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.
Because straight marriage is not about "2 consenting adults." It's about the most stable unit for raising children. One mother, One father. To extend marriage to include homosexuals, you have to redefine it to 'consenting adults' which opens up all these other, unconsidered possibilities.
No it isn't since having children is not a requirement to obtain a marriage license.
because the legal precedent is established by the "equal marriage" argument, not the other way around.
In which case, blacks being able to marry and interracial marriage actually set the precedent, since those are the cases marriage equality are based on in our legal system.
Because straight marriage is not about "2 consenting adults." It's about the most stable unit for raising children. One mother, One father. To extend marriage to include homosexuals, you have to redefine it to 'consenting adults' which opens up all these other, unconsidered possibilities.
In a new, updated policy statement, the nation's largest pediatricians group says that civil marriage for same-sex couples -- as well as full adoption and foster care rights for all parents, regardless of sexual orientation -- is the best way to ensure legal and financial security for children in these families.
In which case, blacks being able to marry and interracial marriage actually set the precedent, since those are the cases marriage equality are based on in our legal system.
So if the two are one in the same, then what's inhibiting gays to marry now based on the "equal marriage" laws recognized within miscegination? Why havne't the "equal marriage" pro-gay advocates simply quoted Loving vs Virginia?
At this point, public opinion is in favor of gay marriage.
There is not one compelling argument to be had against it. In fact there never was.
What you see now are those who can not, or will not, accept what is happening right in front of them: Change.
It's inevitable, gay marriage is going to be legal in this country, most likely sooner than later. The reactionaries, the bigots and the religious zealots, will all scream about the end of the world, while the rest of the country moves forward. I can only imagine how much more advanced we would be as a society, without these neanderthals.
I'm really not sure if you're trolling or just really lack the ability to think critically, but I'll answer your ridiculous question.
A mother marrying her son has far reaching implications past just the two of them. There is a much higher chance of genetic problems with their offspring and it is one of the reasons it isn't allowed now.
Thus, if a family member wants to screw another family member it creates a serious issue towards their potential offspring.
Two gay adults, who are consenting and able to make legal choices have no problematic issues besides some people not liking them.
And like someone else said, why does the issue of family members wanting to marry only come up with gay marriage?
I don't think this is really a question of you lacking any critical thinking skills, but more so a question of are you thinking at all.
You're argument about genetic complications would fall on deaf ears, simply due to the fact that by using that anecdote, you unintentionally bring into question whether anyone with a genetic complication should be able to marry, whether they are kinship or not.
If 'genetic complications' are the apex of your argument, then you've just locked out a number of people regardless of their sexual orientation.
And you continuously dip and dodge, using arguments that support your POV but you consisntly fail to apply them equally across the board.
If this is about 'two consenting adults'--then stick to it. That being said, a mother marrying her adult son are also about two consenting adults. A man marrying 50 women (or vice versa) are between two or more consenting adults.
With regards with to your POV,should the goverment adhere to the right to refuse any legal recognition of them?
And this issue is brought up, because it is a valid question, that many of the pro-gay participants and pro-gay advocates types simply can't answer.
If this is about 'marriage equality' --then why does this only apply to homosexual marriages? Why does the buck stop with you guys and gals? Where, or can you draw the line with that line of rational? Is this equal marriage push JUST for you? Or does everyone else get swallowed up with you?
Because straight marriage is not about "2 consenting adults." It's about the most stable unit for raising children. One mother, One father. To extend marriage to include homosexuals, you have to redefine it to 'consenting adults' which opens up all these other, unconsidered possibilities.
AND this would be? Remember we are talking consenting adults here.
If this is about 'two consenting adults'--then stick to it. That being said, a mother marrying her adult son are also about two consenting adults. A man marrying 50 women (or vice versa) are between two or more consenting adults. With regards with to your POV, what right do you have to tell them no?
Why do you guys always include those in your arguments? Sounds like you guys are the ones with sexual problems. No mention of animals too ? You left that one out.
Why do you guys always include those in your arguments? Sounds like you guys are the ones with sexual problems. No mention of animals too ? You left that one out.
More dipping and dodging.
Animals aren't consenting adults right?
That being said, the question remains--if this is about two consenting adults' should ploygamous and incestuous marriages be included in "equal marriage" laws. or is this privelege only extended to gay couples?
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.
More dipping and dodging. 