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.
I guess our society is redefining marriage. Somehow the proponents of gay marriage have convinced us that we're "no longer restricting gays from marrying" and we're "extending a right to a group that was previously denied it" and "recognizing all loving relationships" and whatever. Such loaded terms. Let's admit that defining marriage as "union of 2 consenting adults" is just as arbitrary as "union of 2 consenting adults, 1 of them male and the other female." After all, if being more inclusive is always better, than we should change it to "union of N consenting adults" or "union of N consenting sentient beings." After all, why are we denying dolphins the right to marry humans? Dolphins are self-aware and can certainly have loving relationships with their human trainers.
Don't even get me started on gay adoption lol. Adam Carolla explained my views perfectly:
After all, why are we denying dolphins the right to marry humans? Dolphins are
self-aware and can certainly have loving relationships with their human trainers
.
What amazes me is that so many people have such a tenuous grasp on the notion of CONSENT.
But proponents of gay marriage don't frame it that way. They frame by saying that "2 consenting adults" is the inherently correct definition of marriage and that we've been disenfranchising homosexuals by using a fake definition for thousands of years. Which is silly, but the propaganda worked. Everyone is now convinced that they need to support redefining marriage if they wanted to be on the morally correct side of some new civil rights movement.
The definition "2 consenting adults" is one that people pulled out of their ass.
The definition "1 male and 1 female" is also stupid because the Religious Right says it comes the Bible, which it doesn't.
I'm not sure which side of this debate is stupider in their arguments, but I'm especially annoyed by the pro-gay-marriage side's insistence that the other side is denying them right that they've always deserved.
But proponents of gay marriage don't frame it that way. They frame by saying that "2 consenting adults" is the inherently correct definition of marriage and that we've been disenfranchising homosexuals by using a fake definition for thousands of years. Which is silly, but the propaganda worked. Everyone is now convinced that they need to support redefining marriage if they wanted to be on the morally correct side of some new civil rights movement.
The definition "2 consenting adults" is one that people pulled out of their ass.
The definition "1 male and 1 female" is also stupid because the Religious Right says it comes the Bible, which it doesn't.
I'm not sure which side of this debate is stupider in their arguments, but I'm especially annoyed by the pro-gay-marriage side's insistence that the other side is denying them right that they've always deserved.
Allowing gay marriage doesn't change the meaning of a straight marriage. That is just silly to think that it does.
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.
