W
warthog
[COLOR=\"Silver\"]
----------
[/COLOR]
Republic is a foreign concept
Republics will destroy your family (only one person will make decisions)
Republicans should be CRUSHED
Under no circumstances should republicans be allowed to marry or adopt children , they threaten the very social fabric of our country
are you mad?
WE are a republic,we celebrate republic day.
here you go
republic=rule of law
monarchy=rule by one
democracy is mob rule period
http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?gl=IN&hl=en-GB&v=DioQooFIcgE
----------
----------
[/COLOR]
Republic is a foreign concept
Republics will destroy your family (only one person will make decisions)
Republicans should be CRUSHED
Under no circumstances should republicans be allowed to marry or adopt children , they threaten the very social fabric of our country
are you mad?
WE are a republic,we celebrate republic day.
here you go
republic=rule of law
monarchy=rule by one
democracy is mob rule period
http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?gl=IN&hl=en-GB&v=DioQooFIcgE
----------
W
warthog
no i have changed my mind.I am only against same sex marriage.For me making love with the same sex is unnatural and for a gay person making love with a opposite sex is unnatural.I just dont want it to be set as a precedent to have more and more corruption of society in the name of gay.now all i ant is for the judiciary to decriminalize marijuana.Hell marijuana is a culture specially for sadhus and shiv bhakts and there has been not a single case of marijuana related death.you are against a republic and you dont even know the meaning of republic.In democracy if 51% said that India should give its sovereignty to Pakistan then it would happen.
ahem. for a gay person having sex with opposite sex is not natural (because he is gay!).
----------
if we can have species on this planet which can reproduce without any sexual partner.
i bet there must be species which can reproduce with same sex partner (nature is wonderful).
why is it unnatural for humans to explore their sexual tendencies.
i guess the argument against this would be... gays cannot reproduce having sex with gays.
i have no answer to that. maybe evolution would make that possible! 
hyea:
----------
if we can have species on this planet which can reproduce without any sexual partner.
i bet there must be species which can reproduce with same sex partner (nature is wonderful).
why is it unnatural for humans to explore their sexual tendencies.
i guess the argument against this would be... gays cannot reproduce having sex with gays.
i have no answer to that. maybe evolution would make that possible! hyea:Homosexual behavior in animals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
basically kicks the whole 'unnatural' and 'psychological problems' argument in the butt
Can anyone tell me if not gene's , what makes some animals homosexual ?
basically kicks the whole 'unnatural' and 'psychological problems' argument in the butt
Can anyone tell me if not gene's , what makes some animals homosexual ?
W
warthog
evolution does not exist.remember its charles darwin's theory of evolution, it is not evolution.Over time scientists ego's removed the word theory of.but i still believe that homosexuality can be cured.
btw. i guess marriage is not even a natural process. it is a man made phenomenon. :wewin:
----------
Whether this has logical or ethical implications is also a source of debate, with some arguing that it is illogical to use animal behavior to justify what is or is not moral (see appeal to nature).
ah ha ha ha, so essentially only humans can be considered moral natural creatures on this planet?
----------
Appeal to nature - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
----------
Whether this has logical or ethical implications is also a source of debate, with some arguing that it is illogical to use animal behavior to justify what is or is not moral (see appeal to nature).
ah ha ha ha, so essentially only humans can be considered moral natural creatures on this planet?
----------
Appeal to nature - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
tech_enthu
Regulars
Excerpts from a balanced presentation of the issue from the point of view of 'hindu ethos'. Please study this article.
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Homosexuality+is+not+a+virtue&artid=|h1DXfUW5DY=&SectionID=d16Fdk4iJhE=&MainSectionID=HuSUEmcGnyc=&SectionName=aVlZZy44Xq0bJKAA84nwcg==&SEO=
Historian Devdutt Pattanaik says that in Hindu literature ‘though not part of the mainstream, the existence of homosexuality was recognised, but, not approved’. Narada smiriti prohibited marriage of homo*sexual men with women. Manu did suggest mild punishments for homos, but of an extreme type. The Indian tradition therefore neither encouraged nor punished lesbians or gays; nor did it celebrate them or despise them. It regarded them as a small, marginal fact of life, preferring to ignore them; and treating them as not worthy of public discussion for or against that might disturb the rest of the society.
In the Indian tradition, homosexuals, as elsewhere, were thus regarded as deviants. But, here, unlike in the Abrahamic, the right of these deviants to exist without being
punished was never denied; and will never be. Yet no one can argue here or elsewhere that homosexuality is a virtue. No law or court of law can declare it as a virtue. That is the crux of the debate; and that is what is being obfuscated.
----------
ooh. public loos accessible everywhere. those would need water too. lots of it. in a country where we do not have enough water for drinking... :huh:
Why urinals have come into discussion in this thread? Is it because, in the west, public toilets are the meeting/touting point of gays.
Mumbai will soon have 11 waterless urinals at the Gateway of India.
There is a 150mm slab of chemicals put below the urinal pot.
The waterless urinal cartridge contains a blue liquid chemical seal that acts as a drain trap and controls the smell.
There will be no additional charges for users and the rates will be the same as other public toilets.
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Homosexuality+is+not+a+virtue&artid=|h1DXfUW5DY=&SectionID=d16Fdk4iJhE=&MainSectionID=HuSUEmcGnyc=&SectionName=aVlZZy44Xq0bJKAA84nwcg==&SEO=
Historian Devdutt Pattanaik says that in Hindu literature ‘though not part of the mainstream, the existence of homosexuality was recognised, but, not approved’. Narada smiriti prohibited marriage of homo*sexual men with women. Manu did suggest mild punishments for homos, but of an extreme type. The Indian tradition therefore neither encouraged nor punished lesbians or gays; nor did it celebrate them or despise them. It regarded them as a small, marginal fact of life, preferring to ignore them; and treating them as not worthy of public discussion for or against that might disturb the rest of the society.
In the Indian tradition, homosexuals, as elsewhere, were thus regarded as deviants. But, here, unlike in the Abrahamic, the right of these deviants to exist without being
punished was never denied; and will never be. Yet no one can argue here or elsewhere that homosexuality is a virtue. No law or court of law can declare it as a virtue. That is the crux of the debate; and that is what is being obfuscated.
----------
ooh. public loos accessible everywhere. those would need water too. lots of it. in a country where we do not have enough water for drinking... :huh:
Why urinals have come into discussion in this thread? Is it because, in the west, public toilets are the meeting/touting point of gays.
Mumbai will soon have 11 waterless urinals at the Gateway of India.
There is a 150mm slab of chemicals put below the urinal pot.
The waterless urinal cartridge contains a blue liquid chemical seal that acts as a drain trap and controls the smell.
There will be no additional charges for users and the rates will be the same as other public toilets.
\Manu did suggest mild punishments for homos,
Mild?
If a stri [adult woman] was found having sexual relations with a kanya [unmarried girl], for instance, her "head should be shaved immediately or two of her fingers should be cut off, and she should be made to ride on a donkey."[20] If two kanya have sex, each "must be fined two hundred (panas), pay the double of her (nuptial) fee, and receive ten (lashes with a) rod
Yeah , just two fingers , doesnt seem much
Mild?
If a stri [adult woman] was found having sexual relations with a kanya [unmarried girl], for instance, her "head should be shaved immediately or two of her fingers should be cut off, and she should be made to ride on a donkey."[20] If two kanya have sex, each "must be fined two hundred (panas), pay the double of her (nuptial) fee, and receive ten (lashes with a) rod
Yeah , just two fingers , doesnt seem much
