View Poll Results: Do you support the legalization of same sex marriages?

Voters
161. You may not vote on this poll
  • I'm opposed to same-sex marriage.

    94 58.39%
  • I'm in favor of civil unions for homosexuals but not marriage.

    29 18.01%
  • I believe same-sex marriage should be legal.

    27 16.77%
  • No opinion.

    11 6.83%
Page 16 of 24 FirstFirst ... 61112131415161718192021 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 231

Thread: Should Same Sex Marriage Be Legal?

  1. #151
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, April 17th, 2021 @ 11:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    6,434
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    201
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,261
    Thanked in
    745 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs. Lyfing View Post
    No, you are mistaken. I don't want to make everyones personal preference, I am only suggesting my opinions. And to me it seems you are trying to make everyones preference as well. Your opinion may be different than mine but we are doing the same thing.

    ..........

    Well, ain't that what I here for..? You sound like an old Althing member with quotes like that. Again, I am not knocking you or anyone else's door down forcing anything on you. I am giving my opinion, just as you. So, take that statement somewhere else.
    You are saying homosexual marriage should be illegal, so you do want to make heterosexual marriage everyone's preference. I don't have a personal preference for homosexuality. I prefer men. I don't want to marry another woman. But I'm not telling a lesbian woman that she shouldn't be able to legally marry another woman. That's the difference.

    Not in my eyes. Not in many people eyes will it ever be traditional.
    In your eyes no, because you still bear the cultural mark of what once was, but in decades interracialism will become condoned more and more, it will be propagandized as the ideal and the population will be programmed and brainwashed to accept it as traditional. After decades of interracialism, they will not accept anything else, because it will be "unnatural", "abnormal", blah, just like homosexuality is to you because your Christian-influenced society in American frowned on it for decades. Just make a comparison, decades ago it was legal to have Negro slaves and shoot Injuns, and few people thought it was abnormal or that there was anything wrong with it. Now more and more people cringe at the thought of having something like that legal, except for a small minority of the population.

    True it is through intercourse but you get what I meant.
    Oh I do, I just think it doesn't make sense to use it as an argument against homosexual marriage. Since marriage is an institution, it doesn't create or destroy children. So homosexual marriage won't harm procreation in any way. Which was your original argument against it, but it seems you change arguments as you post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jäger View Post
    The most important part of the recognition by the state is the support for this relationship,
    Obviously.

    why should the state support gay relationships?
    Because homosexuals who don't face opposition from the state turn into better and productive Germanic citizens. A homosexual who values the state will have a reason to defend it, instead of fighting against it because it doesn't grant him gay rights.

  2. #152
    Bloodhound
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Jäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Atlantean
    Gender
    Posts
    4,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    23
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    126
    Thanked in
    95 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Todesengel View Post
    Because homosexuals who don't face opposition from the state turn into better and productive Germanic citizens. A homosexual who values the state will have a reason to defend it, instead of fighting against it because it doesn't grant him gay rights.
    That's an argument of cowardice, the state who pays his citizens not to rebel against him is of no use.
    "Nothing is more disgusting than the majority: because it consists of a few powerful predecessors, of rogues who adapt themselves, of weak who assimilate themselves, and the masses who imitate without knowing at all what they want." (Johann Wolfgang Goethe)

  3. #153
    Senior Member
    Viking King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, May 17th, 2009 @ 02:50 AM
    Ethnicity
    Norse-Irish
    Ancestry
    Norway, Ireland, Scotland, France
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid + Bruenn
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    London
    Gender
    Family
    Youth
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Taoist
    Posts
    48
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    We are getting somewhere finally. Legal status doesn't speak of the value of something. Interracial marriage is legal, but it shouldn't be. The death penalty is illegal (in Europe), but it shouldn't be. Legal status is just what a state decides should be allowed and what not, it is relative. Now let's get back to your argument against homosexual marriage. You said homosexuals can already lead relationships, exchange rings, vows, etc. and be happy without marriage, thus, homosexual marriage shouldn't be allowed. I said heterosexuals can do all this and be happy without marriage too, so if the basis for disallowing something legally is that it can be done anyway without legal status, then heterosexual marriage should be illegal too.
    Legal status speaks of the value of something - dependent on the position held by the minority on that something. If you're a Nazi Racist who opposes interracial love or marriage, fine, but that doesn't make it an objective fact or truth - it's just an opinion. As fallible and unimportant as the next person’s opinion. What truly matters are the numbers. How many and what percentage of a human population hold this opinion opposing interracial marriage? That’s what counts, in the end.
    Homosexuals can not truly not be as happy as heterosexuals, without the choice of being able to marry, that heterosexuals are granted by default.

    Because homosexuals who don't face opposition from the state turn into better and productive Germanic citizens. A homosexual who values the state will have a reason to defend it, instead of fighting against it because it doesn't grant him gay rights.
    That's an argument of cowardice, the state who pays his citizens not to rebel against him is of no use.
    The state should work towards helpng the people, not working against or antagonising them.

  4. #154
    Senior Member
    Loddfafner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, March 26th, 2018 @ 11:59 PM
    Ethnicity
    European Blood, American Soil
    Ancestry
    English, Swedish, Scottish, Irish, German, Welsh
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Pennsylvania Pennsylvania
    Location
    New Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Beyond left and right
    Religion
    Odin/Thor/Freyr
    Posts
    947
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jäger View Post
    The state who pays his citizens not to rebel against him is of no use.
    The realization (with the help of Locke) that the state should be accountable to the populations it governs is, I believe, one of the main reasons for the prosperity of Germanic countries.

    Back to the topic of this thread: the merits of homosexuality and the merits of state involvement in marriage are separate issues from the merits of same-sex marriage. I take the merits of homosexuality as a false or irrelevant question. I reject the multiculturalists' treatment of gays as a fetish object just as I reject the insistence that they be loudly categorized as abnormal, deviant, and diseased as juvenile stances. Instead, the question is how best to incorporate them into the body politic. Casting them out (institutionalization, police raids on gay bars, parents expelling gay offspring into the street, etc) is cruel, unnecessary, and sends people with a lot to lose from Islamization straight into the hands of the multiculturalists.

    I am wary of gay marriage because I oppose fiddling with tradition for the same reasons Burke opposed the French Revolution. I don't see any point to it and suspect there are better options for gays to contribute to society. Those who adamantly oppose it, however, should realize that a major alternative, at least for men, is promiscuous sex in public toilets and parks.

    Is the role of the state really to pander to some individuals' distaste for other individuals, or is it to work with the conditions of the real world to maintain a prosperous society?
    The sitters in the hall seldom know
    The kin of the new-comer:
    The best man is marred by faults,
    The worst is not without worth.
    -- The Havamal, #133 (trans. Auden and Taylor)

  5. #155
    Bloodhound
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Jäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Atlantean
    Gender
    Posts
    4,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    23
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    126
    Thanked in
    95 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Loddfafner View Post
    The realization (with the help of Locke) that the state should be accountable to the populations it governs is, I believe, one of the main reasons for the prosperity of Germanic countries.
    You cannot please everyone.
    "Nothing is more disgusting than the majority: because it consists of a few powerful predecessors, of rogues who adapt themselves, of weak who assimilate themselves, and the masses who imitate without knowing at all what they want." (Johann Wolfgang Goethe)

  6. #156
    Senior Member
    Mrs. Lyfing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 21st, 2010 @ 10:21 PM
    Ethnicity
    Old Stock American
    Subrace
    Bruenn
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Alabama Alabama
    Location
    Where the mountains are
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    I Love Him!
    Occupation
    Women-ness.
    Politics
    Liberal/Traditional
    Religion
    Spiritual
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    16
    Thanked in
    16 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Todesengel View Post
    You are saying homosexual marriage should be illegal, so you do want to make heterosexual marriage everyone's preference. I don't have a personal preference for homosexuality. I prefer men. I don't want to marry another woman. But I'm not telling a lesbian woman that she shouldn't be able to legally marry another woman. That's the difference.
    No, I don't want to make it their preference. I can not change ones preference and from where I sit now I can nor can not change any laws. But, I back up the same sex marriage being illegal in my state. By legalizing it all it is doing is saying " its ok " I don't believe its ok. All it is doing is corrupting the traditional family. It should be ok for one to want to stand up for traditional family values. If it was offered to the U.S. more it would be beneficial. What is not beneficial is allowing gay marriage, polygamy, etc...which in all gives the same ideas as interracial relationships, that all these screwed up ideas some what to live by, is not right, nor acceptable. ( by it being illegal )

    Oh I do, I just think it doesn't make sense to use it as an argument against homosexual marriage. Since marriage is an institution, it doesn't create or destroy children. So homosexual marriage won't harm procreation in any way. Which was your original argument against it, but it seems you change arguments as you post.
    Marriage does not create children but the divorce or separation can and do destroy some children. Homosexual marriage can harm procreation by them adopting children together. I haven't changed any argument. FYI, it wasn't my only argument against it.


    Because homosexuals who don't face opposition from the state turn into better and productive Germanic citizens. A homosexual who values the state will have a reason to defend it, instead of fighting against it because it doesn't grant him gay rights.
    So, you think you give them their way and they are going to turn into greatful productive people..? Thats a lame excuse for one to better themselves or fight for their country. It is also a bad excuse because my country pisses me off daily, but I still defend it. Life isn't rosy...remember..? They can suck it up and get over not getting their way, just like the rest of us.
    "We've become a nation of strangers. There seems to be very little in common to bond us to our fellow Americans outside of our immediate families,some don't even have that to fall back on."

  7. #157
    Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 27th, 2010 @ 01:02 AM
    Ethnicity
    Icelandic
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Iceland Iceland
    Location
    Heathlands
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Occupation
    Proud Farmer
    Politics
    Odalist - Nationalist
    Religion
    Odalism
    Posts
    21
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Moronic and ineffective

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrioten View Post
    They should not be acknowledge in any way except for what they in reality are, an abnormality that seeks acceptance by legal means so they can force their leftist morality onto the people. Once they manage to achieve a position of moral superiority on a particular issue, you can be certain of the fact that they wont allow any opposition to their moral monopoly.

    This mentality is moronic and ineffective in my opinion. I have come across many homosexual individuals here in Iceland, some of them were awful products of leftist-liberal destructive modernity and others respected traditional culture, were monogamous, responsible, contributing and intelligent individuals who had their shit together, but they wanted a place to live and a chance of representation and intimacy, like most human beings.

    So while I oppose "homosexual marriage" in traditional culture, and realize a small % of any society will always be homosexual, it makes sense to me to allow homosexuals to create their own separate communities (neighborhoods even) where they can live open lifestyles as homosexual couples away from traditional/conservative communities: "oh so you're a fag looking for your own kind? Ok homosexual lifestyle is not welcome in this neighborhood, so go straight ahead 8 miles, take a left and then another left and you'll see a weird trendy neighborhood named 'Boyz-Town' go there and have some happy sodomy at your own risk, have a nice day mister."

    The same goes for Satanism, Drugs, Heavy/Black/Death Metal, Cannibalism etc. We need the doctrine of parallelism in our societies, or to quote an interesting philosopher:

    "In the linear Judeo-Christian worldview, one law applies to us all, and thus homosexuals have to be either 100% accepted or 100% classified as perverts. One law for us all is "equality," but my experience says that nature is rarely so absolute. There's a place for all types of people (but not everyone - we're overpopulated and should kill the 95% least capable in character, strength and intelligence) on this earth, although mixing the groups always causes internal division that results in compromise and degeneracy. One law for the ox, and one law for the raven; one neighborhood for stoners, and one for gays, and the rest for "normal" people living normal lives. Maybe this isn't a perfect solution, but it beats polite denial in conversation."

    Like killing all the "jews and niggers" will not make a better world, to holocaust all homosexuals will not solve any real problem either. Failed modern system is the real problem.

  8. #158
    Senior Member
    Patrioten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, June 27th, 2020 @ 10:02 PM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    1,920
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    21
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Who View Post
    This mentality is moronic and ineffective in my opinion. I have come across many homosexual individuals here in Iceland, some of them were awful products of leftist-liberal destructive modernity and others respected traditional culture, were monogamous, responsible, contributing and intelligent individuals who had their shit together, but they wanted a place to live and a change of representation and intimacy, like most human beings.
    If homosexuals are classified as normal by the state (which was done at a time when little was known about the nature of the disorder, and if their behaviour in itself wasn't enough for the pschyciatric boards which "made them normal", to draw the conclusion that it is a disorder then I must say that their authority on this matter is highly dubious), and if they manage to get the same privilegies as normal heterosexuals, their impact and influence in society will increase enormously, which it has over the course of a few years, and it will only get worse which I mentioned in another post. TV, advertising, education, sub-cultural influences, in public etc. etc.

    Normal people should not have to be exposed to these abnormal people or their actions, my kids if I have any, should not have to be exposed to them, it's as simple as that, just as we shouldn't have to be exposed to other sexual deviants. Stay in the clauset, I don't want to know who is gay or what they are up to (if it's criminal they should of course be dealt with) but keep the damn door closed.

    With acceptance comes inevitably demands for "rights", adoptions, inseminations, surrogate mothers and all kinds of unnatural ways of making sure that these abnormal people can get their hands on children. It's all about their "needs" and interests. There will be no end to the perversities. As a member said in an earlier post, give these people an inch and they'll take a mile. They wont be satisfied with marriage which is enough of an affront, they want children as well.

    Today's society is one giant cesspool, and it will only get worse. I don't have much hope of ever cleaning up the mess that has been created so far but as long as I have two eyes to see with and a functional brain I will oppose the monstrosity that they have created. They throw their perversities in my face, and I'll throw my hate in theirs.

  9. #159
    Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 27th, 2010 @ 01:02 AM
    Ethnicity
    Icelandic
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Iceland Iceland
    Location
    Heathlands
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Occupation
    Proud Farmer
    Politics
    Odalist - Nationalist
    Religion
    Odalism
    Posts
    21
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ulf View Post
    I agree that tradition has precedence over rights. Homosexuals do not follow my/our tradition. Just as you do not follow/abide by American constitutional rights/values, so don't the homosexuals follow our traditions. I agree they have no place in a traditional society, but we are quite far off from that now, maybe we have crossed the rubicon, though hopefully not.

    In the interest of preservation I feel that if we deny them these "rights", then at some point down the road the case may be made to deny us our traditions.
    Parallel societies offer a realistic solution .. not perfect, but it beats tyrannical "one-size-fits-all" law

  10. #160
    Senior Member
    Viking King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, May 17th, 2009 @ 02:50 AM
    Ethnicity
    Norse-Irish
    Ancestry
    Norway, Ireland, Scotland, France
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid + Bruenn
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    London
    Gender
    Family
    Youth
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Taoist
    Posts
    48
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    If homosexuals are classified as normal by the state (which was done at a time when little was known about the nature of the disorder, and if their behaviour in itself wasn't enough for the pschyciatric boards which "made them normal", to draw the conclusion that it is a disorder then I must say that their authority on this matter is highly dubious), and if they manage to get the same privilegies as normal heterosexuals, their impact and influence in society will increase enormously, which it has over the course of a few years, and it will only get worse which I mentioned in another post. TV, advertising, education, sub-cultural influences, in public etc. etc.

    Normal people should not have to be exposed to these abnormal people or their actions, my kids if I have any, should not have to be exposed to them, it's as simple as that, just as we shouldn't have to be exposed to other sexual deviants. Stay in the clauset, I don't want to know who is gay or what they are up to (if it's criminal they should of course be dealt with) but keep the damn door closed.

    With acceptance comes inevitably demands for "rights", adoptions, inseminations, surrogate mothers and all kinds of unnatural ways of making sure that these abnormal people can get their hands on children. It's all about their "needs" and interests. There will be no end to the perversities. As a member said in an earlier post, give these people an inch and they'll take a mile. They wont be satisfied with marriage which is enough of an affront, they want children as well.
    I'm sorry but I can't agree with anyone who believes that giving normal human beings like homosexuals “rights" - is a perversity. In all honesty I don't see what's abnormal about them. They may be rare or uncommon but they're not abnormal or perverse.

    By the way, I also agree with Dr. Who's hypothetical solution. But that kind of territorialization happens naturally with humans, the last thing I want to see is the government segregating homosexuals and other minorities into Ghettos. It's only the artificial multi-culturalization of a society by the government and media that results in antagonizing groups mixing with each other. I say live and let live

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Marriage Now Legal in Connecticut
    By Æmeric in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: Thursday, January 18th, 2018, 04:24 PM
  2. Obama Backs Same-Sex Marriage
    By Verðandi in forum The United States
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Tuesday, March 29th, 2016, 06:36 AM
  3. Gay marriage legal in Iowa for one day
    By Æmeric in forum The United States
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Saturday, September 1st, 2007, 07:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •