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.
Many societal problems actually stem from the fact that people refuse to incorporate morality (understanding right from wrong) into their daily lives. You may believe that homosexuality is right, but you will never be able to point out 1 positive aspect of homosexuality. It's a destructive behavior that will further add to the decline of society.
Increase in female fecundity, reduction in overpopulation, increased caretakers, enhanced creativity in society, social bonding, increased empathy, etc.. You truly are clueless. Homosexuality is an biological adaptation found in every animal species on Earth.
Conservative religious beliefs are certainly destructive to society. Maybe we should eradicate them. In fact, I think teaching children conservative religious beliefs should be charged as child abuse.
So you don't care if behaviors are sinful? The only thing that matters is that you enjoy engaging in those activities?
I'm sure there are many cannibals, rapists, adulterers, child predators and murderers who share the same viewpoint. After all, if they didn't enjoy those activities, they wouldn't engage in them right?
Murderer, child molesters, rapists, and cannibals creates victims by the very acts the wish to engage in. Adulterers do as well to a lesser extent.
Whose rights are violated in a homosexual marriage between consenting adults?
I can't wait to see what happens in a few years, when the vast majority of heterosexuals who support gay marriage get a dose of reality. Their children will be told in school that homosexuality is normal and perfectly ok. Also, just wait until you go out with your family and two men and two women begin kissing right in front of your children and proclaim, what's the issue, "We are married."
Um, same-sex marriage has been legal in other countries for years. The gay divorce rate in the Netherlands is much lower than the straight divorce rate. Gays are actually a more stable family unit than straights in countries where it's legal.
Legally, the same-sex marriage arguments are nearly identical to the interracial marriage arguments.
The interracial marriage arguments have absolutely nothing to do with the same sex marriage argument. A white man has a penis, and a black woman has a vagina. When a man and a woman have sex (regardless of their skin color), they usually produce a child.
Although interracial marriage was illegal in the states prior to Loving Vs. Virginia, it has existed all over the globe, since the beginning of time.
Um, same-sex marriage has been legal in other countries for years. The gay divorce rate in the Netherlands is much lower than the straight divorce rate. Gays are actually a more stable family unit than straights in countries where it's legal.
I'm happy that you mentioned the Netherlands, they have one of the highest rates of people foregoing marriage altogether. Research studies actually indicate that once same sex marriage became legal, all marriage in that nation declined. Marriage is practically non existent there.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl.../stanley-kurtz
In their book, Gay Marriage: For Better or for Worse?, William Eskridge and Darren Spedale say it’s too early to draw conclusions from the Dutch experience. Too early? We’ve had a continuous nine-year spike in out-of-wedlock birthrates since the passage of registered partnerships, and a five-year continuous spike since formal gay marriage went into effect. Scholars recognized the first nine years of demographic upheaval in Eastern Europe following the collapse of Communism as significant. So why aren’t nine years of comparable change in the Dutch out-of-wedlock birthrate also significant (especially since there’s nothing else like it in Western Europe)? I’ve argued that the long Dutch campaign for same-sex marriage (which began around 1990) helped set the stage for the big continuous spike in out-of-wedlock birthrates that began in 1997. Gay-marriage advocates rejected the idea that marriage is intrinsically connected to parenthood, and the Dutch public bought that argument. Once marriage stops being about binding mothers and fathers together for the sake of the children they create, the need to get married gradually disappears. That’s why I’ve argued that the successful campaign for same-sex marriage led to the spike in Dutch out-of-wedlock birthrates. A preliminary spike between 1994 and 1995 was likely influenced by this long public debate, even before formal passage of registered partnerships in 1997.
Last edited by Mary20852; 03-27-2013 at 04:27 PM..
The interracial marriage arguments have absolutely nothing to do with the same sex marriage argument.
Your failure to understand how our legal system works is duly noted.
Quote:
A white man has a penis, and a black woman has a vagina. When a man and a woman have sex (regardless of their skin color), they usually produce a child.
Producing biological children is not a legal requirement to obtain a marriage license. Failure again.
Quote:
Although interracial marriage was illegal in the states prior to Loving Vs. Virginia, it has existed all over the globe, since the beginning of time.
So has same-sex marriage. However, argument from tradition is also not legally valid.
Producing biological children is not a legal requirement to obtain a marriage license. Failure again.
But her argument in relation to interracial marriage holds value in that there is no comparison of interracial marriage to gays in how she stated it. Interracial marriage should never have been illegal. Its a man and woman no matter the color of your skin. They still adhere to the traditional time tested meaning of marriage, husband AND wife.
For people to act as if gays are so held down that it can be compared to how blacks were treated is insane. Gays as men or women have the same freedoms as anyone else. They are free. And Ive stated, I have no arguments of them given same legal things as married couples get, but I do not view it nor should it be viewed as a normal marriage. Its not, and never will be no matter how much its tolerated or accepted. Its a union, not marriage.
But her argument in relation to interracial marriage holds value in that there is no comparison of interracial marriage to gays in how she stated it. Interracial marriage should never have been illegal. Its a man and woman no matter the color of your skin. They still adhere to the traditional time tested meaning of marriage, husband AND wife.
For people to act as if gays are so held down that it can be compared to how blacks were treated is insane. Gays as men or women have the same freedoms as anyone else. They are free. And Ive stated, I have no arguments of them given same legal things as married couples get, but I do not view it nor should it be viewed as a normal marriage. Its not, and never will be no matter how much its tolerated or accepted. Its a union, not marriage.
Gays are most certainly free. Most enjoy very high standards of living and participate in every aspect of society.
Their fight for marriage is about trying to gain normalcy as homosexuals; it has nothing to do with rights. Most gays will even admit that marriage in and of itself holds very little value, because marriage ties one down.
In one recent study of gay male couples, 41.3% had open sexual agreements with some conditions or restrictions, and 10% had open sexual agreements with no restrictions on sex with outside partners. One-fifth of participants (21.9%) reported breaking their agreement in the preceding 12 months, and 13.2% of the sample reported having unprotected anal intercourse in the preceding three months with an outside partner of unknown or discordant HIV-status (1).
This study follows the classic research of McWhirter and Mattison, reported in The Male Couple (1984), which found that not a single male pair was able to maintain fidelity in their relationship for more than five years. Outside affairs, the researchers found, were not damaging to the relationship’s endurance, but were in fact essential to it. “The single most important factor that keeps couples together past the ten-year mark is the lack of possessiveness they feel,” says the authors (p. 256).
Increase in female fecundity, reduction in overpopulation, increased caretakers, enhanced creativity in society, social bonding, increased empathy, etc.. You truly are clueless. Homosexuality is an biological adaptation found in every animal species on Earth.
The above comment, doesn't warrant any serious response from me. Again, I don't have a problem with you as an individual, I do however have a problem with homosexuality.
You're right, its not equal because its not the same thing.
Equal and same are two different words, in case you weren't aware. I am a redhead, which means I am not the same as a brunette or blonde; I am also Jewish, which means I am not the same as a Christian, Muslim, Atheist, etc. Does that mean I'm not equal to them?
Quote:
Perversion due to a miswire in your brain should not result in the forcing of a change of a definition that has been what it is forever.
If you want to discuss "perversions," I think the heterosexuals would win hands-down... who do you think makes up the largest percentage of pornographic customers/viewers? And the definition hasn't been the same "forever," considering it's changed multiple times just within the last century or two - and is still different from one country or culture to the next. Words are fluid, get over it.
Quote:
But as simply human biengs, men and women, they are not without rights others have.
Depends on the state. Some states don't have sexual orientation as a protected class, so they can still be discriminated against in terms of housing and employment. Technically that does apply to both hetero and homosexual individuals, but obviously it is enforced more against the latter. You can be fired for being gay, until recently you could be discharged from the military for being gay, and so forth. They also don't have the right to adopt in some states, even if they are registered domestic partners with the biological parent - oh yeah, and they cannot visit a partner in the ER, inherit their estate without taxes/fees, use their partner's insurance, VA benefits; should I go on, or do you still think we're all treated equally????
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.
