Same-sex "marriage"

[jimmyjack]

I really don't understand the arguments against same-sex marriage or civil partners. As of 2005 all of these countries have same-sex civil partnerships:
Denmark, 1989.

Norway, 1996.

Sweden, 1996.

Iceland, 1996.

France, 1999.

Vermont, USA, 2000.

Germany, 2001.

Finland, 2002.

Luxembourg, 2004.

New Zealand, 2004.

Connecticut, USA, 2005.

Britain, 2005.



and all these countries have same-sex marriage:

The Netherlands, 2001.

Belgium, 2003.

Massachusetts, USA, 2004.

Canada, 2005.

Spain, 2005.




and has the social fabric broken down in any way...no!
if a deeply catholic country like spain can handle gay marriages why can't the US.....maybe need a socialish gov. in the US like in Spain to get these important reforms through

All of those countries have a population crisis.

 

[vergiss]

All of those countries have a population crisis.

Yes, because all the heterosexuals are turning gay instead of breeding. :lol:

 

[jimmyjack]

Yes, because all the heterosexuals are turning gay instead of breeding. :lol:

Not so, and don’t forget, they are also killing their unborn sons and daughters too.

 

[Duke]

All of those countries have a population crisis.

And what is your point? Do you have a point, or are you simply trying to rest some nonsensical blame on gay people?


Duke

 

[jimmyjack]

And what is your point? Do you have a point, or are you simply trying to rest some nonsensical blame on gay people?


Duke

If you draw the same conclusion as I do, it is hardly nonsensical, unless you are calling yourself nonsensical too, in which case it is very nonsensical of you.

 

[FallingPianos]

All of those countries have a population crisis.

what does that have to do with same-sex marriage?

 

[jimmyjack]

what does that have to do with same-sex marriage?

Are you suggesting you don’t see a link?

 

[jallman]

Are you suggesting you don’t see a link?

I'm not suggesting, I am outright stating...there is not correlation. Try again.

 

[jimmyjack]

I'm not suggesting, I am outright stating...there is not correlation. Try again.

Then it must be just a huge coincidence.

 

[jallman]

Then it must be just a huge coincidence.

Until you can show otherwise, it most certainly is. If you want to show a relationship between the two issues, I invite you to do so.

 

[Duke]

If you draw the same conclusion as I do, it is hardly nonsensical, unless you are calling yourself nonsensical too, in which case it is very nonsensical of you.

Well now, you can harldy expect me to follow your train of logic if you don't tell me what your train of logic consisits of, can you? What, do you suppose that gay people are so bad for society that they cause heterosexual people to just sit there and not reproduce?

All of those countries are well-developed, stable, progressive countries. They are richer countries, and their people are better off. As you may know, stable, well-off families often do not have more than two children. When many of the families of a country are well-off, this can cause a slow decrease in population.


Duke

 

[FallingPianos]

Then it must be just a huge coincidence.

as jallman said, until you can show otherwise, it most certainly is. If you want to show a relationship between the two issues, I invite you to do so.

 

[JustineCredible]

Let's get something sorted out, gays and lesbian DO have children. No, obviously they cannot concieve without outside aid, but who cares?
There are NO guaruntees that a heterosexual/two gender couple will concieve a child either!
There are THOUSANDS of children who need loving, caring homes. Gay and lesbians are perfectly capable of raising children. Gays and lesbians are indivually just as phsysiologically capable of conception as heterosexual individuals.
With the number of gay and lesbians raising children, whether biological or adopted, there is NO issue of a UNDER population problem.

Get over it and deal with reality.