Dumb Anti-Gay Arguments...

[dogmai]

Ah yes...polygamy was a way for EKM to establish some grounds for why marriage should be redefined.  I had to remind him that polygamy does not exists in Hmong society...it's a load of crap...as I've yet to hear about a Hmong guy go to jail confessing he is a polygamist.  Until a Hmong polygamist utter such strong opinion openly in court then it is suffice to say polygamy does not exists.  Talk is cheap until you place your hand on the Bible and state it to a judge and due time for it...anyone know of a hmong polygamist?

I'll explain why your reasoning here is flawed. Just because someone doesn't admit to something, doesn't mean that they never did it. A murderer still committed murder even if he/she doesn't admit to it. A rapist committed rape even though he/she doesn't admit to it.

I'll use a belief you've mentioned before.  Since you believe that everyone is born sinned, even if you don't admit it, you're still a sinner.

[Evil_K_Man]

So while you talk that there existed such a system, we are in America now and that system is dead. 

Just because it is dead HERE in the USA, doesn't invalidate the fact that polygamy was/is a practice accepted by hmong people (already confirmed by you via your knowledge of your grandfather/FiL's experience). True that the vast majority of "westernized" hmongs do not practice it NOW and may even look down upon it, but it doesn't invalidate polygamy as part of the hmong's definition of marriage. 

Again, my SIMPLE point here is that the definition of marriage is defined differently by other cultures and is not always a ONE man ONE woman policy, so why should certain people have to follow it.  Polygamy existed way before the idea of ONE man ONE woman was introduced by doctrines like religion or law.

Again, you're trying to rationalize something that doesn't need to be.

[Evil_K_Man]

My point is that the definition of marriage varies by groups, both culturally and religiously.  The US definition of marriage was highly influence by judeo-christian religion from Europe.  Before the colonization of America, the first Americans practiced polygamy openly here. To force them to follow the christian definition of marriage amounts to violating their religious beliefs just as how other "religious" Americans find that gay marriage violates their religious beliefs.

The laws here are designed to apply to all, so its not fair for those who do not follow the Christian faith to have to put up with Christian ideologies becoming law, but fortunately due to the robustness of our legal system, we are able to correct such mistakes (i.e. ignorance).

[Evil_K_Man]

Let's not forget Hmong culture OKs rape too...  Again, the norm here is America.

amongst many other things...but that is still our culture.

[Evil_K_Man]

I'll say this again, stop changing the definition. 

I'm just going to summarize this simply for you.  The fight for marriage equality is NOT to change the "religious" definition of marriage, its a fight to change the "legal" definition of it.

If Governments were smart, they would remove all references to marriage and replace it with Civil Unions, this way if you want to call your civil union a marriage, no one could care less.

[dogmai]

Your murder example is so flawed.

Let's review this. Here's what I wrote.

I'll explain why your reasoning here is flawed. Just because someone doesn't admit to something, doesn't mean that they never did it. A murderer still committed murder even if he/she doesn't admit to it. A rapist committed rape even though he/she doesn't admit to it.

I'll use a belief you've mentioned before.  Since you believe that everyone is born sinned, even if you don't admit it, you're still a sinner.

And you wrote earlier.

Let me restate: THERE EXISTS NO POLYGAMY IN HMONG CULTURE.  Until the community confesses and go to jail for each offense then I'll believe it, but no Hmong Man is man enough to go to jail for his love of two women.   

I'll say it again, just because someone didn't admit to doing something, doesn't mean that they never did it.

[bulbasaur]

That's not good enough for him.  He simply dislike gays, and he feels the need to segregate them.  He is not looking for a solution.  Re-read all his posts on the subject.  He is not looking for a solution.  He is looking to justify himself.  He can't even admit that it is an issue.  He can't even recognize that the current situation isn't fair to every citizen.  He is so deluded by his religious beliefs, that he has convinced himself that 17th century scholars thought the Earth was flat.  He has convinced himself that this is not about equal rights.  Or look at his latest argument.  He is trying to redefine polygamy.  So it's okay to redefine polygamy, but not marriage?  Even hypocrisy won't change his mind. 

I'm just going to summarize this simply for you.  The fight for marriage equality is NOT to change the "religious" definition of marriage, its a fight to change the "legal" definition of it.

If Governments were smart, they would remove all references to marriage and replace it with Civil Unions, this way if you want to call your civil union a marriage, no one could care less.

[bulbasaur]

So why do you care so much about it?  HYPOCRISY!   

Like I said, 8v10un30sun doesn't care about a solution.  There is no point in trying to reason with him. 

 Don't care so much about important people around you think about you.  One day you will be old and your life is almost gone and then and there will you say, why did I care what they think?  Just live your life like you want to.  It's OK to be gay.  Just don't try to change the marriage definition to fit your needs and we can be best buds as usual.   

[duckwingduck]

don't know why the definition of marriage is bothering some people?  does it change how you live your life if the definition is changed?  That's the question.  If I change the definition of eating to include oral sex, is v8 going to jump around and say we can't do that?

[dogmai]

You are still wrong...Marria ge requires agreement of two people.  If the man does not agree, don't matter what the woman wants...or vice versa.  In your murder case, there has to be a body, and official document.  if no body, no murder...they call those missing people.  You need to understand how our government work.  if you don't this is not going anywhere fast.

All you said earlier was, you needed someone to admit to polygamy. Looks like now you're trying to cover up your mistake. Don't tell me bulbasur is right about you.

[duckwingduck]

All you said earlier was, you needed someone to admit to polygamy. Looks like now you're trying to cover up your mistake. Don't tell me bulbasur is right about you.

It's OK.  When Adam and Eve's children married one another, that was too called marriage. 

[Vsavage]

Again, the norm here is America.

if that is your logic and you claim to know so much about it (which is funny case your post says otherwise) then you would know that the norm in America now is that gays are okay to marry 

[Evil_K_Man]

You just describe a subversion game strategy.  Isn't that what a lot of group have been saying.  It's not about marriage, it's about subverting the American culture by a minority group.

Like I said earlier, our system is design to correct ignorance. American culture has never been one to remain static.

[Evil_K_Man]

That's not good enough for him.  He simply dislike gays, and he feels the need to segregate them.  He is not looking for a solution.  Re-read all his posts on the subject.  He is not looking for a solution.  He is looking to justify himself.  He can't even admit that it is an issue.  He can't even recognize that the current situation isn't fair to every citizen.  He is so deluded by his religious beliefs, that he has convinced himself that 17th century scholars thought the Earth was flat.  He has convinced himself that this is not about equal rights.  Or look at his latest argument.  He is trying to redefine polygamy.  So it's okay to redefine polygamy, but not marriage?  Even hypocrisy won't change his mind.

Its a debate, and all views should not be discounted, until reasonably refuted.

[Vsavage]

Sometimes I wonder why I put my two cents into these trolling threads created by the so called "Liberals" with a chip on their shoulder.  I'm writing to say, go ahead...live your life as you please...we live in America, you can do this...I'm not judging you...I will drink beer, eat burgers and watch the NCAA tournament with you and we can be merry...You don't have coodies...I don't have coodies...we are all people...just don't try to do more than that...you know...You want equality...I want you to have "equality" too (although I do not believe such exists in reality)...I want you to have the same legal rights too...I'm fine with that...just don't do it by imposing your definition on me when there is civil union already...wher e marriage is at, you should get the lawyers to add "and civil unions too."

That's it folks...that's my two cents.  All this discussion on technicality and definition doesn't help your cause and only excite more misunderstandi ng...You know what you need to do, just do it.

I'm done with these thread by the folks with a chip on their shoulder.   Have a great day.

u speak like a racist. like its okay for gays to take the bus but the rule say they have to sit in the back 

come back when u educate yourself