Tell me what to think (the issue of gay marriages)

[Solly]

I find it ironic that gays wish to legitimise their partnerships through the medium of marriage, which is itself an institution founded through the principles of Christianity, a religion which rightfully states that homosexuality is not to be acted upon.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by red_jon
I really do not get how people fail to understand that a lot of homosexuals do procreate...

They didn't really have Sex Education when I was in school.
I truly didn't know homosexual couples had the capacity to procreate.

How does that work?

[Frogman]

Originally posted by Alvaro
My morals are for me to act by. I have no intentions on forcing them upon anyone.

I don't think it's morally wrong because I think it's genetical. It's not their choice to be homosexual.

We were not put on this planet to be homosexual. I have a penis and my girlfriend has clitoris so that we could have children. That's our #1 goal in this life according to the bible, and the holy book is spot on, we are what we leave behind us and there's no more memorable or valuable a legacy than human life and since homosexual relationships cannot create it - they're wrong.

I don't think that homosexuality is to be encouraged, it is un-natural, however I don't think that gays should be restricted in their rights, "it's not their fault", so to speak.

Two points. First, is it wrong for a heterosexual couple to be married if they are incapable of having children? Procreation is not the moral legitimacy for marriage, love and fidelity is.

Second, how can you say that while 10% or so of our population is homosexual, by genetics, and then say its not natural? It may not be typical, but its just as natural and normal as left handedness. I don't find homosexuality to be a whole lot different than being left handed. Left handed people don't choose it, some try to switch just to fit in, and they have to adjust in a world made for right handers, but being a minority doesn't make them unnatural.

People aren't going to switch to being gay just because we accept them as normal. Its a hard coded preference that seems to go with artistic abilities. I don't know why that is, but the world would be a more dreary place without the contributions of the gay community.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand



They didn't really have Sex Education when I was in school.
I truly didn't know homosexual couples had the capacity to procreate.

How does that work?

Artificial insemination with a willing woman is practised.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by Frogman


Two points. First, is it wrong for a heterosexual couple to be married if they are incapable of having children? Procreation is not the moral legitimacy for marriage, love and fidelity is.

Second, how can you say that while 10% or so of our population is homosexual, by genetics, and then say its not natural? It may not be typical, but its just as natural and normal as left handedness. I don't find homosexuality to be a whole lot different than being left handed. Left handed people don't choose it, some try to switch just to fit in, and they have to adjust in a world made for right handers, but being a minority doesn't make them unnatural.

People aren't going to switch to being gay just because we accept them as normal. Its a hard coded preference that seems to go with artistic abilities. I don't know why that is, but the world would be a more dreary place without the contributions of the gay community.

Well said.

And in Victorian Times, left-handed schoolchildren were forced to write with their right hand.

[Alvaro]

Originally posted by Boddington's
I find it ironic that gays wish to legitimise their partnerships through the medium of marriage, which is itself an institution founded through the principles of Christianity, a religion which rightfully states that homosexuality is not to be acted upon.

That's a good point. However there are now financial advantages to married couples, and let us not forget that marriage is not tied to religion so closely as it used to, even here in Israel.

Two points. First, is it wrong for a heterosexual couple to be married if they are incapable of having children? Procreation is not the moral legitimacy for marriage, love and fidelity is.

See Boddington's above quote.

People aren't going to switch to being gay just because we accept them as normal. Its a hard coded preference that seems to go with artistic abilities. I don't know why that is, but the world would be a more dreary place without the contributions of the gay community.

Absolutely correct. However I find that stereotypical "artsy" reference quite out of place, I don't think gays, lefties or any other such sector stand out, or at least have not seen a reliable resaerch to prove it.

Second, how can you say that while 10% or so of our population is homosexual, by genetics, and then say its not natural?

The day that 2 homosexual men/women procreate without external help is the day I call it natural. If it cannot survive - it is not natural. Most mutations become extinct. If gays were to be left on their own - they'd not survive.

From what I know lefties are not impotent, they can f*** quite well.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by Alvaro
The day that 2 homosexual men/women procreate without external help is the day I call it natural. If it cannot survive - it is not natural. Most mutations become extinct. If gays were to be left on their own - they'd not survive.

Gay people do have parental instincts and if needs be, at least some would have sex with a member of the opposite sex to procreate.

[Alvaro]

adam + eve = children

dog + ***** = puppies

james + adam = 0

angelica + pamela = 0

The idea is that if the couple cannot have children ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT EXTERNAL HELP (as is said by me in the paragraph you quoted) - it is not natural.

[red_jon]

But that's presuming you locked every gay person in a room of the same gender. No-one has much of a chance at procreating like that...

[Gibsie]

Ironically, if homosexuality is a result of genetics, the reason it has continued throughout history so consistently is because homosexuals, fearful for being found out, have been forced to take spouses and procreated in order to allay suspicions of their gayness...

[Japher]

{Because I am Lazy Gay will mean homosexual, incl. Lezbian}

Gay people should be allowed to marry and gain any advantages/disadvantages alloted to them by the state for such an institution.

Love and fidelity are not the reasons for marriage, these things can be given without the vow... Religion may have defined what marriage is, but it no longer represents the institution as a whole; people can be married by a justice of the peace, and atheists get married all the time..

The real reason for marriage is a) to affirm one's love for another, and b) to people to legally support the one the love. The affirmation is not something that the state needs to grant, though (b) is, and gay people want that there is no reason for the state to withhold it from them.

It was brought up that a concern for gay marriages, if legalized, would cause "alternative" lifestyles, that are destined to failed, to become more prolific... Really? Seeing as the divorce rate is already high, that the number of single parents growing rapidly, and the the number of children without homes or any parents is also growing I don't see how gay marriages can hurt. I have seen plenty of straight marriages occur that were doomed from the start. IMO it is not a gay or straight thing, but a stupid and blind thing... We don't prevent stupid people from marrying...

Gays with Kids: As noted in the paragraph above; there are many kids without homes or parents. Gay couples can create some very stable homes for these (as well as their own) kids. Some may argue that a kid needs a mother/father figure... My response; most don't already. At least in the case of gay couples the kid will have two loving parents.

Thus, while we (and the government) argue the case of gay marriages, and whether they will harm society, we have allowed straight marriages to cause the harm without even a whimper.

[HazieDaVampire]

i think marriages are ok, but not adoption, think how much that child is gunna get the piss taken out of it.

You'll just end up with some socialy exclued kid who grows up to go on a rampage with a gun in school, or trys to kill sombody famus or somthing along those lines.

[SlowwHand]

Bottom-line?
Gay marriages are just so Gay.

[Gibsie]

That's such a poorly thought-out position to take, HdV. How about if gay parents home-schooled their kid? How about if they lived in an area where all parents taught tolerance to their kids? How about if the kid was already such a freak that gay parents would be the last thing his peers would bully him over? Would we also ban anyone with a funny surname from adopting so their kid doesn't get bullied?

Think on!

[red_jon]

Originally posted by HazieDaVampire
i think marriages are ok, but not adoption, think how much that child is gunna get the piss taken out of it.

You'll just end up with some socialy exclued kid who grows up to go on a rampage with a gun in school, or trys to kill sombody famus or somthing along those lines.

Most adoption agencies are for it - which must say something.

Having two parents of the same gender is much better than no parents at all. Those who had to be raised in children's homes tend to be the most 'disturbed'.