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.
Ohh gee, look at that. The ******* agenda has led to a breakdown in marriages and now the ******* agenda wants us to believe their agenda, this time, is genuine, pure and moral.
First of all, your post is ignorant and ridiculous at its core. Anyone that uses the term "*******" is more than a bit immature and short on intelligent things to say, but I'll look past that for now. How does anyone else's marriage affect yours or anyone else's? This is not a rhetorical question.
First of all, your post is ignorant and ridiculous at its core. Anyone that uses the term "*******" is more than a bit immature and short on intelligent things to say, but I'll look past that for now. How does anyone else's marriage affect yours or anyone else's? This is not a rhetorical question.
It wouldn't affect me or anyone else except for the fact that homosexual couples are requiring marriages to be given to them so that they can be subsidized. Therein lies who, what, when, why and how it affects me and everyone else. You want me to pay for something? Fine, but then I get to dictate every single part of what you're asking me to pay for. If you want to take subsidizing marriages out of the equation that's fine too but then you'll have to explain how you're going to fund your welfare state.
Society's well being depends on the basic unit of society: family, which is based on marriage between a man and a woman. Legal marriage is primarily for the benefit of society, especially the future of society: CHILDREN. Children are created by a man and a woman.
Studies and common sense, show that children also thrive best by being raised by the 2 opposite sexes that created them (nature is wise).
Gay marriage denies the right for a child to have both a mother and father, & basically states, "Mothers aren't really important - 2 dads are ok, or Fathers aren't really important - 2 moms are ok." When this false!"
Well first of all that was a very long post. I didn't even finish it. But anyway, I'm pretty sure anyone can agree that marriage between a man and a woman doesn't have the same meaning it once did. Nowadays it's more about the festivities. But let me run some facts to speed this up:
Family: I was raised by a single parent and turned out perfect. In my opinion we were a family. We took vacations and everything.
Legal marriage: How does it benefit society. I'm pretty sure the people in my neighborhood are married, however they have no affect on what I do with my life. I was living before i moved here and I'm going to be doing the same when I leave.
Children: Trust me, these women who are having children 5 and 6 at a time are not raising quality children, knowing damn well they can barely feed themselves as a parent.
Obviously, you haven't really given this much thought.
Using your standard brother and sisters could marry along with parents and children, aunts, uncles, nieces and nephews.
And why do they have to love each other?
Will couples be tested to verify their love for one another?
You placed a limit of two persons who may marry but made no effort to explain why two was the correct number, assuming a limit were needed.
Two people are needed for sexual reproduction.
The two-person limit has nothing to do with homosexuals who cannot sexually reproduce.
If you are going to model homosexual unions after heterosexual ones, please don't insult our intelligence by imposing a limit of two persons as though reasoning applied (e.g., two people are needed for sexual reproduction).
The only person insulting your intelligence is you.
In this country, polygamy is frowned upon hence the "two person" reference.
Relatives marrying? It does happen but that's not part of what we're discussing here. That's just a stupid attempt to steer the debate away from the original point. Read your bible dear, it happened a lot in there.
At least TRY to come up with a valid, reality based argument.
If having my own place and a nice job who was raised to be respectful and independent is what you call an egotist, then yes I am. What am I supposed to be, a bum strung out on drugs. I don't get your comment. What it was supposed to come off as was that single parent families turn out great just like a married couple family.
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.
But anyway, I'm pretty sure anyone can agree that marriage between a man and a woman doesn't have the same meaning it once did. Nowadays it's more about the festivities. But let me run some facts to speed this up:
What it was supposed to come off as was that single parent families turn out great just like a married couple family. 