10 Reasons why Gay Marriage is Wrong!!

[Drake Tungsten]

Sarcasm noted.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Sarcasm noted.

You were being sarcastic?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Leaving aside the question of whether marriage is, in fact, a "perfectly good time-tested institution" -- it's lasted, sure, but so has slavery and infanticide

Are you saying marriage is the equivalent of slavery and infanticide? Or that slavery and infanticide could be considered "perfectly good"? Either way, I'm not sure your views are really in step with the majority of people...

Okay, forget infanticide; I was being goof. But the view that slavery was a perfectly good, time-tested institution has been held by most societies for most of human history. My point is, being a "perfectly good time-tested institution" shouldn't exempt an instition from changing when a society deems it appropriate.

And, in fact, marriage has changed over time, obviously. In fact, that "perfectly good institution" was at one point a form of slavery. There's noting wrong with changing the definition or social understanding of marriage; such change is the norm.

In the end though, I think it comes to this: repressive societies forbid things until they have a good reason not to; free societies permit things until they have a good reason not to. I have yet to see a good reason not to permit gay parenting. In a free society -- as I believe we still are -- it should therefore be an option.

[Drake Tungsten]

You were being sarcastic?

That's better. I prefer you're endearingly bad attempts at humor to your ham-fisted attempts at sarcasm.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

You were being sarcastic?

That's better. I prefer you're endearingly bad attempts at humor to your ham-fisted attempts at sarcasm.

Next time when you post someting sarcastic use one of the smilies for a visual aid.

[Berzerker]

Ben

I'd agree. Which makes much more sense to me then to say that this phenomenon refers to homosexuality. I don't see low libido as a trait one commonly associates with gay men.

They - low libido and homosexuality - need not be associated (other than both being products of the helper phenomenon). One does not preclude the other, but both have the same effect - lower procreation rates and consequently more unattached adults available to help raise the young 'ens of family and friends, i.e., the clan. For most of human history (and I include several million years of hominids) the nuclear family could have resulted in our extinction while the extended family and the clan is how we survived. Why? The availability of adults to help propagate the species thru procreation of course, but clan members who helped raise the children of other clan members. Look at the big cats most in danger of extinction, they dont rely on clans. But lions do and they're still doing well. Unattached adults are the key, the moment a parent is killed in the hunt the kids are raised by others.
That tells me there is an evolutionary advantage to clans and a certain percentage of unattached adults.

Where have I said homosexuality ought to be punished as a crime? That's not the issue here.

You haven't, I was commenting on the origin of "that ain't natural" arguments and how it was used to invent "crimes against nature".
How does one decide what is natural? Its far too subjective and leads to ludicrous arguments. For example, if we say "natural" is defined by the majority's behavior ala heterosexuality vs homosexuality, then what do we say about the behavior of minority's we like or support? How many people have flown into space? Is it un-natural to fly into space? Of course not, part of our nature includes inquisitiveness, endeavoring to achieve, to explore, to ask questions about existence. Is this not true for emotional attachments as well? The desire to love and be loved is natural, true?

Ah, so people have the individual right to be married? Look at all the other rights that you have. You can exercise them individually. You have the right to free speech. You have the right to free assembly, you have the right to freedom of conscience and religion. All of these rights can be exercised individually.

Not assembly Inherent to our individual liberty is the right to make contacts, to cooperate with others.

Ogie

Fundamentally I agree with your assessments, but of course society and government reserve the right to regulate behaviors that they feel dangerous to society (or even least optimal).

Thats fascism - the good of society must prevail over the good of the individual

So given a nonsensical example that a serial killer should not be constrained in his pursuit of happiness which just so happens to be pathological murder the governement is well within their role to restrict this kind of behavior. (No I am not attempting to compare gay marriage to murder.)

But "society's right" stems from the individual victim's right. And the pursuit of happiness is an equal right which automatically limits what others can do to you in the name of pursuing their happiness.

Rufus

Ben - This is really very simple. You believe that a loving mother/father arrangement is the absolute best thing for a child. You don't -- can't -- know.

Seems obvious, and being raised in a family with 2 parents, multiple siblings and older relatives is better than being raised as an only child with only the 2 parents. The argument I consistently hear against homeschooling is the lack of assimilation, a valid argument for sure, but one that holds true for families. Removing the mother or father from that equation doesn't enhance assimilation or emotional bonding with the absent gender...

[Spiffor]

@ Drake

[Agathon]

I noticed you left the CPA Spiff. You are now officially a traitor. Better buy some salt mining boots.

[Spiffor]

I didn't leave it, I went undercover

[Sikander]

Good save on a thread that looked like it was doomed guys!

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Wittlich
Here we go again...I guess it was just a matter of time before this subject was brought up again...

And were going to keep bringing it up until someone makes an honest man of you!

[Wittlich]

Originally posted by Sikander


And were going to keep bringing it up until someone makes an honest man of you!

Well, if by "honest" you mean "straight"... I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

I had to hide my homosexuality for 20 yrs in the Army and I'm not going back into that closet again.

As a matter of fact, I was in the same field as you were Sikander - Military Intelligence.

[Ben Kenobi]

So, are you now going back and saying that gays are more likely to be pedophiles... that's BS and you know it.

Just admit it... you are against it because of your religion... because frankly, none of your arguments hold any water. If it's truly about the Kids... let's not let religion get in the way of their potential happiness.

If it were all about religion, then we wouldn't be sitting here arguing ming. You are Catholic, so am I, so let's dispense with that smokescreen. If it were all about religion, then my beliefs would have changed after I was confirmed, but they have not, and you have admitted as such.

I have not made a single argument from religion other then to clarify what someone else said that Christianity teaches, since they were using religion to buttress their own point.

You gave a scenario, I gave another plausible scenario. I said nothing about gay people being more likely to be pedophiles, all I said is that abuse is a plausible outcome of your scenario, nothing more nothing less. So please, if you have an argument, argue on what I have said and don't put words into my mouth.

[Kontiki]

Did your beliefs magically change the day you were confirmed? What precepts of Catholicism did you not believe the day before your confirmation that you did believe the day after?

[Arrian]

Your scenario isn't "plausible" Ben. It's possible, since all sorts of horrible **** happens in this world, but that doesn't make it at all likely. It's the creation of a person who actually believes that homosexual = pedophile. Or at least that homosexuals are predisposed to be pedophiles. It's silly, but hey, so are many of your beliefs.

Moreover, your assertion that you are not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia is COMPLETE AND UTTER BULL****. You do that often, Ben, in the context of discussing gay marriage. You clearly think that gays are predisposed to pedophilia. Can you actual back that up with anything resembling fact?

-Arrian