What's new
By:

Gay marriage in Utah put on hold

E.J. Wells said:
Being able to procreate isn't really the issue, since gay people can still procreate if they choose. What the issue is, as you've stated, is that homosexuality is evolutionarily weak, and thus, is substandard to "regular" people. What I find interesting is that you point out that people with Downs can, and do, procreate, which ironically increases the chances of evolutionary decline. (even if it is minute, sneakers)
Click to expand...

A gay person reproducing can only be done through heterosexual relations.
 
E.J. Wells said:
Sneakers, to be fair... even if it was 0.00001% of the time, it would still mean that Bean is wrong. Again. As usual.


Being able to procreate isn't really the issue, since gay people can still procreate if they choose. What the issue is, as you've stated, is that homosexuality is evolutionarily weak, and thus, is substandard to "regular" people. What I find interesting is that you point out that people with Downs can, and do, procreate, which ironically increases the chances of evolutionary decline. (even if it is minute, sneakers)
Click to expand...

Oh ya sure. This isn't something i'm gonna be a stickler about.
 
Stoked said:
Just look at all the lawsuits on private business owners for refusing to provide services for LGBT activities.
Click to expand...

Under the law, if you operate a public business, you can't refuse to sell a wedding cake to an inter-racial couple or an inter-religious couple. Since these refusals are now vanishingly rare, you never hear about them.

To me, the same principle is at stake. I see no reason why you should allow a baker to refuse to make a cake for an LGBT wedding, but say they have to treat inter-racial couples or inter-religious couples without bias. Of course, you might think that such prejudice is acceptable for all three situations.

to me, if you don't want to serve the public, don't open a public business or advertise to the public.
 
Beantown said:
A gay person reproducing can only be done through heterosexual relations.
Click to expand...

Luckily we live in a world where you don't need to go hump as many opposite-sex members as you can in order to reproduce. Hey look, gays have adapted to find a way to reproduce yet maintain their preferred relationships. Evolution at its finest!
 
Sneakers said:
Luckily we live in a world where you don't need to go hump as many opposite-sex members as you can in order to reproduce. Hey look, gays have adapted to find a way to reproduce yet maintain their preferred relationships. Evolution at its finest!
Click to expand...

You don't make any sense. A gay man cannot produce a child without a female egg.
 
Beantown said:
Lol please tell me how a gay person reproduces without the opposite sex.

This should be fun.
Click to expand...

Except that's not what you said. You said, "A gay person reproducing can only be done through heterosexual relations.", which is incorrect. Oh, the miracles of science. A virgin can have a child, an egg can be fertilized in a petri dish, and a woman can have those eggs inserted into her womb. All of that can be done without any type of sexual relations.

IMAGINE THAT!

So, as long as there is at least one man and one woman on the planet, we're safe. Phew.
 
Beantown said:
You don't make any sense. A gay man cannot produce a child without a female egg.
Click to expand...

Gay couples can get a donor, fertilize it themselves (or vice-versa), and produce biological offspring. And luckily because there are willing female donors, they will have that ability. And still be gay. Biological success.
 
colton said:
Regardless of how you feel about Beantown, I think I'm standing in good company when I agree with Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas S. Monson, and James E. Faust--to whom traditional marriage was clearly important and clearly different than gay marriage.
Click to expand...

Beantown has earned a reputation for making very unserious arguments and, AFAICT, taking them seriously. I have no feelings about Beantown, but if I found myself agreeing with him against certain other posters, based on his posting history I'd take that as a sign that I needed to make sure I had a serious argument. Saying the relationships are "not equal because only heterosexual sex leads to babies" is not a serious argument, and I'm surprised you would defend it. None of that was directly present in the quotes you offered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top