Thread: Gay marriage.
Results 221 to 230 of 230
06-06-2008, 12:24 AM
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
First of all who asked you to butt in ,the reply wasn't intended for you !
But you had your say now I will have mine .
"Ultra conservative" I think not,conservative yes.
"Wacco" ,A judgement call as in insane, I am as sane as you and in much better control of my emotions.
"irrational religious tendencies" ,How in the world did you come to that conclusion you know nothing about me.
"Totally Off the charts" ,at you're old stomping grounds 'DU' yes !
"Insane" again compared to whom ? Where did you come from 'Wilber',are you new here ?Have you been a member of any other message boards recently ?
"Stop drinking the kool-aid" ,my church doesn't serve 'kool-aid' does yours ?
"your religious cult" my church is far from a cult and can I assume that you are a church going critter ?
From your irrational outburst you sure sound like some kind of half human primitive critter !
Last edited by megimoo; 06-06-2008 at 12:50 AM.
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
GoldwaterGuest06-06-2008, 08:12 AM
06-06-2008, 10:26 AM
- Join Date
- May 2008
That's how genetics works.
It is only because there is an advantage towards being heterogeneus for sickle cell anemia that the condition persists today.
07-15-2008, 11:32 AM
Government's involvement in "marriage" is not about getting involved in YOUR business of what you want to stick where, or who you want to love. Government exists to organize a society based on rule of law, and such laws are based upon a universal "morality", or at least what is seen as a common benefit to society at-large.
With that said... explain to me, outside of the emotional/sexual bond, what benefit a homosexual marriage gives to society?
A heterosexual marital union, based on thousands of years of plain-as-day evidence, exists for the benefit of civilization to create a strong child-rearing situation. A benefit to society and CIVILIZATION, no doubt. Marriage (outside of religion) is Government's recognition that FAMILY is a benefit to the success and furtherence of the society.
And now before you say "gay couples can raise kids"... sure, they can. So can a single parent. They should have that right if they so chose. But that does not take away the fact that BIOLOGICALLY, it takes a heterosexual couple to produce a kid. Even one that a gay couple adopts.
Health insurance benefits, wills, estate transfers, power of attourney? All can be set up to be legaly given to whomever you wish, giving gay couples the same rights as a married couple. Look up "revocable living trust". If there are things we can fix to smooth out the legal hurdles to give your benefits to your gay lover, then we can talk about that and fix it.
If you're gay and in love, do you really need GOVERNMENT's permission to make a committment to each other? Do you need some legislator's approval before you stick your wank where you wish? Then what is the real driving force behind the Gay Marriage movement? Love is love, sex is sex, with or without the government involved. Homosexuals seemt to jsut want to force society to look at their love/sex life and get our approval. WHY DO YOU NEED IT? Are you insecure about it because maybe deep down you know it's wrong?
Marriage exists as a government "benefit" because society recognizes that the stable union of a man and a woman provides the best possible situation for creating and raising children for the furtherence of civilization/society. Every individual is created equal and should have equal rights.... but marriage is recognition that there is a special uniqueness to the love and relationship between a man and woman... that should be encouraged, btw... that is more of a benefit to society than a homosexual relationship, which cannot naturally produce children.
07-16-2008, 10:30 AM
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
I didn't read the entire thread, but here are my two cents.
1. The definition of marriage should be left to the people of each State to decide, as the Constitution left this issue to the States.
2. Either a federal amendment should be proposed to enforce the above, or the dumbass judicial activists should realize that the above is 100% true.
3. There should be no forcing the people of a pro-heterosexual-marriage-State to accept homosexual marriages. If you are married in Commiefornia and move to Michigan, your marriage is void.
4. Moving the ability to choose what is best farther and farther away from the people results in diluting their will. I believe in keeping as many important decisions local, as this most accurately reflects the peoples' needs. Why should the will of Commifornians be forced upon me? Remember, it cuts both ways: Michiganders could win a big ruling and force Commiefornia to abandon their choice to accept gay marriage. Oops...the people didn't choose to accept gay marriage...but, you get my point.
5. If you want gay marriage accepted, you should convince the people of your state to support your position. When the people are ready, gay marriage may be accepted.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|