You lose. The quotas are in place to keep workplaces from having all white men, thus preventing discrimination. If you don't get the job, then it's probably because you aren't qualified. As for abortion, as soon as the fetus can be transferred from the woman's body to yours, then we'll talk.

Abortion, who the fk are you to tell a woman she must see your semen through to some child, you dont own her body.
I know ill impregnate you, now you cant get rid of my child cause I say so.

How do you feel about going though a child growing inside you, giving birth to it in agony and spending every penny you earn on my chils for 21 yrs.

you still convinced

Two words: racial profiling.

Another two words: wage gap.

The discrimination the others are talking about are over because the people being discriminated against fought for their rights, just as homosexuals are doing to be given the right to legally marry their partners. In thirty years time when same sex marriages are as a normal as a woman voting or working, or a black person having the same rights as a white person then people will be saying that discrimination against homosexuals is over.

Racial quotas aren't detrimental to white people. If they are detrimental at all then it's detrimental to ALL people by putting such a limit on things.

FYI: women have the rights when it comes to abortion because they are the ones who have to bear the child, it's them who will go through pregnancy, childbirth, who will do most of the work in caring for and raising the child. Men are NOT being discriminated against there.

I win. If all of the white men are more qualified than the black ones, then it's fair that they are all employed, and the quotas were invented by opportunistic blacks who can't get a job or a place in college because they aren't capacitated, and rely on their skin to do the job for them. As for abortion, the baby is 50% the father, 50% the mother, don't you think they should have equal rights about it?

Situation: You put a coin in the soda vending machine. Who's the soda is? Yours or the machine's? (this is a joke, my arguments are above)

Sure, they can have equal rights after it's born. Until then it is still living off the woman's body. The woman makes the choice because it's her body, not the man's.

So utterly moronis it doesn't deserve my thoughts,
I find it really hard to think down to this level,

But I can,

Liar Liar pants on fire,


Go away, idiot

See my link about racial profiling. Also, read the history section of your own "racial quotas" link.

The man only has equal rights when the baby's born. The mother's the one who carries the baby, and suffers from all of the potential risks of pregnancy.

Just because something is banned doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are still neo-nazis and the KKK is alive and well in the American South, especially in some parts of Alabama and Georgia. My white classmate once said he was invited to a KKK meeting but declined. Another black classmate that came from Alabama said you could see them walking down the streets in their white cloaks there. The discrimination we described (except giving up your bus seat. That was stopped thanks to Rosa Parks and the rest of the Civil Rights protesters) is still happening daily, maybe not as widespread, blatantm or severe as it used to be. However, in certain cases and places it still is.

Racial quotas and affirmative action is a bit troubling to me because it can bar whites from jobs but when the day a non-white person can walk into a place to get a job interview and not automatically be "unfit for the job" then will racial quotas be unneeded. Whites are still the majority in high-ranked positions and many colleges and on average, non-whites are the ones financially underprivilaged thus the creation of affirmative action, to at let non-whites be on the same level as whites, not above.

You've only added to the argument that not allowing gay people to marry, even if they were allowed "civil unions" is denying them some rights that married couples have, things much deeper than a mere matter of terminology, and the document seems not to deal with the silliness of saying marriage is a sacrament before God when atheists can marry.

I don't recall saying marriages and civil unions were the same, merely that religion had nothing to do with marriage in quite a few countries. Then why would the Church have anything to say about the "sanctity" of marriage if they don't own the monopoly to it? Think about it.

Not if they were chosen over equally qualified blacks because of their skin color. Yes, there will be non-whites that'll use racial quotas to their unfair advantage but there'll also be qualified non-whites that'll appreciate the lift up when they could've lost the job because of their skin color.

I find the whole debate on gay marriage rediculous.
Two people love each other, decide to make a commitment to be together always,
Isn't that marriage.
So why is it such a problem.

That is what it means to you, but not necessarily what it means to someone else. I feel the OP answered their question in the first post. The problem is simply changing the minds of those that oppose you. That can be difficult since parents teach their children what they themselves were taught.

Because my religion shall control America, that's way. [/sarcasm]

You should read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins

Why is that?

People don't have to read about atheism, they must realize that everyone doesn't share the same religious beleifs so religion must stay out of government to be equal.

It's no sillyness, it's one of the seven Sacraments. I don't recall you saying marriage through law and civil unions were different.

Most gays don't really want to marry and have a commitment. They just want to fuck things like family, values, religion and disguise themselves in the "equal rights" stuff



No, black people no longer lose jobs because of their color.



But the baby is the man's too, and the baby is a life, even if it's living off the women's body, and if murder is banned there are no reasons for abortion to no to be.



If she know she would take risks, why would she get pregnant? I read your link and I see you appreciate the 60's, especially because this doesn't happens anymore.

It upholds what you said, children believe what their parents believe.
If you arent faith based you will find it facinating.

Athiesm is a belief, why do you object to a point of view?,
Everyone should read about Atheism, it's a part of life.

Hear that, Safyre? Your love is fake. If we allow gay marriage, no gay couple would ever want to get married.



Really? As for the pregnancy, virtually every pregnancy has risks. What do think the doctor is there for, free porn?

I see, thanks for the reference. Seems interesting enough and I'm agnostic. However I do understand why religious people are against same sex marriage, though I do not agree with them.

I have to confess, this has irked me beyond belief. Would you want to be the child who grows up starving and crying every night because your mother can't afford to look after you and your father walked out after saying "no, you have to keep it because I said so and it's my kid too."? I highly doubt it, it may be taking a life, but surely you'd rather LEGALLY take a life than bring a child into a world where it will only suffer because the guy you were with thought it'd be nice to have a kid he can just fuck off and ignore.

Slightly more on topic. I'm pretty in key with "religion plays a large part in morally objecting to homosexuality"



Please direct me to your sources. Seriously, "most gays"? Do you even KNOW what goes on in the heads of "most gays"? I can't emphasise how biggotted that makes you look, if you are not "most gays" yourself, how can you possibly know what they want? Did "most gays" sign some sort of document that says "I just want to fuck family values and religion"?

An edit just to say my example on not aborting is a "worst case scenario" if you will. I think men should have a say in abortion to a certain extent, but not be capable of forcing a woman to bring a child into the world when she can't cope or look after it, which (from the experience of people I know) is a main reason for abortion in the first place. It's not for shits and giggles and should be thought out thoroughly before keeping or "aborting"

You can't be serious strangeguy. Non-blacks lose job opportunities all the time because of their skin color and a woman can't have a job and raise children at the same time? Maybe this happens in Brazil but in America, these things happen.

The only thing I could agree with you is men's rights with abortion. I believe the father should have some legal say in an abortion since without him, the baby wouldn't have existed. Plus, men do like raising children too.

Neil, it's a bit unfair to think people should have to read about The God Delusion. What if a Christian felt that everyone should read the Bible because it's a part of life? Again, reflecting your religious beliefs on others.

strangeguy, what will gays marrying affect you any? Will your marriage fall apart? Your children will get on drugs? Morals will go down the drain and people will start killing each other for the sport of it? Churches will burn and religions will be done away with?

So, I looked up marriage law in Brazil:

1)Marriage in Brazil is a matter of local law of the province of the marrying spouses, and is accomplished through a Brazilian notarial office known in Portuguese as "Cartório".

2)Registering the intent to marry is not the same thing as registering the actual marriage.

3)Once the documents have been filed and the fees paid, a waiting period of 30 days begins for the marriage license to be approved. From this point, the marriage licence is valid for three months during which time the parties may legally get married.

4)Another fee is charged to register the marriage at the Civil Registry Office. This registration must take place prior to the marriage.

Marriage in Brazil is bureaucratic. The process can be slow and legal rules are rigid. All individuals, regardless of nationality, who desire to be married in Brazil, must comply with the Brazilian Law.

The process must begin at a Brazilian notarial office, and according to the local law, the office chosen depends on the parties' Brazilian residence. Marriages are performed at the Civil Registry Office that has jurisdiction over the residence of the registration of the party.

5)Religious ceremonies may be performed but they are not legally recognized, therefore they are also not considered legally binding.

I guess that there are only Civil Unions in Brazil, as all marriages are by law, not religion.



I love how the religious right screams that gay marriage is a destruction of family and family values. How is getting married NOT part of family, and a family value?

I don't care. I want to get married, and I don't see why this right should be denied.

Why? Why would we spend our time on that? We have social lives.