Gay marriage destroys heterosexual marriage. (legislation, America, quote, Biblical)
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.
In post 289 I responded with to your statement that statistics did not tell the entire story with
You are correct in that a single statistic does not explain the sitution fully , it is only a tool to assist in figuring out that situtiaon. And you are right in that poverty is a leading reason for marriage breakdown, less resources to handle problems, more money worries etc.
That not good enough for you? And no I do not respond to every statment that you or anyone else has made, I respond when I think I have something to add or something I want to say about a post. Note I put forth that I thought poverty is a leading cause of marriage breakdown.
You still have not said what you would do about gays and sex/marraige if you were in charge and had your way either. And lots of other posts, some of them direct questions to you, have not been responded to, some never get a single response.
Phil Robertson
Pat Robertson
Kevin Swanson
Scott Lively
Sharon Slater
Brian Brown
Larry Jacobs
Paul Cameron
This is just a short list.
I have heard of Phil and Pat Robertson, but none of the others. None of these guys speak for me.
Having said that, I've also never heard either of the 2 I've heard of suggest that homosexuals deserve death. I'd appreciate you backing up your far-fetched claims.
People should not be judged by their sexual/relationship fetishes...all have them to a greater or lesser degree.
Some are more bizarre than others (finding people of your same gender to be of a romantic interest or sexual turn-on is at the far end of the scale)... but are harmless choices people make relative to a very personal aspect of their life.
To each their own as to what "trips their trigger"....in relationships and/or sexual conduct.
Do your own thing...with any other adult that consents. And let others do their thing. It has no effect on you...beyond your emotional headtrips about it.
You have two choices: Learn to cope, or, Suffer in Silence.
Run your mouth, or act out...and face the potential consequences.
Those that have been persecuted for their choices...you have my sympathy.
Plenty of people would argue against your position. You have given your body to someone else. Therefore you can no longer give yourself 100% to your future spouse. There is a deep personal closeness knowing that your spouse is the only other human being who has known you on this intimate physical level.
An honest question about that statement: how do you measure how much personal closeness does one get knowing that your spouse is the only one that knows you on this intimate physical level? That is quite a claim that you are making. Do you have proof of that. When I make a statement you did not agree with your comment was to the effect that I offered something up without proof, normal for me. So where is the proof and more importanly how is this even a measureable thing?
On a side not when you demanded proof I aimed you towards Google with millions of hits for the subject. Many people are much closer with their second spouse then their first one, how would you explain that?
And why should gay and lesbian couples have the opporunity to have a spouse that they can have a intimate physical level experience for the rest of their lifes with? You wish to prevent it or at least make it less likely.
We need to support others whether they be family, friends, neighbours or even Maple Leafs fans, to have strong families whatever the shape or form of that family, traditional, common law and same sex marriages, with or without kids or dogs or pianos. We should not be trying to prevent marriages of consenting adults, same sex, same race, opposite sex, different race, same or different religious views etc.
Same sex marriage is only going to harm hetrosexual marriages where one spouse accepts SSM or at least tolerates it and the other spouse is an extreme opponent of it and the first spouse decides this person is no longer a nice person to be with. And by accept I mean to recognize that it is legal right for SSM, not that they necessarily agree with it.
It's because 20 years ago it was just "gay". Then it became Lesbian and Gay. Then "Transgender". Now, "*****" is actually an acceptable title.
What next? There really is no telling what letter will be added to the acronym.
I have to say I am with you on this one. I don't understand the need to keep adding differing groups , and while I have no interest in sticking my nose in the affairs and rights of gay people , I'll admit to not understanding the difference between queeerr and homosexual . The transgender grouping I get . I have no idea what the letters after that stand for or why they are necessary.
None of which has anything to do with their rights to be treated as equals in every aspect of society and to live their lives as they see fit as long as it doesn't cause harm to anyone .
How do you know that? My sources tell me marriage has been around as long as human beings.
In any event, it certainly has been around as long as our country has been in existence. So again, why would we want to go and change the definition of an institution that is a bedrock of our society in order to suit a vocal minority?
That's been explained . Do you just ignore every response you don't like , so you can repeat your mantra over and over without having to acknowledge the logical reasons given to you ?
Regarding the Puritan attitudes about sex, I read somewhere a study that linked violence and sexual activity. The study showed that liberal attitudes about sex , premarital or otherwise, corresponded to lower violence . The more Puritan the attitude about sex, the more violent the society . I wish I could find it again but I admit I haven't been able to locate it .
That's been explained . Do you just ignore every response you don't like , so you can repeat your mantra over and over without having to acknowledge the logical reasons given to you ?
It may have been "explained"...but I'm not convinced of the explanation.
Why do you just accept that explanation? Why do you ignore my explanation? Do you just ignore every response you don't like, so you can repeat your mantra over and over without having to acknowledge the logical reasons given to you?
How do you know that? My sources tell me marriage has been around as long as human beings.
In any event, it certainly has been around as long as our country has been in existence. So again, why would we want to go and change the definition of an institution that is a bedrock of our society in order to suit a vocal minority?
Yet again, I will explain.
The constitution says that the government can not deny citizens equal protection of the laws. (14th amendment)
Legal marriage provides legal protections.
Thus the government can not deny marriage to citizens without first showing a compelling state interest in doing so. Tradition is not a compelling state interest.
It may have been "explained"...but I'm not convinced of the explanation.
Why do you just accept that explanation? Why do you ignore my explanation? Do you just ignore every response you don't like, so you can repeat your mantra over and over without having to acknowledge the logical reasons given to you?
Oh I do love a parrot ! They are so cute in their mimicking .
I accept the explanation I gave you because it is logic based . There are members of our society being discriminated against . Their numbers do not matter anymore than the number of sexual slaves in America would matter before thinking about dealing with it . There is no need to wait for large numbers of victims before deciding on a solution .
Your explanation has nothing to it other than your religion opposes it. Since the US is designed as a secular society, your religious views are of no concern in dealing with these type issues . Sorry, but that's the way the FF designed the system .
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.
