Caladaria wrote:next thing you know, people will want to marry their cats.
Oh, you don't need to worry about that. My cat is dead, and I'm not into necro-bestiality.
Advertisement
by Olthar » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:08 pm
Caladaria wrote:next thing you know, people will want to marry their cats.
by Ifreann » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:10 pm
by The Scientific States » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:11 pm
Caladaria wrote:Divair wrote:Looks like it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/us/ha ... .html?_r=0
Good for Hawaii. They're quite solidly Democrat, so hopefully this passes the House.
Good for Hawaii? My God, my God, it seems like everyone is legalizing gay marriage now.....Where are we going to? I am going to rue the day when it is legal across the United States....next thing you know, people will want to marry their cats.
This video explains clearly why this is wrong: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCjKSMd5fHQ
by Lost heros » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:12 pm
by Caladaria » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:12 pm
by Seperates » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:12 pm
by Olthar » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:13 pm
by Olthar » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:15 pm
by The Scientific States » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:15 pm
Caladaria wrote:Liriena wrote:Enumerate them, and we'll see just how "logical" these reasons are.
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage. Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong. If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage. Besides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own (unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt) and have never been the norm of relationships. Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed". I would never march for something which is against the laws of society and against common sense.
4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense. A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child. Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society as the Laws of Science, the Laws of Nature, and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
by Ifreann » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:19 pm
Caladaria wrote:Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions.
by Ainin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:20 pm
Caladaria wrote:Liriena wrote:Enumerate them, and we'll see just how "logical" these reasons are.
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage. Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong. If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage. Besides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own (unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt) and have never been the norm of relationships. Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed". I would never march for something which is against the laws of society and against common sense.
4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense. A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child. Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society as the Laws of Science, the Laws of Nature, and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
by Caladaria » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:21 pm
The Scientific States wrote:Caladaria wrote:
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage. Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong. If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage. Besides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own (unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt) and have never been the norm of relationships. Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed". I would never march for something which is against the laws of society and against common sense.
4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense. A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child. Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society as the Laws of Science, the Laws of Nature, and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
Nice copy pasta, did you read what you wrote?
(1. That's a logical fallacy, you're appealing to tradition.
(2. Implying two dads can't raise a kid
(3. So what if they can't procreate?
(4. Appeal to Nature, really?
by The Scientific States » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:23 pm
Caladaria wrote:The Scientific States wrote:
Nice copy pasta, did you read what you wrote?
(1. That's a logical fallacy, you're appealing to tradition.
(2. Implying two dads can't raise a kid
(3. So what if they can't procreate?
(4. Appeal to Nature, really?
I typed this myself. Why would I copy and paste? I present my arguments in my own writing. I do not merely copy blindly what others have written.
1) A logical fallacy...yet my argument is correct.
2. Two dads would not be the proper parents.
3. You're proving my point!
4) An appeal to science...and an appeal to common sense.
by Seperates » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:23 pm
by Regnum Dominae » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:25 pm
Appeal to traditionCaladaria wrote:Liriena wrote:Enumerate them, and we'll see just how "logical" these reasons are.
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women.
So? Marriage isn't just about having children. Not to mention that there are options beside normal pregnancy such as adoption, IVF, surrogacy...Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage.
Appeal to tradition.Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong.
If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage.
Appeal to nature. Also, homosexuality is natural: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animalsBesides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God.
1) Marriage is about more than just having children. And there are other ways of having children.Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own
See, even you admit that.(unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt)
So fucking what?and have never been the norm of relationships.
That's nice.Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed".
"It's bad because it's illegal!" Circular logic. Not to mention that those laws are changing.I would never march for something which is against the laws of society
Appeal to absurdity.and against common sense.
4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Appeal to absurdity. "Common sense" is not an argument.Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense.
Slippery slope fallacy. And actually not even equivalent due to the difference in ability to consent, as I explained above.A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child.
I see nothing wrong with the legal recognition of polygamous marriage.Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......
No, it wouldn't. Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, France, Iceland, and Canada seem to be doing very well. [/quote] as the Laws of Science,[/quote] Nope. the Laws of Nature, [/quote] Nope.Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society
Your religion is irrelevant due to separation of church and state.and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
by Estado Paulista » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:25 pm
Caladaria wrote:3. You're proving my point!
by Furious Grandmothers » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:27 pm
Caladaria wrote:Liriena wrote:Enumerate them, and we'll see just how "logical" these reasons are.
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage. Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong. If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
Caladaria wrote:2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
Caladaria wrote:3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage. Besides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own (unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt) and have never been the norm of relationships. Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed". I would never march for something which is against the laws of society and against common sense.
Caladaria wrote:4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Caladaria wrote:Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense. A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child. Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society as the Laws of Science, the Laws of Nature, and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
by New Frenco Empire » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:28 pm
by The Truth and Light » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:28 pm
by Liriena » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Caladaria wrote:Liriena wrote:Enumerate them, and we'll see just how "logical" these reasons are.
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage. Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong. If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage. Besides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own (unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt) and have never been the norm of relationships. Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed". I would never march for something which is against the laws of society and against common sense.
4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense. A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child. Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society as the Laws of Science, the Laws of Nature, and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Ainin » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:30 pm
New Frenco Empire wrote:Either way, I'm sure all of those countries who have already legalized gay marriage are in a vile state of civil war and anarchy, correct?
by Lost heros » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:31 pm
by Regnum Dominae » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:31 pm
by Caladaria » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:31 pm
Ainin wrote:Caladaria wrote:
You are the same person who argued with me on the other thread about this very same issue. And yet you are firm in your beliefs. I bear no ill will against any person because of their sexual orientation, but I do not support gay marriage for the following reasons:
1) Gay marriage would upset the whole definition of marriage For thousands of years, ever since Man first gained consciousness of himself as a being, the relationship that has been established is between men and women. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to each other: the means by which they procreate and the means by which they fall in love with each other thus shows that there is a natural background thus, to the formation of the institution of marriage. Over time, this was formalized: every society, since the dawn of civilization, has acknowledged marriage between men and women. Now, of course homosexuality has existed throughout history, and it was a practice in the societies of Greece and Rome: but in the end, heterosexual marriage was confirmed in its position, especially during the Middle Ages and in fact, all the way up into the twentieth century. Historical considerations provide great support for the logic that argues for why gay marriage is wrong. If you legalized it, you would be upsetting the established balance: that is, the way would be opened to absurd relationships, such as bestiality, and eventually, even to polygamy. Gay marriage cannot be allowed. Marriage is for one man and one woman.
2) Marriage denies a child proper parents For some strange reason, it seems as if homosexual couples adopt varying roles: for example, the one acts "feminine" while the other acts "masculine". However, even with this, the child raised by that couple will not be raised in the proper manner. He or she will not have a true, proper father, and (in the case of male homosexual couples) a true, proper mother. This has a psychological impact upon their development, as they do not have the counterbalancing male and female influences in their lives (at least from their parents). The child is left in conflict with himself and is left wondering about his "parents". This will eventually impact the course of their own relationships.
3)Gay rights are not the same as civil rights Gay rights advocates claim that their movement for the legalization of gay marriage is the same as civil rights. This is false. Sexual orientation and race are of two completely different planes. African-Americans, for example, were enslaved and put under Jim Crowism for a very long time in the United States. Jews, for example, were persecuted on the basis of their race and religion. In my view, slavery, racial discrimination, and genocide are of a far more serious nature then of merely denying homosexuals the right to marriage. Besides this, people of varying races, and different genders can marry, without being in contradiction to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own (unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt) and have never been the norm of relationships. Thus, I would march, with all of my being, for justice for those who have been lynched or shut out of a store because of a sign saying "No Coloreds allowed". I would never march for something which is against the laws of society and against common sense.
4) The BIOLOGICAL aspect! My fourth and final major reason for why gay marriage is wrong results from common sense. As stated in my first reason, marriage between men and women developed because it was universally recognized that men and women were biologically and psychologically compatible to each other. This is not the case for homosexual couples: two homosexual men or two homosexual women cannot procreate a child. This in itself argues against gay marriage! If they cannot have children, then why should they be in a legally recognized union?
Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions. I respect everyone's right to their opinions. This means that you should respect my opinions. I do not support gay marriage: I never have, and I never will. I believe the con against gay marriage is stronger than the pro, because of simple common sense. A hundred or two hundred years from now, this practice would give way to absurdity: a man marrying his dog, or marrying his parents (originally happened, but was eventually accepted as wrong), or marrying his child. Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society as the Laws of Science, the Laws of Nature, and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!
There's so many genetic fallacies in there it hurts. But let's give it a shot.
1) Your definition of marriage is wrong. 2000 years ago, before Jesus and company came to town, homosexual marriage existed.
2) That's bullshit, and has been scientifically debunked.
3) Yes it is. The right to gay marriage is part of the right to equal treatment under the law.
4) A blatant appeal to nature, and a false one at that.
by The Truth and Light » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:31 pm
Regnum Dominae wrote:Is it just me or are there suddenly a lot more homophobes on this forum than usual in the past few days?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Emotional Support Crocodile, Gernstead, Google [Bot], Kostane, Miokandia, New Heldervinia, Number Five, Stellar Colonies, Tiami
Advertisement