Stitch on 19/5/2008 at 15:48
Quote Posted by paloalto90
Lets do it for the children.
How does a young male bond with a male in place of the woman as a mother when both couples are men?How would it effect his relationship with a future woman?
Ask the countless children adopted by gay parents. That train left the station years ago.
Edit: also what Starry said, you retard.
Queue on 19/5/2008 at 15:58
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
Don't you realize, mop, with this decision the floodgates are officially opened! We're five years away from seeing inter-species marriage legalized now, what with those godless Darwinists saying how we're so closely related to monkeys!
Is that what you want, mop? DO YOU WANT YOUR SON MARRYING A MONKEY?! Because that's what's going to happen!
Damn dirty apes!
The more I think about it, the more I wonder why anyone would give a rat's ass if the gays want to marry each other. WHY!? If they want to get married, have at it. Will it truly hurt anyone? No. Will it "subvert" the poor little kiddies in anyway? No. Will it cause a mass epidemic of homosexuality? One can only hope (at least it would make things interesting!), but the answer is still no.
I've heard the argument that they should not receive the same benefits (i.e. tax breaks) as "normal" couples--and by allowing gay marriage to happen they will (apparently this is un-American to offer the same benefits to all Americans. Go figure). Well, why not! If they are living together as a committed couple, sharing the same burdens as any other American citizen, then they should be eligible for the same benefits. So what if they're not popping out off-spring by the dozen--marriage should not mean "one must reproduce". Besides, think of how many "normal" couples, one sees them roaming around the Wal-Mart with a gaggle of children in tow all the time, which truly shouldn't have children.
SubJeff on 19/5/2008 at 16:22
Quote Posted by Hidden_7
There's really no non-religious justification to limit marriage to a man and a woman.
Well fett has brought up one thing - the fact that certain parts are really made for other parts to go into and out of repeatedly. Sure, straight people do it but they also have another option.
If one wanted to play Devil's advocate one could argue that we have evolved to be a species with gender and that any deviation from that is against evolution (and not God this time). If everyone was gay there would be no more children and the race would die out. You can spin it that male-female balance is normal just like the hot-cold balance or whatever. There are a lot of "scientific" reasons you could come up with for homosexuality being "wrong".
fett on 19/5/2008 at 16:31
Quote Posted by Jennie&Tim
I'm baffled. Straight people have anal sex too.
Quote Posted by fett
I'm just saying that the media tends to ignore the fact that anal sex, for both men and women is dangerous, especially if it's habitual and/or unsanitary.
Quote Posted by Jennie&Tim
I'd guess that lesbians have less of it than straight couples or gay couples. Marriage for gays probably won't change sexual habits, so any damage done by anal sex (of which I'm ignorant) wouldn't change. So how is this relevant?
Quote Posted by fett
Er...what does any of this have to do with gay marriage?
:p
Vivian on 19/5/2008 at 17:08
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Well fett has brought up one thing - the fact that certain parts are really made for other parts to go into and out of repeatedly. Sure, straight people do it but they also have another option.
If one wanted to play Devil's advocate one could argue that we have evolved to be a species with gender and that any deviation from that is against evolution (and not God this time). If everyone was gay there would be no more children and the race would die out. You can spin it that male-female balance is normal just like the hot-cold balance or whatever. There are a lot of "scientific" reasons you could come up with for homosexuality being "wrong".
On the other hand, seeing as there is good evidence for it being genetic, and as it has evolved in a bunch of other species as well (most probably as a (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spandrel_%28biology%29) spandrel associated with increased fecundity in other sexes), you could say that it was entirely 'natural' (as if anything an organism can do is not in some way natural).
SubJeff on 19/5/2008 at 17:11
1. Where is the good evidence that it's genetic?
2. Many diseases are genetic - and they are something that we are trying to stamp out. My point is; genetic != good.
Starrfall on 19/5/2008 at 17:22
Love and anal sex are different things so even if anal sex automatically killed everyone who engaged in it you still wouldn't have an argument that being gay is bad.
Unfortunately the people who would make that argument to begin with probably wouldn't listen to things like "reason" anyways so
Queue on 19/5/2008 at 17:38
Vivian, you mean they didn't just wake up one morning and say to themselves, "You know, I think being shunned and ridiculed sounds like a helluva good life right now. I wonder what I can do that might just make that happen?"
Ironically, there is the thought that serial killers can't help themselves--they have the impulse to kill (from being wired wrong in the head). So why not homosexuals?
I have a couple of guy friends--before they became a "couple" they both tried to be "normal" and dated women, and, frankly, just couldn't do it. They've both said they would have given anything to be straight to avoid the stigma of being homosexual, but, it just didn't work for them.
fett on 19/5/2008 at 17:53
Speaking of reason, since when is something good or profitable just because it's genetic and it can't be helped? I'm NOT saying that homosexuality is inherently bad, but using that argument to call it 'normal' or even 'natural' is idiotic.
For instance, I woke up this morning with an inexplicable urge to mow down the patrons of the local Wal-Mart. I also have frequent impulses to lie, cheat, steal, cheat on my wife, beat my kids, kick the dog, and punch Hillary Clinton in the face. No one taught me to do those things -they are 'genetic' urges pre-programmed and learned from my parents and environment. That doesn't make them 'normal' or even 'ok' in the social sense. They certainly don't work for the betterment of myself or those around me.
STATING FOR THE SECOND TIME IN THIS POST that I'm not grouping homosexuality in with the above activities or calling it 'bad' or 'unnatural' - only saying that just because something is a natural or genetic impulse doesn't mean it gets a pass.
Queue - we both know that although there are many people who are legitimately attracted to the same or both sexes, there are also many who 'decide' to become gay because they are attention whores.
