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.
Seriously. If we allow marrying people of the same sex, why not members of the family? Or a pet? Who is someone else to draw the line where THEY consider it reasonable and impose their morals on others?
Britney Spears is the exact reason why I would ask the same question...because obviously if I married my dog, an animal that's too stupid not to eat his own excrement, it still would not have been as much of a disgrace to the supposed sanctity of marriage.
Seriously. If we allow marrying people of the same sex, why not members of the family? Or a pet? Who is someone else to draw the line where THEY consider it reasonable and impose their morals on others?
Good God. Have some respect.
A dog doesn't need the legal protections and advantages of marriage. Gays do.
Familial marriage produces inbreds. If gay sex produced deformed babies, nobody would be talking about gay marriage. Luckily, it doesn't. Do you see everything so black and white?
But what about incest? You could argue it's not hurting anyone but themselves...as long as there is no baby. What if they were completely sterile? What if we developed some 100% effective birth control method?
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 03-03-2009 at 09:19 PM..
I think you should be able to marry your sister if thats what you are in to. Good for your.
When it comes to pets though. Well, unless you didn ' t know, gays are humans not animals such as dogs, cats, hamsters or gold fish. That' s were I would draw the line.
It is so funny how this discussion even exist. Gays are the new blacks!
I guess I could possibly see your point about people marrying their relatives, but...pets? How would a pet even agree to marriage in the first place? I can't see how that's even remotely the same thing as two people of the same sex marrying.
Respect for what? And please leave religion out of this.
Quote:
A dog doesn't need the legal protections and advantages of marriage. Gays do.
uh, sorry, no. Gays do not "need" the "legal protections" of marriage (whatever that means). In fact, this has nothing to do with needing legal protections at all.
As for gays "need" the "legal advantages" of marriage - what the heck are you talking about?
Quote:
Familial marriage produces inbreds.
This is a question of degree - and so what?
Quote:
If gay sex produced deformed babies, nobody would be talking about gay marriage. Luckily, it doesn't.
Neither does marrying a dog. So you're cool w/that right?
When it comes to pets though. Well, unless you didn ' t know, gays are humans not animals such as dogs, cats hamster or gold fish. Thats were I would draw the line.
So? Why should everyone else follow where you draw the line (or any other particular person, to be fair)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Secret Samadhi
I guess I could possibly see your point about people marrying their relatives, but...pets? How would a pet even agree to marriage in the first place? I can't see how that's even remotely the same thing as two people of the same sex marrying.
I didn't say it was the same. But a person should be allowed to marry whoever they want according to some - so why should we draw the line at same species? As long as they love each other, that's all that matters.
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.
.
