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 have mentioned teenagers, not children. But if homosexuality/lesbians/transgenders/etc. have been fighting for their rights, I don’t see what would hold other orientations/preferences in doing the same. But I am talking, for the time being, about teenagers and their 40 year old girlfriend/boyfriend, for example. I repeat, TEENAGERS, not little children. But in a country like the USA, you never know.
If the "teenager" is of the age of consent, then who cares if they somehow fall in love with (and want to marry) a 40-year old?
If the "teenager" is not of the age of consent, then the relationship shouldn't happen.
The ability to give consent to sign a legal (and binding) contract is the only factor that should be considered in the legal contract called marriage.
Children, robots, animals, plants (yes, some doofus in this thread actually said plants!), the Easter Bunny, etc. are NOT able to enter into any contracts legally - marriage or otherwise.
What is it specifically that you find repellent regarding children or teen marriage with adults of the same or even opposite sex? The issue of consent aside, which would be lowered and otherwise redefined for teenagers just as easily as redefining marriage, what is it specifically that you do not like regarding a woman marrying a teenage boy or a man marrying a teenage girl?
I find it interesting that alarmists keep saying that children marriage will be next when they don't realize it can never happen because it has been conclusively proven without a shadow of a doubt that children cannot give consent.
It has been?
Some children in some instances can sometimes not be legally allowed to give consent, but that is a lot different than 'it has been conclusively proven without a shadow of a doubt that children cannot give consent'
Quote:
not to mention the fact that we make men ashamed to be gay, therefore they're less likely to use protection in that case.
What makes an ashamed gay man less likely to use protection?
I have mentioned teenagers, not children. But if homosexuality/lesbians/transgenders/etc. have been fighting for their rights, I don’t see what would hold other orientations/preferences in doing the same. But I am talking, for the time being, about teenagers and their 40 year old girlfriend/boyfriend, for example. I repeat, TEENAGERS, not little children. But in a country like the USA, you never know.
Define "teenager".
Because in my mind, I don't have a problem with a 15-16 year old getting married.
What is it specifically that you find repellent regarding children or teen marriage with adults of the same or even opposite sex? The issue of consent aside, which would be lowered and otherwise redefined for teenagers just as easily as redefining marriage, what is it specifically that you do not like regarding a woman marrying a teenage boy or a man marrying a teenage girl?
I have no issue outside of the fact that they cannot legally consent to enter a contract on their own.
Do I need more? The law says I don't.....
The age of consent has not been lowered, so any discussion of minor children or teens getting married is a non-starter.
It's not adult/child, its adult/TEEN. Interesting how gays/lesbians and their supporters feel intimidated that other so called orientations/preferences will fight for their so called rights and benefits too. Hey, you guys are all for change, so why all of a sudden feel threatened? You guys are all for redefining unions, redefining laws, etc. Why can’t other orientations/preferences redefine unions, laws, etc.?...
Are we talking 18 or 19 yr old "teens"? If they are under the age of consent, the *law* views them as children.
Until that changes, there is nothing more to discuss.
The point is really this:
How do you logically prevent one subset of people, homosexuals, from entering into one specific legal contract, marriage, when they are free to enter into any and all other legal contracts?
Get the churches out of our laws. I think there's even something about that in the Constitution...
If the "teenager" is of the age of consent, then who cares if they somehow fall in love with (and want to marry) a 40-year old?
If the "teenager" is not of the age of consent, then the relationship shouldn't happen.
The ability to give consent to sign a legal (and binding) contract is the only factor that should be considered in the legal contract called marriage.
That’s right. So if teenagers and their 45 year old lover want to REDEFINE the age of consent, union, etc. Then why not? Go for it. The USA is a free country after all. Gays/lesbians are permitted to do it so why not every other orientation/preference as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasy Tokoro
Define "teenager".
Because in my mind, I don't have a problem with a 15-16 year old getting married.
ThirTEEN and up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan
I have no issue outside of the fact that they cannot legally consent to enter a contract on their own.
Do I need more? The law says I don't.....
The law said gays/lesbians couldn’t get married and now look how far they have gotten? So let teenagers, children, etc. march for their rights and redefine whatever they want just like gays/lesbians already did.
Quote:
Get the churches out of our laws. I think there's even something about that in the Constitution...
Get gays/lesbians out of churches and religious organizations too. Why try to redefine that as well? Remember the links I posted about gays/lesbians suing bible publishers, churches, etc.? What do you think of those gays/lesbians who sue?
Children are pushed to accept taking classes that promote homosexuality. Sure, they took religion out of schools but now they force feed homosexuality to children? Why not keep both out of schools? Teach in school about sexual preferences/orientations but not tell them it is fine, it should be supported, etc. Teach them about religion too and let them choose. Fair for both sides.
.
Actually I will do one better. Get the government out of schooling and let people send their kids to the school of their choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onihC
Nope, go look it up in your bible. Read it again and tell me what you think about a man getting together with a woman to form a family, not two men or two women and then talks about how they become one flesh (sexual union). What part of that sounds unclear? Plus all other verses that talk about how it is sinful. Other religions also view it like that. No wonder homosexuals hate religions.
.
Jesus was talking to his audience; they were not gay men so he targeted his talk. No condemnation was given. Plus we are not talking about religious unions, but ceremonies either permitted or as what I want certified. Religion has no bearing on the issue. Most verses mistranslate or don't take context and history into account making it easy for them to condemn people.
I think some gays hate religious people, not religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onihC
Have you tried Satanism? They support gays/lesbians and other preferences/orientations. Or are gays/lesbians trying to redefine religions as well?
.
God supports all people; he does not hate any group. People don't support gays by misusing the word of God. It is hard for someone to try a religion when you have been saved by God because of the death of Christ before time. Nice try though!
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.
It would be a X2 against nature I suppose 
.
