Hawaii has legalized same sex marriage

[Olthar]

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.

[Ifreann]

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.

But if you post-humously marry your cat, you'll be able to claim their government pension!

[The Scientific States]

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

Not going to happen...

[Lost heros]

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.

Are you sure? Don't you think your cat looks mighty sexy decomposing in his/her grave?

[Caladaria]

And for several logical reasons...

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!

[Seperates]

Oh, you don't need to worry about that. My cat is dead, and I'm not into necro-bestiality.

Are you sure? Don't you think your cat looks mighty sexy decomposing in his/her grave?

It was cremated.

[Olthar]

Oh, you don't need to worry about that. My cat is dead, and I'm not into necro-bestiality.

But if you post-humously marry your cat, you'll be able to claim their government pension!

He doesn't have one. I think he was an illegal immigrant.

[Olthar]

Are you sure? Don't you think your cat looks mighty sexy decomposing in his/her grave?

It was cremated.

How did you know that!?

[The Scientific States]

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!

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?

[Ifreann]

But if you post-humously marry your cat, you'll be able to claim their government pension!

He doesn't have one. I think he was an illegal immigrant.

I suppose it's probably too late for a green card marriage now.

---

Now, I know that you disagree greatly with what I have presented. I respect that. I respect your right to your opinions.

Here's the thing. Disagreeing with what you just posted isn't a matter of opinion. It's a matter of fact. The things you've said are factually incorrect. They are untrue. Whoever told you they are true is lying, or passing on a lie to you that they fell for, as you pass it on to us. Or perhaps you are lying yourself.

[Ainin]

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!

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.

[Caladaria]

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?

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.

[The Scientific States]

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.

(1. Just because you think it's correct, it doesn't make it correct.

(2. Why so?

(3. No I'm not. So what if a couple can't procreate? Why the hell does that matter.

(4. Given your text, it's just a crappy appeal nature.

[Seperates]

It was cremated.

How did you know that!?

Did the same thing to my cat. I figured it was standard Western practice.

[Regnum Dominae]

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.

Appeal to tradition

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.

So? Marriage isn't just about having children. Not to mention that there are options beside normal pregnancy such as adoption, IVF, surrogacy...

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.

Appeal to tradition.

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.

Not this idiotic slippery slope bullshit again.
Bestiality, pedophilia, and necrophilia are not equivalent to homosexual relationships for a very simple reason:
Animals cannot give informed consent.
Children cannot give informed consent.
A corpse cannot give informed consent.
Adult homosexuals can, however.

And as for polygamy, who the fuck cares? I support legal recognition of polygamous marriage as well.

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.

Studies have shown, again and again, that homosexual parents are every bit as capable as heterosexual parents, and that being brought up by same-sex parents has no detrimental effect on the child's upbringing.

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.

The gay rights movement is about much more than just marriage. And actually it is just like the black civil rights movement. You are forgetting that long after the end of slavery, blacks faced legally sanctioned discrimination in all aspects of life. And even after that discrimination was removed, they faced serious social stigma and did not have substantive equality. That's where the gay rights movement is right now, working on removing the legal barriers to equality.

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.

Appeal to nature. Also, homosexuality is natural: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals

Homosexual couples, however, would not follow this, as they are unable to procreate and have children of their own

1) Marriage is about more than just having children. And there are other ways of having children.

(unless if they use artificial techniques, in the case of female couples, or adopt)

See, even you admit that.

and have never been the norm of relationships.

So fucking what?

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".

That's nice.

I would never march for something which is against the laws of society

"It's bad because it's illegal!" Circular logic. Not to mention that those laws are changing.

and against common sense.

Appeal to absurdity.

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?

Because (1) marriage is not just about having children, and (2) there are many ways for same-sex couples to have children.

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.

Appeal to absurdity. "Common sense" is not an argument.

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.

Slippery slope fallacy. And actually not even equivalent due to the difference in ability to consent, as I explained above.

Or polygamy, that practice of the Mormons, becoming widespread.......

I see nothing wrong with the legal recognition of polygamous marriage.

Legalizing gay marriage would destroy the order of society

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.

and the Laws of Nature's God have intended!

Your religion is irrelevant due to separation of church and state.

[Estado Paulista]

3. You're proving my point!

A lot of hetero couples can't procreate. This isn't relevant in any way.

[Furious Grandmothers]

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.

The exact same natural background behind how same-sex couples are compatible to each other and fall in love.
Same-sex marriage in history.
Maybe the established balance is in fact unbalanced and needs to be changed? Or should the previously established balance of the institution of slavery, systemic gender and racial discrimination etc. have been left alone?
Polygamy has been established since ancient times, and both bestiality and polygamy have nothing of relevance in common with gay marriage.
You need to look up what the purpose of having the legal institution of marriage is.

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.

With same-sex parents occurring for a long time now, where are your statistics on psychologically damaged children?
Studies show that same-sex couple are no worse, and maybe even better, than different-sex couples in parenting.

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.

1,500 homosexual animal species dispute your flawed law of nature and nature's god.
What about sterile different-sex couples unable to procreate or couples that just don't want children? They should be divorced? Again, read up on what marriage is for.
And common sense would have you understand that gay rights are civil rights. It may not be important to you; hell, black rights probably weren't important to slaveowners. Doesn't make them not civil rights.

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?

See point one, and the point about sterile different-sex couples or couples that just don't have children.

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!

Have given due respect to your opinions as above by considering them and questioning them. You may be too paranoid about things that you might realize are just not going to happen, if you think it through.

[New Frenco Empire]

-Shit. Fucked up.

[The Truth and Light]

I swear, I could explain the definition of "legal contract between two adult citizens" one thousand times and it would never stick.

[Liriena]

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!

1. This is baseless pseudo-sociological garbage, combined with appeals to nature and tradition, both of which are as awfully simplistic, ignoring the existence of homosexuality and bisexuality in nature, the existence of intersex people, the existence of modern reproductive methods that enable same-sex couples to procreate, and the existence of more than just two civilizations that accepted LGBT people in one way or the other, and some of which even recognized same-sex unions.

2. This is an overwritten appeal to the children, and it's also demonstrably false. Research thus far shows that children raised by stable same-sex couples fare no worse in any regard, let alone as far as emotional development goes, than the children of opposite-sex couples.

3. Disregarding the fact that it baselessly appeals to nature and "common sense", this argument also disregards the fact that LGBT rights have been regarded as human rights by several international organizations, and that even American law has recognized LGBT people as a protected minority, in the sense that their human rights (starting with the right to privacy, equality under the law, marriage and religious liberty) have historically been violated by the cisgender heterosexual majority.

4. Another simplistic appeal to nature, sugar-coated with a special pleading that serves no practical purpose other than assert, in a very conspicious fashion, that same-sex couples are less legitimate than opposite-sex couples, despite much evidence of the contrary.

I respect your right to hold these beliefs, but I also respect my own right to call you out on how false and fallacious they are. Your arguments boils down to a combination of uninformed appeals to nature and false slippery-slopes.

Homosexuality is natural, and since animals aren't people (thus, they can never marry) and so many homophobic societies have seen fit to legalize child marriage and polygamy will outright banning homosexuality, I think we can safely say that your argument is not just invalid or false. It's unrealistic.

[Ainin]

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?

Of course. Didn't you hear? Sweden has collapsed into civil war over gay marriage.

[Lost heros]

Are you sure? Don't you think your cat looks mighty sexy decomposing in his/her grave?

It was cremated.

Even better.

[Regnum Dominae]

Is it just me or are there suddenly a lot more homophobes on this forum than usual in the past few days?

[Caladaria]

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.

1) I referred to homosexual practices in ancient Greece in my arguments! You clearly did not fully understand what I was presenting. And it describes homosexual relationships, not actual unions recognized in law.
2. Source against your argument:
http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/wri ... ohomo.html
3. Gay marriage is not a issue like the continuing inequality between African-Americans and Caucasians:
http://micheletravis.hubpages.com/hub/A ... rimination
http://www.charismamag.com/life/culture ... vil-rights
http://caapus.org/black-pastors-gay-rig ... il-rights/
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/poll-55 ... vil-rights
4. I know that animals have been homosexual: however, my statement is that in general, genders are the basis from which proper marriage was derived.

This is also in response to Liriena's rebuttal.

[The Truth and Light]

Is it just me or are there suddenly a lot more homophobes on this forum than usual in the past few days?

I'm noticing that a lot of them were founded today.