- Joined
- May 6, 2016
- Messages
- 1,908
- Reaction score
- 489
- Location
- Colorado
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Gay marriage was legalized awhile back. In 50 years, there will probably be talks of recognizing civil unions between siblings and cousins and then in another 50 years, polygamy. Do you think any of the other types of marriage should be legalized other than gay marriage?
No other types of marriage should be legalized, and gay marriage should be made a crime.
Aww, look at you, all threatened, for no good reason...
Oh My God. Really?No other types of marriage should be legalized, and gay marriage should be made a crime.
Oh My God. Really?
I seriously hope you are just joking.
Yes. If it's between consenting adults I don't see why not.Gay marriage was legalized awhile back. In 50 years, there will probably be talks of recognizing civil unions between siblings and cousins and then in another 50 years, polygamy. Do you think any of the other types of marriage should be legalized other than gay marriage?
Well then, that's just absolutely terrible.That would be an invalid hope, my friend. What I said is what I mean.
Well then, that's just absolutely terrible.
Why do you want gay marriage to be a crime?
Probably. We gays are very icky people. [emoji48]Cause it's icky?
And . . . where did I say I was threatened? Please elaborate.
Well then, that's just absolutely terrible.
Why do you want gay marriage to be a crime?
You can't call a dog's tongue a dog's tail, and magically make the tongue the tail. Similarly, you can't just call something marriage and by calling it so make it so.
Traditionally marriage has been defined as a covenant or agreement between a man and woman which by its very nature has the goals of procreation and the education of children, as well as the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.
Same sex marriage denies psychological, physiological, and biological differences between men and women that find complementarity in marriage.
Same-sex marriage also denies the primary purpose of marriage, which is to perpetuate the human race through children (yeah, marriage is about keeping the human race alive, not about sexual pleasure, as many people today seem to think it is).
It is best for a child to be raised by a natural father and mother. Looking at the difficulties faced by orphans or those raised by relatives or foster parents, this point becomes clear. A child living in a same-sex "marriage" will always be deprived of his natural father or his natural mother.
That's also complete gibberish.Same-sex "marriage" also turns a moral wrong into a civil right.
I hope you realize that back in the 60's most people believed interracial marriage to be "against nature". Even today quite a bit of people still believe that. Same thing with how SSM is viewed, but thankfully the tide in this country has changed in support of SSM.Bear this in mind: sexual behavior and racial treatment are very different. A man and woman may differ in height, weight, skin color, accent, wealth, and fame, but none of these things are impossible obstacles to marriage. Supposed "marriage" between those of the same sex cannot occur because of a biological obstacle that can never be removed. It doesn't matter what race, age, bodily shape, or wealth they have; by the fact that they are the same sex, marriage is impossible for them. Racial barriers: possible to overcome. Sexual barriers: impossible to overcome.
Completely untrue.Finally, there is no such thing as a family in same-sex "marriage".
If one of the "spouses" wants a child, they have to go through tons of artificial means.
The natural tendency of same-sex unions is not to create families. Therefore it does not fulfill the basic reason for marriage, and furthermore deserves no state-sponsored rewards for marriage because it does not provide conditions for a stable, affectionate atmosphere beneficial to upbringing of children.
In short, same-sex is an imposter seeking to claim it is what it is not, and saying it is deserving of rewards that it is not. It is not even marriage by any traditional meaning.
Understand: normal heterosexual marriage is the only way to perpetuate the human race; homosexual marriage by its very nature leads toward extinction.
Do the math for yourself; it's not hard. Same-sex marriage is an imposter and furthermore an outright liar and abuser, intended or not, of children. And that is why I say it should be a crime.
No other types of marriage should be legalized, and gay marriage should be made a crime.
TheGoverness,
Hitler said Jews needed to be exterminated, and many people agreed with him, but his saying so didn't mean that Jews had to be exterminated, it only meant he THOUGHT they had to be exterminated. If someone, even legal authorities, says same-sex marriage is marriage, it doesn't make it marriage, it only means that person or authority says and believes it to be marriage.
Please explain why marriage has not always been traditionally defined as a covenant between a man and a woman. Show proof for your claims. If you want proof that marriage has traditionally been a covenant between a man and a woman, I can give it to you, and will be glad to.
Same-sex "marriage" doesn't deny the differences between man and women, it denies the idea that they find complementarity in marriage. Please read more carefully.
Did the first modern humans marry for sexual pleasure? True, that was likely a part of it, but the underlying reason for that desire was and is procreation. Explain to me how it's not.
There are exceptions to some rules (bear in mind: not to all rules). Evidence shows clearly children are best off with a mother and a father, particularly if that mother and father are their natural parents.
Please do more than just say what I'm saying is gibberish. Just saying I'm speaking gibberish is being childish.
Don't go off on a rabbit trail. What I was saying was whether racial barriers were insurmountable and whether sexual barriers were insurmountable. I was not making a statement about racism or the lack thereof. I was and am addressing same-sex marriage. Please read more carefully.
Why is my statement that there's no such thing as a family in same-sex marriage "completely untrue"? Elaborate, don't just make that statement. Making a statement that something is not true is not the same as showing why you think that that something is not true.
I have nothing against using artificial means to have a child. But while artificial means is only required for some heterosexual couples, it is required 100 percent of the time for homosexuals, raising the question of whether the two forms of union are actually equal. Artificial means isn't wrong, but homosexuals require it to have children. Heterosexuals don't. The issue is heterosexual marriage versus homosexual marriage, not artificial means.
SS"M" is between two consenting adults, but that in and of itself makes it neither marriage nor even a naturally right thing to do.
That comment about not needing more people could be taken as an argument for population control. I'm not saying that's what you meant, but please be more careful what you write. And what's more, you're dodging the issue. If everyone became homosexuals, the human race would go utterly extinct within a hundred years. Homosexuals require heterosexuals in order to survive and avoid extinction, plain and simple. You cannot get around this argument, especially not by running off down rabbit trails concerning global population.
You know deep down I have made a rational and logical argument with many convincing points showing why same-sex marriage is wrong and isn't even marriage, and you don't want to accept it simply because you don't believe the way I believe. You don't appear to be looking at my argument logically; it seems like you're just glossing over and half-reading my points without giving them serious consideration because you have already decided I am wrong.
Let everyone marry whomever, and how ever many he or she wishes. It's funny to see those that fought so hard for same sex marriage are now so opposed to polygamous marriage. When you struck down that a marriage was between one man and one woman, you opened Pandora's Box. There's not way to get that sucker closed again. Besides what is the real problem with polygamous marriage? It's not like those in a polygamous relationship aren't going to live together and have kids anyway. Now, it will just give them some pieces of paper to frame and put on the wall.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?