• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

EA Joins coalition against DOMA

men and women who are gay will be gay regardless of weather or not they can or do marry. Making marriage possible wouldnt mean that less straight people are making babies. Actually having the rights afforded through marriage would only make life better for those gay couples who are starting families through adoption or whatever.

The only reason anyone has against it is because of faith, religion, the bible. The bible says it is wrong and not acceptable therefor they will be against it (despite many other things the bible says are not acceptable but they just ignore that) Religion is the only real argument, and it shouldnt be considering the separation of church and state.





They can't win.

I was just using marriage as an example of one of the many avenues of gay bashing, since this thread is about that.

And I was just saying that same sex = no natural procreation or ability to create babies -- this also seems to be the issue thats at the core of most of the hatred, or a big part of the reason why certain groups of people are against it.

A gay person, or the notion of a gay relationship might evoke some base instinct in certain people, making them feel like they need to protect themselves/others against the gay notion/idea to ensure the safety of the human race.

And, perhaps the hatred against gay people is that feeling distilled into something focused; feelings are expressed differently by some people.
 
And I was just saying that same sex = no natural procreation or ability to create babies -- this also seems to be the issue thats at the core of most of the hatred, or a big part of the reason why certain groups of people are against it.

and yet sterile couples can marry, and couples with no intention of having kids can marry.
 
seems a rather pointless gesture since the Obama administration isn't even bothering to defend DOMA in court (which is a completely different problem in so much they shouldn't pick and choose which laws they defend, it's the Justice Department's job to defend the laws)
 
I was just using marriage as an example of one of the many avenues of gay bashing, since this thread is about that.

And I was just saying that same sex = no natural procreation or ability to create babies -- this also seems to be the issue thats at the core of most of the hatred, or a big part of the reason why certain groups of people are against it.

A gay person, or the notion of a gay relationship might evoke some base instinct in certain people, making them feel like they need to protect themselves/others against the gay notion/idea to ensure the safety of the human race.

And, perhaps the hatred against gay people is that feeling distilled into something focused; feelings are expressed differently by some people.


all of which is useless in a debate against same sex marriage because gay people will be gay regardless. Its about tolerance. No one has to be OK with it, because it will exist either way. The important thing is not to impinge freedom. This is why these kinds of things are not supposed to be voted on by the people. Majority does not rule when it comes to civil rights.

and lets be honest. the core of why anyone is really against it is religion, not fear of human race going extinct as if everyone in the world was going to turn gay if it was widely accepted. The only way someone would want to marry someone of the same sex is if he or she is already a homosexual. Therefor it has nothing to do with fear of people being gay, but simply an acquired intolerance to it because of religious beliefs.

seems a rather pointless gesture since the Obama administration isn't even bothering to defend DOMA in court (which is a completely different problem in so much they shouldn't pick and choose which laws they defend, it's the Justice Department's job to defend the laws)


They deem DOMA unconstitutional and therefor are not going to defend it.
 
They deem DOMA unconstitutional and therefor are not going to defend it.

that's the Supreme Court's job not the DOJ's

how would you feel if a future Republican administration refuses to defend a law they don't like in courts? will laws only be enforced if the current administration likes them? it's a dangerous precedent
 
and yet sterile couples can marry, and couples with no intention of having kids can marry.

But, but... people who don't want to have kids COULD change their mind. It could happen!

And sterile couples um... well... um they honor the image of marriage by being one of each gender! They're a philosophically correct couple. They won't confuse children who see them on the street.

all of which is useless in a debate against same sex marriage because gay people will be gay regardless. Its about tolerance. No one has to be OK with it, because it will exist either way. The important thing is not to impinge freedom. This is why these kinds of things are not supposed to be voted on by the people. Majority does not rule when it comes to civil rights.

The notion that you have to get over gay people and deal with their existence is at the very core of 'gay is a choice' rhetoric and institutions like conversion therapy.

I have sat and listened to people who on about how The Gay has to be a choice, just a behavior people 'accidentally' picked up. Half the time, they sound as if they're feverishly trying to convince themselves that's true, rather than the person they're talking to.

Because the realization that gay isn't going away, is too close to the surface. They are terrified of it surfacing, because then they must reconcile notions like 'gays shouldn't exist' or 'God says gays are bad' with the incontrovertible fact that gays will never go away.

And how could gay be bad if it's natural? How could gays still exist if God himself (or so they think) says they are bad?

It's the sort of thing to rock reality tunnels and make them begin to crumble. People become scared when that feeling sets in.
 
I have sat and listened to people who on about how The Gay has to be a choice, just a behavior people 'accidentally' picked up. Half the time, they sound as if they're feverishly trying to convince themselves that's true, rather than the person they're talking to..

I had this talk with a friend of mine who was quite weird about the whole idea of homosexuality before I came out and he didnt understand it at all. The easiest way I could get him to understand it was to ask him how his feelings and attraction for women developed and how he felt about it, was it something he controlled, is there any way he could change those feelings. After asking him this and getting his answers its like he just got that it was not a choice, and then the question became is it part of the genome or an offset development. I told him that if there are 2 identical twin boys and 1 is gay, there is like a 70 or 80% chance the other is gay as well, as opposed to a 10% or so chance for fraternal siblings. He understood that. Later it became about marriage rights and as soon as I was able to explain how a Wedding Ceremony and a Marriage License differed, he agreed that it should be offered.

that's the Supreme Court's job not the DOJ's

how would you feel if a future Republican administration refuses to defend a law they don't like in courts? will laws only be enforced if the current administration likes them? it's a dangerous precedent

If its unconstitutional in their eyes they will not defend it. Its also different from enforcing a law. they will enforce a law as long as its in place while they may move to change it. same sex marriages are not recognized on a federal level are they? because DOMA is in place. and besides, changing laws is part of siding with a party. They tend to have different views.
 
It's not shoehorning in for an agenda. Why is straight the default?

It's possible we wouldn't exist as a species if straight wasn't the default.
Also video games like writers create 'fantasy' worlds. They shouldn't have to cave into pressure to do what's acceptable in the normal world, they should have the freedom to do whatever either include gay characters or don't it's their choice.
 
It's not shoehorning in for an agenda. Why is straight the default?

You are assuming that they are straight because you are assuming that straight is the default. I don't think we know much about the sexual preferences of practically every FPS protagonist, they could all be gay or bisexual for all we know. Or do they need to say "Hello Bravo 5, I'm the gay leader of Charlie 2"? :P

Oops, kind of a necrobump, I had this thread opened from last night.
 
QEj7O.jpg



Great news!
 
all of which is useless in a debate against same sex marriage because gay people will be gay regardless. Its about tolerance. No one has to be OK with it, because it will exist either way. The important thing is not to impinge freedom. This is why these kinds of things are not supposed to be voted on by the people. Majority does not rule when it comes to civil rights.

and lets be honest. the core of why anyone is really against it is religion, not fear of human race going extinct as if everyone in the world was going to turn gay if it was widely accepted. The only way someone would want to marry someone of the same sex is if he or she is already a homosexual. Therefor it has nothing to do with fear of people being gay, but simply an acquired intolerance to it because of religious beliefs.




They deem DOMA unconstitutional and therefor are not going to defend it.

I'm not trying to debate anything, I'm merely stating my opinion on the roots of intolerance towards gays -- which is that it stems from a basic human instinct of fear from exctinction. In the sense of how nature works and maintains itself, and the constant, universal law of evolution and progression (Time moves forward, things change and evolve.) homosexuality is not natural (Again; in THAT sense.) -- it doesn't matter if it's limited to one or two people at one point, humans might perceives it as a threat cause time moves forward and things change, and might react (With a feeling and/or idea/notion.) instinctially because "who knows how many people those 1 or 2 might turn into eventually.".

It might be naturally relative to this concept;

"Possibly pheromones, odorous chemicals given off
by males/females to attract mates (male’s sweat
and female’s urine) activates the hypothalamus
(controls sexual behavior);
a natural incest
prevention mechanism; inhibits sexual attraction
for daughters."


-- forensicconsultation.org/files/Chapter_11.ppt

Not sure how legit that site is, but I've read about that somewhere else as well. I think it applies to every member in a family, but the quote only mentions a father/daughter scenario because it's specifically about the influence fathers have on daughters.

I personally have nothing against gay people, and try to be as open minded as possible. How should you behave around a gay person? Should you be aware of it, and talk to him/her about it? Or should you try to deny it, try not to bring up anything gay related, and imagine he/she is straight? Or is it even bigoted to bring up such a question?

I personally think that you should be aware of it, and not be afraid to ask questions -- since you are straight in such a scenario, learning things from the "gay perspective" is probably more useful than any other option and might even broaden your horizons.
 
Soooo, why is this thread in the gaming section of GAF again?

Because I'm not seeing any gaming discussion here at all, except the "put a gay main character in your most important franchise" comment...
 
I totally disagree. Even though marriage was made up to stop integration it's still should be between man and a woman. Folks are really subdued in the head of they think a man and a man or woman on woman is acceptable. An abomination it is and always will be.

...as a ninja, i am impressed by your skills. successfully hiding from the hammer out in the open like this, it's not a feat i've seen prior.
 
I'm not trying to debate anything, I'm merely stating my opinion on the roots of intolerance towards gays -- which is that it stems from a basic human instinct of fear from exctinction. In the sense of how nature works and maintains itself, and the constant, universal law of evolution and progression (Time moves forward, things change and evolve.) homosexuality is not natural (Again; in THAT sense.) -- it doesn't matter if it's limited to one or two people at one point, humans might perceives it as a threat cause time moves forward and things change, and might react (With a feeling and/or idea/notion.) instinctially because "who knows how many people those 1 or 2 might turn into eventually.".

It might be naturally relative to this concept;

"Possibly pheromones, odorous chemicals given off
by males/females to attract mates (male’s sweat
and female’s urine) activates the hypothalamus
(controls sexual behavior);
a natural incest
prevention mechanism; inhibits sexual attraction
for daughters."


-- forensicconsultation.org/files/Chapter_11.ppt

Not sure how legit that site is, but I've read about that somewhere else as well. I think it applies to every member in a family, but the quote only mentions a father/daughter scenario because it's specifically about the influence fathers have on daughters.

I personally have nothing against gay people, and try to be as open minded as possible. How should you behave around a gay person? Should you be aware of it, and talk to him/her about it? Or should you try to deny it, try not to bring up anything gay related, and imagine he/she is straight? Or is it even bigoted to bring up such a question?

I personally think that you should be aware of it, and not be afraid to ask questions -- since you are straight in such a scenario, learning things from the "gay perspective" is probably more useful than any other option and might even broaden your horizons.


Just to be clear im not trying to debate anything with you, im expressing why its invalid in a debate, or any argument really. Not once have I ever seen "a basic human instinct of fear from exctinction" used as a real reason for homophobia for too long. It ultimately always boils down to bigotry religion and the bible. Gay relationships and sexual activity was fairly common in ancient cultures, like greece, up until religion was brought into them.

Its great that you have nothing against gay people, and the community would appreciate more of that tolerance.
 
Just to be clear im not trying to debate anything with you, im expressing why its invalid in a debate, or any argument really. Not once have I ever seen "a basic human instinct of fear from exctinction" used as a real reason for homophobia for too long. It ultimately always boils down to bigotry religion and the bible. Gay relationships and sexual activity was fairly common in ancient cultures, like greece, up until religion was brought into them.

Its great that you have nothing against gay people, and the community would appreciate more of that tolerance.

Intolerance usually stems from ignorance/unwillingness to understand; a race is different than another, etc. Some people might prefer the same sex. There are several more factors of course but I think it has a lot to do with "people who are different than you."

But the reason I thought the primal, instinctual response to the concept of "gay" might be fear of extinction is because I thought that nature would enforce some restrictions on the first humans in the form of instinctual responses to ensure reproduction.

Anyhow, ugh..! I just realised that, for some reason, I didn't factor polygamy into the "equation". Ooops...

That basically makes the fear of exctinction theory pointless in modern society atleast, since humans are more aware of options and responsibilities and can obviously be together with a man and a woman, or reproduce with a woman when "necessary". But would this also apply to the caveman?

However, again in the sense of the protection of the species, other people should also realise that gay people could mate with females, which again calls the unecessary bigotry into question. Why? People speaking against gays throughout history is one thing, but why does it continue to resonate with people?

On a philosophical level, what makes people dislike gay people? The very core/root of the issue..
 
I totally disagree. Even though marriage was made up to stop integration it's still should be between man and a woman. Folks are really subdued in the head of they think a man and a man or woman on woman is acceptable. An abomination it is and always will be.

And.. because?

Marriage was around as a concept before the abrahamic faiths, and was in fact co-opted by them. They added their "man and woman only" stipulation later.

You're probably just a drive by comment anyway, but I wonder if you even have an explanation for why it's an abomination.
 
I totally disagree. Even though marriage was made up to stop integration it's still should be between man and a woman. Folks are really subdued in the head of they think a man and a man or woman on woman is acceptable. An abomination it is and always will be.

Are you anti-gay or are you anti-gay-marriage?

Edit: Ohhhh, and banned.
 
Respawn was making similar comments in the FE: Fates gay marriage thread, guess someone was looking through their post history and necroed?
 
Top Bottom