do".morality seems to have taken a backseat and the so long as you are happy concept has taken over the steering wheel.
Yup, it should have been this way a long time ago. Morals are self defined, you are the immoral one for denying the existence of love in a relationship. So, stop adopting a "holier than thou" attitude you hypocrite. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
morality means different things in different culture. but the sanctity of marriage in agrarian societies has always been to procreate, accrue legal status and rights (because in an agrarian society, the men were the bread winners of the household).if gay marriages are considered norm and not stigmatised then i guess it would have widespread historical records of such marriages in every country.
historically the thing with such liasions is that it is mostly clandestine, therefore imbued with a sense of illegality.
i don't have any problems with gay wanting to be with their partners, but to solemnise and legalise it is beyond me.
what makes you think what they are doing is not hurting anybody psychologically? common folks could have extreme disgust over such marriages and psychological trauma.
Then I guess its you the common folks who have to change your outdated primeval mindset which date backs to centuries ago.
A marraige is a sacred union between 2 loving people who have came together purely on the basis of love. This is the norm and should never change.
-
Originally posted by DriftingGuy:
Can tell who wears the pants in this relationship liao
Ellen is the top, portia is the bottom
-
Originally posted by shade343:
I think you are the one that is screwed up.
likewise i think you have some abnormal sexual preference and therefore making a stand to uphold the homosexuals of the world.you are entitled to your homosexual attitude.
-
Originally posted by shade343:
YOu have just shown how retarded you are by comparing a human to human relationship to a human to animal relationship. I suppose its alright to compare your brains with bird brains.your physical comparisons with aviaries are futile attempt to blur the lines again.
hasn't there been cases of folks marrying their pets? are you the person with the holier than thou attitude now trying to dislodge the love relationship between humans and their pets now? Maybe you can tell me what's wrong with the relationship here?
in a later post you said, "Morals are self defined, you are the immoral one for denying the existence of love in a relationship.", so the person who brandish morality is contradicting himself/herself, by saying that the relationship between humans and animals is wrong.
my perspective is that of the modern world, that whatever pleases the person, it's left to his prerogative to pursue the interest in that direction.
what is morality in the modern world?
-
Originally posted by shade343:
Yup, it should have been this way a long time ago. Morals are self defined, you are the immoral one for denying the existence of love in a relationship. So, stop adopting a "holier than thou" attitude you hypocrite.
Morals are self defined? Self-defined meaning defined by the person himself/herself? I thought morality was defined by society? If morals were self defined, then I guess the pedophile or incestuous would not be wrong in pursuing their course?Where do you actually draw your line if you consider your morals are defined by yourself?
-
Originally posted by shade343:
Then I guess its you the common folks who have to change your outdated primeval mindset which date backs to centuries ago.
A marraige is a sacred union between 2 loving people who have came together purely on the basis of love. This is the norm and should never change.
Basic tenets of morality has not change since according to you "primeval", I'd rather the term medieval. It is wrong to kill, it's wrong to rob, it's wrong to commit adultery, the sanctity of marriage is between a man and a women.
primeval:
of or pertaining to the first age or ages, esp. of the world: primeval forms of life.
According to you marriage is "a sacred union between 2 loving people", look here simpleton, there is nothing SACRED about a union between a man & man, women & women. Your understanding of the world and words are limited. Sacred connotes religious linkages. In which orthodox religion do you find the priest marrying persons of the same gender? Or any orthodox religion(s) that encourages homosexual behaviour amongst it's followers?
sacred:
1. devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.
2. entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.
3. pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to secular or profane): sacred music; sacred books.
THERE IS NOTHING SCARED BETWEEN THE MARRIAGE OF A MAN + MAN AND WOMEN + WOMEN!!!
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
your physical comparisons with aviaries are futile attempt to blur the lines again.
hasn't there been cases of folks marrying their pets? are you the person with the holier than thou attitude now trying to dislodge the love relationship between humans and their pets now? Maybe you can tell me what's wrong with the relationship here?
in a later post you said, "Morals are self defined, you are the immoral one for denying the existence of love in a relationship.", so the person who brandish morality is contradicting himself/herself, by saying that the relationship between humans and animals is wrong.
my perspective is that of the modern world, that whatever pleases the person, it's left to his prerogative to pursue the interest in that direction.
what is morality in the modern world?
I have not implied that human to animal relatiionship is wrong in anyway. I stated that its a fallacy on your part to compare apples with oranges. The issue here is on morality regarding human relationships. It has nothing to do with human to animal relationships. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
The world is bloody screwed up these days.
Its their bloody business, but I take issue with "them" for hijacking the establlished institutions, and not inventing their own. They are trying to be "normal".
Its not too difficult to plan their own nupital format.
The starting point should be legislation. "The Pairrage Act"? (not The Marriage Act pls, but its ok to plaigarise, with amendments from it)
And "they" should not expect red carpets.
-
Originally posted by shade343:
I have not implied that human to animal relatiionship is wrong in anyway. I stated that its a fallacy on your part to compare apples with oranges. The issue here is on morality regarding human relationships. It has nothing to do with human to animal relationships.
I was referring to morality in general, not human + animal relationship per se. So are you indirectly saying that you agree to bestiality? Since you did not disagree to this form of arrangement.If you would like to, maybe you can make a stance as to your views on incestuous relationships and pedophilia? Perhaps it would enligthen us to your worldly views and concepts.
morality:
1) conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct.
2) moral quality or character.
3) virtue in sexual matters; chastity.
4) a doctrine or system of morals.
Rules of conduct, if your conduct towards marriage is only between man and women, obviously it is the norm, then all else you would have to reject, be it man to man, women to women or men to dogs.
Do you have double standards?
-
Gay marriages are futile attempts by the abnormals at normalcy.
I have no problems with gay relationships, afterall they have a right to live their life as they deem fit.
But the problem with legalising gay marriages is that, it gives it a sense of legality and normality, which if far from the truth. It would give youths the impression that since it is legal and normal, it's alright to be gay.
-
Wah i lazy read all the essays here.
But now lesbian couples no need 1 butch 1 niang one la. Heard of lipsticks lesbians? Both also beri gu niang one.
Those that watch A shot at love with Tila Tequila will noe liao. Nice show leh!