Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How would you reproduce people via homosexual means? No reproduction, no mankind. Period.
There's no ignorance on my part - just common sense. In fact, the ignorance is on those who support the lifestyle - an ignorance towards how to use the parts on one's body properly.
Sex was given to mankind (and animals) primarily for procreation.
Your ignorance here is astounding.
Assuming that EVERY male and female would just drop their relationships and what they're doing just to have gay sex is reaching, asinine, and totally baseless.
You do realize how much of an ass you sound like, right? You're straight (I'm assuming) and so am I. Does that mean that us as men will go and try to have sex with other men if/when homosexual marriage is accepted in all 50 states? No it doesn't.
All that means is that people who WANT that sort of thing will be able to have it. Traditional...rather Straight marriage will ALWAYS be around. I have no idea why you're even of the mindset that it'll disappear without a trace if homosexual marriage is legalized in the US in all 50 states.
Pretty arrogant and asinine for you do to do so. Join us in 2012, thanks.
How would you reproduce people via homosexual means? No reproduction, no mankind. Period.
There's no ignorance on my part - just common sense. In fact, the ignorance is on those who support the lifestyle - an ignorance towards how to use the parts on one's body properly.
Sex was given to mankind (and animals) primarily for procreation.
Are people really still using this argument, while knowing FULL WELL that procreation isn't a requirement of ANY marriage? We all know a penis fits in a vagina, and that a man & woman are needed to make a baby - we learned that in 5th grade sex ed, thanks. Now can we move on with the legal discussion, and actually acknowledge the fact that straight people don't need to have babies to get married? So again, how is procreation relative to LEGAL UNIONS??? It's not, which is why you guys love to avoid answering or addressing these questions.
Assuming that EVERY male and female would just drop their relationships and what they're doing just to have gay sex is reaching, asinine, and totally baseless.
You do realize how much of an ass you sound like, right? You're straight (I'm assuming) and so am I. Does that mean that us as men will go and try to have sex with other men if/when homosexual marriage is accepted in all 50 states? No it doesn't.
All that means is that people who WANT that sort of thing will be able to have it. Traditional...rather Straight marriage will ALWAYS be around. I have no idea why you're even of the mindset that it'll disappear without a trace if homosexual marriage is legalized in the US in all 50 states.
Pretty arrogant and asinine for you do to do so. Join us in 2012, thanks.
It really is astounding, huh? So just because I support two consenting adults being free to marry, that means I don't understand how the human body works? It seems only "DRob" is confused here, since he doesn't seem to realize that straight people ALSO use their bodies "not as intended"... or is he going to claim only gay people practice oral & anal sex? Yeah right.
This isn't about sexual acts, although the antis do seem rather obsessed with that aspect - it's about relationships and legal contracts, not what parts they put where or whether they plan to breed. If those were the bases of marriage, probably 90% (or more) of all hetero marriages would be null & void too.
the world being 100% gay is a pretty big leap from letting gays get married, buddy.
LMAO... they're grasping, which always happens once their "logical arguments" are shot out of the water. So DRob, would you start sleeping with men if gay marriage were legalized nationally tomorrow? Would you like me to set you up with a nice boy?
Speak for yourself. Don't speak for the millions of same-sex couples who cherish the ability or deeply desire the opportunity to marry their partners. They truly do value marriage and what it encompasses.
Once AGAIN! The PEOPLE making the argument don't have anything to do with the argument itself. That is an ad hominem fallacy, arguing against the PERSON rather than the argument.
"An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument." Fallacy: Ad Hominem
One most certainly does not have to be religious to oppose SSM. Atheists also make these same arguments.
And THIS argument is a red herring, taking us off on a tangent.
Pull the stick out of your ass, and pay attention. If the argument against same-sex marriage is religious in nature, regardless of marriage itself being a secular construct, it's a religious argument. That's pretty straight forward, no matter how bunched up those panties get.
Pull the stick out of your ass, and pay attention. If the argument against same-sex marriage is religious in nature, regardless of marriage itself being a secular construct, it's a religious argument. That's pretty straight forward, no matter how bunched up those panties get.
Nice. Very professional. More Ad Hominem attacks. I'll ignore them and give you ONE more chance.
First, let's deconstruct this sentence. If the argument against same-sex marriage is religious in nature, regardless of marriage itself being a secular construct, it's a religious argument.
If argument = religious
even if marriage = secular
the argument = religious
That's circular reasoning. Yu-doy!
You said "the argument is religious, therefore it's a religious argument."
Anyway, that's not what ORIGINALLY you said. And it's not what I said.
You said...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden
The principle opposition to same-sex marriage are religious fundamentalists. While the subject at hand, marriage, is secular, the opposition is religious, which very much makes it a religious discussion.
See? People. You said if religious people make an argument, the argument is religious. That's an ad hominem fallacy.
Get your story straight.
This new statement of yours depends on the idea that the argument is religious. But it's not a religious argument.
The ENTIRE debate boils down to harm. Whether or not SSM is harmful is very much up in the air. We can study it. Or we can let it loose. But homosexuals don't want us to study it. They just want us to let it loose. Is it ethical to just let it loose though? Is it ethical to experiment on society? No! Why not? Because what happens if your experiment does harm? Is there any indication that homosexuality is harmful? YES! We are talking about a group of people who are BANNED from giving blood! What? Why would they be banned? Is the FDA bigoted? Of course not. Their job is to protect the blood supply, and the CDC tells us that men who have sex with men account for 61% of all new HIV cases each year. The CDC says that homosexuals are 44 times more likely to catch HIV because of their behavior. THAT is why they are not allowed to give blood. Their behavior.
Ever since the APA removed homosexuality from the DSM in 1973, homosexuals have had the chance to prove to the rest of the world that their behavior is benign. But they did the opposite. The evidence speaks against them. And we are supposed to trust this group of people that they won't harm us? This 3% of the population? We are supposed to just let loose same sex marriage when this group of people has demonstrated that they can't be trusted? Absolutely not. I have tolerance. But not for people who won't see the truth. Not for people who refuse to see the harm that they are doing. I'm not bigoted. I'm reasonable. It's REASONABLE to protect yourself from a group of people who demonstrate time and again that they are harmful.
Do you see what I just wrote? This argument? It's not a religious argument. It's based on simple logic combined with statistics.
THERE! Will you PLEASE stop saying that it's a religious debate now?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
