| 308 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
outfctrl
 Advanced Member
Joined: 11/16/03
American by Birth |
ok, so we now except the gay way of life. Marriage of same sex couples has been passed. Now we have to prepare our kids for real life in school. Sex Education. What do we teach them? Heterosexual only? Oh no, we must teach them Gay sex too, after all, it will not be politically correct to only show them sex between a man and a woman. Right? So, another law comes on the books for voting. Where does it stop? What is next? |
|
11/10/09 6:08:13 AM#242
sex education is about awareness of consequences. So unwanted pregnancy was one but the other is sexually transmitted disease and health. Anal sex for example, is a pretty important issue for sexual health and the spread of disease. Sex education is not about being good in bed, or sexual orientation, it is about health and wellbeing. |
|
|
11/10/09 6:43:47 AM#243
Originally posted by nurgles
Exactly. Anal sex has many bad consequences just as vaginal sex can. Of course, he would suspect teachers of politicizing it. Never once in class did they say that one type of sex is good versus the other. They just talked about safe sex and the consequences. After that, it's your choice. I really hate how people like to politicize everything. |
|
|
11/10/09 8:55:26 AM#244
Originally posted by outfctrl
They teach it to 5 year olds here. Incredible.
And no, it isn't right.
Where does it stop? It stops when I smash my fist into a teachers face. Or if I am that teacher, it stops at the door to my classroom. In the end, I don't know any primary school teacher who is willing to do it. It might be the law here, but common sense prevails. The problem with bad laws like this is that when common sense fails, there is no easy method of sanction. I have to physically turn up and beat some one up, rather than them just automatically losing their job. |
|
|
11/10/09 9:13:22 AM#245
Originally posted by Gameloading
I'm not aware of any science that say this? I'm open to it. But I'm not aware of it.
There is no gay gene I'm aware of. No one out there taking Hetero Pills to rebalance their hormones. or indeed Gay Pills to rebalance their hormones either.
What is this "science" of which you speak? What repeatable experiments have they made that produced/deliniated gay people everytime?
You don't half talk some utter bollocks at times mate. |
|
|
zchmrkenhoff
 Novice Member
Joined: 4/19/09
The biggest argument against democracy is a 5 minute discussion with the average voter |
11/10/09 12:51:11 PM#246
Originally posted by Fishermage I dont have an issue with that. What I do have an issue is, jamming that privacy in the public. We didn't start the idea of putting this in public. It all began when the government started recognizing one religious view over another. We're simply asking for our equal recognition under the law. As would you too if the tables were turned. I think the problem is that you're in the majority and we do not follow your religious ideals. I don't see this any other way. Which makes me believe that you do not really believe in American views of equality and representation. You believe instead in living in a democracy... well at least as long as you're in the majority in that democracy. Am I wrong in any of that?
What is ironic is that you and I are both Christians, but WE actually believe that God is love, and believe all are equal in His eyes -- and that our rights are inherent in our humanity, not our sexuality. Our sexuality is irrelevant to His love. There is no male or female in Christ -- sounds pretty gay to me :) Thankfully, schmrkenhoff's view is losing. His "morality" of "normal vs. abnormal" is giving way to Christ's morality of love thy neighbor -- at least in this area. Let us keep working for a brighter, better, freer tomorrow where people will barely even notice you. Unless of course you want to be noticed for whatever gifts God has given you. As with all human rights battles, the Christians on the side of love and justice will eventually trump the ones on the other side. As always, it's just a matter of time. Let them have their cherry picked lines from the Bible, we have the very heart God. This is a little too hippie for me :P "let's all be friends, we are all equal, there should never be war, no culture should be unique, nobody is different, we're all the same. at our core, all of us are gay, we just have to come to realize it. there's no such thing as a heterosexual, reproduction is bad. the human race will continue because God wants it to continue. gay marriage! it's the logical conclusion of everything. it can only be progress because it is change" I don't like how "progress" is ONLY when you are descending into chaos. How is that progress at all? Progress is doing things to keep people decent... that's why things where arranged in such a way in the first place. I refuse to let anarchists destroy everything.... just can't sit idle-like and watch it happen. "Listen, you fuckers, you screwheads. Here is a man who would not take it anymore. A man who stood up against the scum, the cunts, the dogs, the filth, the shit. Here is a man who stood up." - Robert DeNiro |
|
11/10/09 12:57:41 PM#247
Originally posted by zchmrkenhoff I dont have an issue with that. What I do have an issue is, jamming that privacy in the public. We didn't start the idea of putting this in public. It all began when the government started recognizing one religious view over another. We're simply asking for our equal recognition under the law. As would you too if the tables were turned. I think the problem is that you're in the majority and we do not follow your religious ideals. I don't see this any other way. Which makes me believe that you do not really believe in American views of equality and representation. You believe instead in living in a democracy... well at least as long as you're in the majority in that democracy. Am I wrong in any of that?
What is ironic is that you and I are both Christians, but WE actually believe that God is love, and believe all are equal in His eyes -- and that our rights are inherent in our humanity, not our sexuality. Our sexuality is irrelevant to His love. There is no male or female in Christ -- sounds pretty gay to me :) Thankfully, schmrkenhoff's view is losing. His "morality" of "normal vs. abnormal" is giving way to Christ's morality of love thy neighbor -- at least in this area. Let us keep working for a brighter, better, freer tomorrow where people will barely even notice you. Unless of course you want to be noticed for whatever gifts God has given you. As with all human rights battles, the Christians on the side of love and justice will eventually trump the ones on the other side. As always, it's just a matter of time. Let them have their cherry picked lines from the Bible, we have the very heart God. This is a little too hippie for me :P "let's all be friends, we are all equal, there should never be war, no culture should be unique, nobody is different, we're all the same. at our core, all of us are gay, we just have to come to realize it. there's no such thing as a heterosexual, reproduction is bad. the human race will continue because God wants it to continue. gay marriage! it's the logical conclusion of everything. it can only be progress because it is change" I don't like how "progress" is ONLY when you are descending into chaos. How is that progress at all? Progress is doing things to keep people decent... that's why things where arranged in such a way in the first place. I refuse to let anarchists destroy everything.... just can't sit idle-like and watch it happen.
There is no chaos in allowing adults to contract. Contracts are one of the foundations of rule of law and of civil society. This has nothing to do with anarchy or anarchism. Again, where did you learn logic? |
|
|
11/10/09 1:08:54 PM#248
There is a risk of chaos if you allow some adults to contract but not others. Or if the guidlines you use to decide which adults should be allowed to make contracts between each other is unreasonably discriminatory.
For example if making love with another man deliniated my ability to pass money on in my will, or get tax breaks, then such a law would be discriminatory against two straight men. A bad law brings the law into disrepute.
If gay marriage in churches is so offensive to such a large element of a particular church that is causes a schism then it has brought chaos. Churches need to have a critical mass of followers in order to hold together. For example you would at least need a congregation large enough to be able to fund building maintenace. If 90% are all homophobes, then you've just fucked the whole thing. Better to kick 10% out than have the 90% leave. Less chaotic anyway. |
|
|
zchmrkenhoff
Novice Member
Joined: 4/19/09
The biggest argument against democracy is a 5 minute discussion with the average voter |
11/10/09 1:20:11 PM#249
Originally posted by Fishermage We didn't start the idea of putting this in public. It all began when the government started recognizing one religious view over another. We're simply asking for our equal recognition under the law. As would you too if the tables were turned. I think the problem is that you're in the majority and we do not follow your religious ideals. I don't see this any other way. Which makes me believe that you do not really believe in American views of equality and representation. You believe instead in living in a democracy... well at least as long as you're in the majority in that democracy. Am I wrong in any of that?
What is ironic is that you and I are both Christians, but WE actually believe that God is love, and believe all are equal in His eyes -- and that our rights are inherent in our humanity, not our sexuality. Our sexuality is irrelevant to His love. There is no male or female in Christ -- sounds pretty gay to me :) Thankfully, schmrkenhoff's view is losing. His "morality" of "normal vs. abnormal" is giving way to Christ's morality of love thy neighbor -- at least in this area. Let us keep working for a brighter, better, freer tomorrow where people will barely even notice you. Unless of course you want to be noticed for whatever gifts God has given you. As with all human rights battles, the Christians on the side of love and justice will eventually trump the ones on the other side. As always, it's just a matter of time. Let them have their cherry picked lines from the Bible, we have the very heart God. This is a little too hippie for me :P "let's all be friends, we are all equal, there should never be war, no culture should be unique, nobody is different, we're all the same. at our core, all of us are gay, we just have to come to realize it. there's no such thing as a heterosexual, reproduction is bad. the human race will continue because God wants it to continue. gay marriage! it's the logical conclusion of everything. it can only be progress because it is change" I don't like how "progress" is ONLY when you are descending into chaos. How is that progress at all? Progress is doing things to keep people decent... that's why things where arranged in such a way in the first place. I refuse to let anarchists destroy everything.... just can't sit idle-like and watch it happen.
There is no chaos in allowing adults to contract. Contracts are one of the foundations of rule of law and of civil society. This has nothing to do with anarchy or anarchism. Again, where did you learn logic? They can do it just in their own privacy! Understand, my primary desire is for homosexuals to just do their thing in their own privacy. Regardless of whether or not it is a choice or if it is not, there are going to be homosexuals, and we shouldn't have to be trying to cure it or anything. There have always been homosexuals that have co-existed with the norm yet they've always conducted their business in privacy... the assertion that they deserve the same marriage reserved to people who wish to create a nuclear family is wrong, in my opinion, as I believe marriage means more than just recognizing the love of two individuals, but is the first step to creating a family. I don't see a couple together as a family, i see that as a couple. If these are two sterile heterosexual people, they are still just a couple. Only those people willing to and capable of producing a nuclear family deserve to be married, as they are the only essential people to society and are what should be promoted. By allowing gay people to marry, you show that you no longer have respect for tradition, are not promoting the nuclear family, and you have destroyed marriage. This reckless destroying of traditions for the purpose of "freedom" is anarchy to me, as I have absolutely no reason to believe that beastality and incest aren't next in line to be seen as normal and legal. Where will it end? All of you claim that those things are "just wrong" , but there will come a day when YOU are seen as a bigot for not allowing those disgusting people to do what they want to do. Gay people are fine... they just need to shut up and learn their place. It's this desire to destroy our traditions, such as marriage, that gives them negative attention. I guarantee that if homosexuals started actively conducting their business in privacy, these foolish issues would vanish and everybody would be quite happy ^^ "Listen, you fuckers, you screwheads. Here is a man who would not take it anymore. A man who stood up against the scum, the cunts, the dogs, the filth, the shit. Here is a man who stood up." - Robert DeNiro |
|
11/10/09 1:23:31 PM#250
Originally posted by zchmrkenhoff We didn't start the idea of putting this in public. It all began when the government started recognizing one religious view over another. We're simply asking for our equal recognition under the law. As would you too if the tables were turned. I think the problem is that you're in the majority and we do not follow your religious ideals. I don't see this any other way. Which makes me believe that you do not really believe in American views of equality and representation. You believe instead in living in a democracy... well at least as long as you're in the majority in that democracy. Am I wrong in any of that?
What is ironic is that you and I are both Christians, but WE actually believe that God is love, and believe all are equal in His eyes -- and that our rights are inherent in our humanity, not our sexuality. Our sexuality is irrelevant to His love. There is no male or female in Christ -- sounds pretty gay to me :) Thankfully, schmrkenhoff's view is losing. His "morality" of "normal vs. abnormal" is giving way to Christ's morality of love thy neighbor -- at least in this area. Let us keep working for a brighter, better, freer tomorrow where people will barely even notice you. Unless of course you want to be noticed for whatever gifts God has given you. As with all human rights battles, the Christians on the side of love and justice will eventually trump the ones on the other side. As always, it's just a matter of time. Let them have their cherry picked lines from the Bible, we have the very heart God. This is a little too hippie for me :P "let's all be friends, we are all equal, there should never be war, no culture should be unique, nobody is different, we're all the same. at our core, all of us are gay, we just have to come to realize it. there's no such thing as a heterosexual, reproduction is bad. the human race will continue because God wants it to continue. gay marriage! it's the logical conclusion of everything. it can only be progress because it is change" I don't like how "progress" is ONLY when you are descending into chaos. How is that progress at all? Progress is doing things to keep people decent... that's why things where arranged in such a way in the first place. I refuse to let anarchists destroy everything.... just can't sit idle-like and watch it happen.
There is no chaos in allowing adults to contract. Contracts are one of the foundations of rule of law and of civil society. This has nothing to do with anarchy or anarchism. Again, where did you learn logic? They can do it just in their own privacy! Understand, my primary desire is for homosexuals to just do their thing in their own privacy. Regardless of whether or not it is a choice or if it is not, there are going to be homosexuals, and we shouldn't have to be trying to cure it or anything. There have always been homosexuals that have co-existed with the norm yet they've always conducted their business in privacy... the assertion that they deserve the same marriage reserved to people who wish to create a nuclear family is wrong, in my opinion, as I believe marriage means more than just recognizing the love of two individuals, but is the first step to creating a family. I don't see a couple together as a family, i see that as a couple. If these are two sterile heterosexual people, they are still just a couple. Only those people willing to and capable of producing a nuclear family deserve to be married, as they are the only essential people to society and are what should be promoted. By allowing gay people to marry, you show that you no longer have respect for tradition, are not promoting the nuclear family, and you have destroyed marriage. This reckless destroying of traditions for the purpose of "freedom" is anarchy to me, as I have absolutely no reason to believe that beastality and incest aren't next in line to be seen as normal and legal. Where will it end? All of you claim that those things are "just wrong" , but there will come a day when YOU are seen as a bigot for not allowing those disgusting people to do what they want to do. Gay people are fine... they just need to shut up and learn their place. It's this desire to destroy our traditions, such as marriage, that gives them negative attention. I guarantee that if homosexuals started actively conducting their business in privacy, these foolish issues would vanish and everybody would be quite happy ^^
They can't contract just in their own privacy. You are encouraging lawlessness and chaos. |
|
|
11/10/09 1:27:09 PM#251
I'd like to think it was that simple, but sweeping it under the carpet, keeping it a secret behind closed doors also allows for the victimisation of gays to go unnoticed. There is a balance point somewhere I suppose and it's probably never in the same place twice. I can certainly see gay rights activists helping to forge a more tolerant society, the kind in which I would prefer to live, although I happen to think that gay marriage is just a big joke. Well done your married. Whoopy do. Since it's going to be a loveless marriage, it isn't likely to last and no one will be the worse off if it doesn't. |
|
|
zchmrkenhoff
Novice Member
Joined: 4/19/09
The biggest argument against democracy is a 5 minute discussion with the average voter |
11/10/09 4:28:44 PM#252
Originally posted by Fishermage
What is ironic is that you and I are both Christians, but WE actually believe that God is love, and believe all are equal in His eyes -- and that our rights are inherent in our humanity, not our sexuality. Our sexuality is irrelevant to His love. There is no male or female in Christ -- sounds pretty gay to me :) Thankfully, schmrkenhoff's view is losing. His "morality" of "normal vs. abnormal" is giving way to Christ's morality of love thy neighbor -- at least in this area. Let us keep working for a brighter, better, freer tomorrow where people will barely even notice you. Unless of course you want to be noticed for whatever gifts God has given you. As with all human rights battles, the Christians on the side of love and justice will eventually trump the ones on the other side. As always, it's just a matter of time. Let them have their cherry picked lines from the Bible, we have the very heart God. This is a little too hippie for me :P "let's all be friends, we are all equal, there should never be war, no culture should be unique, nobody is different, we're all the same. at our core, all of us are gay, we just have to come to realize it. there's no such thing as a heterosexual, reproduction is bad. the human race will continue because God wants it to continue. gay marriage! it's the logical conclusion of everything. it can only be progress because it is change" I don't like how "progress" is ONLY when you are descending into chaos. How is that progress at all? Progress is doing things to keep people decent... that's why things where arranged in such a way in the first place. I refuse to let anarchists destroy everything.... just can't sit idle-like and watch it happen.
There is no chaos in allowing adults to contract. Contracts are one of the foundations of rule of law and of civil society. This has nothing to do with anarchy or anarchism. Again, where did you learn logic? They can do it just in their own privacy! Understand, my primary desire is for homosexuals to just do their thing in their own privacy. Regardless of whether or not it is a choice or if it is not, there are going to be homosexuals, and we shouldn't have to be trying to cure it or anything. There have always been homosexuals that have co-existed with the norm yet they've always conducted their business in privacy... the assertion that they deserve the same marriage reserved to people who wish to create a nuclear family is wrong, in my opinion, as I believe marriage means more than just recognizing the love of two individuals, but is the first step to creating a family. I don't see a couple together as a family, i see that as a couple. If these are two sterile heterosexual people, they are still just a couple. Only those people willing to and capable of producing a nuclear family deserve to be married, as they are the only essential people to society and are what should be promoted. By allowing gay people to marry, you show that you no longer have respect for tradition, are not promoting the nuclear family, and you have destroyed marriage. This reckless destroying of traditions for the purpose of "freedom" is anarchy to me, as I have absolutely no reason to believe that beastality and incest aren't next in line to be seen as normal and legal. Where will it end? All of you claim that those things are "just wrong" , but there will come a day when YOU are seen as a bigot for not allowing those disgusting people to do what they want to do. Gay people are fine... they just need to shut up and learn their place. It's this desire to destroy our traditions, such as marriage, that gives them negative attention. I guarantee that if homosexuals started actively conducting their business in privacy, these foolish issues would vanish and everybody would be quite happy ^^
They can't contract just in their own privacy. You are encouraging lawlessness and chaos.
I don't understand "Listen, you fuckers, you screwheads. Here is a man who would not take it anymore. A man who stood up against the scum, the cunts, the dogs, the filth, the shit. Here is a man who stood up." - Robert DeNiro |
|
upallnight
 Apprentice Member
Joined: 1/08/06
I make my friends all laugh and smile, and never want to hate! |
11/10/09 5:19:03 PM#253
Originally posted by outfctrl It starts by taking the "shock" factor out of someone being gay. The same way it started by taking the shock factor out of a black kid being in a once all white school. The world changes. Things seem weird at first. Maybe even uncomfortable for some. But when we have people ultimately living together in a more peaceful and meaningful way instead of tearing at each others throats over non-sense then we'll all look back and be glad we made it over a little early unease. -------------------------------------- |
|
upallnight
Apprentice Member
Joined: 1/08/06
I make my friends all laugh and smile, and never want to hate! |
11/10/09 5:24:44 PM#254
Originally posted by zchmrkenhoff We didn't start the idea of putting this in public. It all began when the government started recognizing one religious view over another. We're simply asking for our equal recognition under the law. As would you too if the tables were turned. I think the problem is that you're in the majority and we do not follow your religious ideals. I don't see this any other way. Which makes me believe that you do not really believe in American views of equality and representation. You believe instead in living in a democracy... well at least as long as you're in the majority in that democracy. Am I wrong in any of that?
What is ironic is that you and I are both Christians, but WE actually believe that God is love, and believe all are equal in His eyes -- and that our rights are inherent in our humanity, not our sexuality. Our sexuality is irrelevant to His love. There is no male or female in Christ -- sounds pretty gay to me :) Thankfully, schmrkenhoff's view is losing. His "morality" of "normal vs. abnormal" is giving way to Christ's morality of love thy neighbor -- at least in this area. Let us keep working for a brighter, better, freer tomorrow where people will barely even notice you. Unless of course you want to be noticed for whatever gifts God has given you. As with all human rights battles, the Christians on the side of love and justice will eventually trump the ones on the other side. As always, it's just a matter of time. Let them have their cherry picked lines from the Bible, we have the very heart God. This is a little too hippie for me :P "let's all be friends, we are all equal, there should never be war, no culture should be unique, nobody is different, we're all the same. at our core, all of us are gay, we just have to come to realize it. there's no such thing as a heterosexual, reproduction is bad. the human race will continue because God wants it to continue. gay marriage! it's the logical conclusion of everything. it can only be progress because it is change" I don't like how "progress" is ONLY when you are descending into chaos. How is that progress at all? Progress is doing things to keep people decent... that's why things where arranged in such a way in the first place. I refuse to let anarchists destroy everything.... just can't sit idle-like and watch it happen.
There is no chaos in allowing adults to contract. Contracts are one of the foundations of rule of law and of civil society. This has nothing to do with anarchy or anarchism. Again, where did you learn logic? They can do it just in their own privacy! Understand, my primary desire is for homosexuals to just do their thing in their own privacy. Regardless of whether or not it is a choice or if it is not, there are going to be homosexuals, and we shouldn't have to be trying to cure it or anything. There have always been homosexuals that have co-existed with the norm yet they've always conducted their business in privacy... the assertion that they deserve the same marriage reserved to people who wish to create a nuclear family is wrong, in my opinion, as I believe marriage means more than just recognizing the love of two individuals, but is the first step to creating a family. I don't see a couple together as a family, i see that as a couple. If these are two sterile heterosexual people, they are still just a couple. Only those people willing to and capable of producing a nuclear family deserve to be married, as they are the only essential people to society and are what should be promoted. By allowing gay people to marry, you show that you no longer have respect for tradition, are not promoting the nuclear family, and you have destroyed marriage. This reckless destroying of traditions for the purpose of "freedom" is anarchy to me, as I have absolutely no reason to believe that beastality and incest aren't next in line to be seen as normal and legal. Where will it end? All of you claim that those things are "just wrong" , but there will come a day when YOU are seen as a bigot for not allowing those disgusting people to do what they want to do. Gay people are fine... they just need to shut up and learn their place. It's this desire to destroy our traditions, such as marriage, that gives them negative attention. I guarantee that if homosexuals started actively conducting their business in privacy, these foolish issues would vanish and everybody would be quite happy ^^ I don't listen to you to tell me where my "place" is. And just try to make us shut up. We will only get louder. You're very much a large ego. How funny that you think your opinion is what we will listen to. -------------------------------------- |
|
outfctrl
Advanced Member
Joined: 11/16/03
American by Birth |
Originally posted by upallnight It starts by taking the "shock" factor out of someone being gay. The same way it started by taking the shock factor out of a black kid being in a once all white school. The world changes. Things seem weird at first. Maybe even uncomfortable for some. But when we have people ultimately living together in a more peaceful and meaningful way instead of tearing at each others throats over non-sense then we'll all look back and be glad we made it over a little early unease. Sorry, I have to disagree with you there. You cannot relate Gay with being black. Being black is biological, being Gay is or could be a choice. There is no biological proof of being Gay. |
|
11/10/09 5:59:33 PM#256
Originally posted by outfctrl Sorry, I have to disagree with you there. You cannot relate Gay with being black. Being black is biological, being Gay is or could be a choice. There is no biological proof of being Gay.
However, whether it is a choice or not is irrelevant, just as being a redhead may or may not be a chouce (there are genetic redheads and chosen redheads)> The point is one's sexuality has nothing to do with whether one has the right to contract. Forbidding gay marriage is taking away the right for two men or two women contractng that way. As a minister, if i choose to sanctify the marriage of two men or two women, and gay marriage is illegal, the state is violating our right to freedom of religion. If Marriage is a religious ceremony, it violates a person's religious freedom to forbid it. There is no reasonable argument against gay marriage. Every single one of them is emotionally-based, or the desire to impose one religious doctrine over all -- that violates the establishment clause of the first amendment. Either way it violates the first amendment. |
|
|
upallnight
Apprentice Member
Joined: 1/08/06
I make my friends all laugh and smile, and never want to hate! |
11/10/09 6:33:45 PM#257
Originally posted by outfctrl Sorry, I have to disagree with you there. You cannot relate Gay with being black. Being black is biological, being Gay is or could be a choice. There is no biological proof of being Gay. Says you. And you're not gay. -------------------------------------- |
|
upallnight
Apprentice Member
Joined: 1/08/06
I make my friends all laugh and smile, and never want to hate! |
11/10/09 6:48:43 PM#258
Originally posted by outfctrl Sorry, I have to disagree with you there. You cannot relate Gay with being black. Being black is biological, being Gay is or could be a choice. There is no biological proof of being Gay. How about this "biological proof", I did not choose to be gay. I was raised in a VERY religious family, had tons of male role models, even played football and baseball all through junior high and high school. I probably do more "guy" things than you do. Yet, all through that nurturing that I was raised in, I still ended up liking guys to no end and girls never. Not even when I wanted to. Not even when I tried. And I'm very much in love with my current same sex partner. Whatever reason I got to this point, I am certain enough to bet everything I can call my own in this life and beyond that I never made a choice to be gay. So, I guess to you I'm either quite dubious in my personal judgment or a liar. Because I have a feeling no matter how many gay people tell you they didn't choose their sexual attraction, you're going to work to find a way to make them out to be one or the other. -------------------------------------- |
|
11/10/09 7:06:17 PM#259
Originally posted by zzvicezz Even if we accept the fact that it serves no great utiliarian purpose. Is that really enough of a reason to ignore the constitutional freedoms in favour of a society's situational status quo? Should we bend the constitution every time we find something not immediately practical to us? Marriage between homosexuals have the same benefits as a marriage between heterosexuals. Because the lawyers have to make money somehow:P
|
|
|
upallnight
Apprentice Member
Joined: 1/08/06
I make my friends all laugh and smile, and never want to hate! |
11/10/09 7:50:37 PM#260
Originally posted by zzvicezz I'm assuming that your "undeniable benefits" have something to do with the raising of children. Because other than that, there really is no difference in a same sex marriage as opposed to an opposite sex marriage. That being said, you're argument might have had some credibility in the past. But you are aware that same-sex couples are using modern science to have children? Same sex couples today are raising families. The times have changed. The people needing those benefits have expanded to include others. Why should people be so cruel as to deny the children from same sex couples the same benefits as given to other children? -------------------------------------- |
