Gay Sex Political Scandal- Guess Which Party?

[Darius871]

Um, no. Again, they were opposed to a white man marrying a black woman or a white woman marrying a black man.

Read what I said again, Darius.

Two persons! = man and woman.

Oh really? In the history of time there has never existed a single interracial marriage opponent who thought that a white man marrying a black man or a white woman marrying a black man was abhorrent? They all only care about man-woman miscegenation, and they're all cool with gay miscegenation? Where the **** are you getting this from?

[Kidlicious]

I guess we should deny legal recognition to straight couples who either have no desire to reproduce, or have put bearing children as a low priority on their list.

We should also deny legal recognition to straight couples, who seem to be past the age of healthIy child bearing.

This response is stupid. I don't know why anyone is still pandering to you.

[DaShi]

[MrFun]

Good thing you put healthy in there. Gosh, how bad would it be for older parents to choose to have children? Smells like bigotry to me.

I just have not heard of a seventy-five year old woman getting pregnant, carrying the fetus to full term, and successfully giving birth.

[MrFun]

It's not possible that your reading comprehension is truly that poor. I refuse to believe it.

I'm afraid it's true - he's beyond being saved.

[Ben Kenobi]

They all only care about man-woman miscegenation, and they're all cool with gay miscegenation? Where the **** are you getting this from?

If you can find me a quote where they refer to gay miscegenation, fire away.

[Ben Kenobi]

I just have not heard of a seventy-five year old woman getting pregnant, carrying the fetus to full term, and successfully giving birth.

Then why not simply state 'infertile'?

[MrFun]

Fine, let's go with infertile and prohibit legal recognition of marriages of straight, infertile couples.

[Ben Kenobi]

Fine, let's go with infertile and prohibit legal recognition of marriages of straight, infertile couples.

There's nothing to prevent people from becoming infertile later in life. Should we dissolve a marriage because of infertility?

[MrFun]

Nah - let's not dissolve already existing marriages based on infertility that will occur later. Just prohibit those who are already infertile from having legally recognized marriage.

[lightblue]

What about a man whose sperm is faulty (eg circle swimmers) or a woman whose fallopian tubes are blocked? Should they banned from getting married as they won't be able to have kids (without IVF, which I guess is another no-no seeing as some of the embryos will be discarded).

[Aeson]

I fully support a woman's right to marry a IVF apparatus. (Forgive me, but I do not know the technical term for such an apparatus.) I would also support a man's right to marry a porn magazine and kleenex, but only within certain jurisdictions (such as sperm banks).

[lightblue]

How's that relevant? A couple where one or both have a problem with fertility can use IVF to have a greater chance of conceiving, but I assume that Ben and his like would not condone of IVF seeing as it creates embryos outside the body, and not all are implanted.

[Aeson]

How is it not relevant? Are you bigoted against porn magazines and kleenex or something?

[loinburger]

Well that one's not difficult. I'm not Christ. Do I think his advice is the right way to go? Yes, absolutely. Do I always do what Christ says I should do? No.

Because I fail to live up to Christ's ideals does not make his ideals wrong. It just makes me a sinner just like everyone else who needs his help to live according to his laws.

How do you decide which of Christ's ideals should be ignored?