This content was originally posted by: TheUltimate
Ok, Beyond_the_Veil, to save space, I am not quoting you.
Okay.
This content was originally posted by: 1
My initial response means what it says - as long as I, my kids or any other married or unmarried heterosexual does not have to adhere to new standards, I am ok with gays calling their union anything.
...which is in stark contrast to what you have stated later:
This content was originally posted by: 2
And who said it would affect the traditional marriages? Not me.
[/quote]
If you feel same sex marriage has the potential to affect traditional definition of marriage, then it is logically deduced that you are implying it could (and hence there is a statistical probability that it would, sooner or later) affect traditional definition of marriage. And then you go ahead and say you haven't said it would affect traditional marriages. For more information, check the first paragraph of my post
here.
So could you clarify your stance?
Are you trying to say why they want to get married and take a concept that was not meant for them?
Because there are more than one purpose of getting married. Hence there are purposes of getting married, and procreation is one of them (and the most or second most crucial one at that too).
Yes.
I am on two minds when it comes down to polyamory. I will say that I have not seen very strong arguments or statistical records to show that these relationships can sustain properly. However, I am very open to the concept if anyone is willing to elaborate on its needs and place in society.
Because a civil union isn't exactly the same as a marriage. There are countless benefits married couples receives, that couples in a civil union do not.
Check this. There is no reason why LGBTs should be discriminated against. If there is a valid, rational, scientific, social argument against it, the one ought to bring it forth. So far, the "best" opposition point made against gay marriage revolves around the predictably same "Because God said so" or "Because it goes against traditional views" which aren't valid points at all.
I could debate ceaselessly on homosexuality. Why do you feel there has been no good case put up so far? And what exactly is your objection (if you have a major one) with them getting married - would you elaborate on that more so that I can present my counterarguments if I can.
Government should grant them the right to get married - people fighting for equality are not going to rest until this.
How exactly are they (which I am presuming you meant the LGBTs) bringing church into the state? In fact, it is usually the religious community attacking same sex marriage and (sometimes) even civil union by bringing their faith.
Edited by Beyond_the_Veil - 12 years ago
comment:
p_commentcount