What's new

So gay!!!

I dont care if people are gay. But dont lie to me and tell me these relations are the same or equal to heterosexuals. Its just flat out false. Let them have civil unions. But the term marriage to me has biological meaning. I think we need to recognize that only heterosexual relations have the power to procreate and the more respect we have for that power as a socioty the better.

Since when does the ability to procreate become a prerequisite for marriage? Barren women cant get married either then? Sterile men?

And seriously, a "biological" term? Nothing about marriage is biological by nature. Ceremonies have biological framework, nor do marriage certificates, crappy music, presence of cheap wine or poorly designed bridesmaid dresses.

You can def. say marriage is a religous term, you can say its a civil term... buuuut biological?
 
Since when does the ability to procreate become a prerequisite for marriage? Barren women cant get married either then? Sterile men?

And seriously, a "biological" term? Nothing about marriage is biological by nature. Ceremonies have biological framework, nor do marriage certificates, crappy music, presence of cheap wine or poorly designed bridesmaid dresses.

Specific men and women health issues doesnt change the fact that only heterosexual relations were selected for the process of sexual intercourse and the ability to procreate.
 
I dont care if people are gay. But dont lie to me and tell me these relations are the same or equal to heterosexuals. Its just flat out false. Let them have civil unions. But the term marriage to me has biological meaning. I think we need to recognize that only heterosexual relations have the power to procreate and the more respect we have for that power as a socioty the better.



Marriage is one part a gesture of love and one part a legal institution. It has nothing to do biology or procreation or religion. YOUR definition of marriage means nothing. Marriage isn't some abstract term open to interpretation.

It's hilarious to see you touting biology and evolution though. Funny how "science" is suddenly the argumental backbone of a movement that is based almost entirely within religious fundamentalism.
 
Marriage has always been a term associated with family. Biologically this means a "family" is offsrping that carries genetic and DNA from yourself and can be continued through generations. Only heterosexual couples can perform such an act. Which is why the term marriage does not make sense to use for a homosexual relation.
 
Marriage is one part a gesture of love and one part a legal institution. It has nothing to do biology or procreation or religion. YOUR definition of marriage means nothing. Marriage isn't some abstract term open to interpretation.

It's hilarious to see you touting biology and evolution though. Funny how "science" is suddenly the argumental backbone of a movement that is based almost entirely within religious fundamentalism.

Marriage is a term asscoiated with offspring and families. Homosexuals cannot create offspring or genetic lineage and continue the process of evolution though heredity.
 
My point is homosexuals cannot have sexual intercourse through direct sexual organ contact.

You're wrong on this point, of course.

Isn't it proponents of gay marriage that should be proving that it won't? ... "Your just a stupid bigot!"

Should proponents of interracial marriage have needed to prove its worth? Proponents of voting women? What type of proof would be needed?

It's hilarious to see you touting biology and evolution though.

He doesn't. He touts an incorrect formulation of biology and science, designed to support his opinion.
 
Back
Top