What's new
By:

So gay!!!

This video has far more to do with the true topic at hand than any of Beantown's nonsensical arguments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cu56T_AirsM&feature=player_embedded
 
Thats a good point Bean, should relatives be allowed to marry based on ur "biological" definition of marriage? What about a 12 year old female and a 50 year old male?
 
KM32MVP said:
Thats a good point Bean, should relatives be allowed to marry based on ur "biological" definition of marriage? What about a 12 year old female and a 50 year old male?
Click to expand...

I think its odd first cousins can marry and I think a person should be of legal age to get married.

A question back at you:

Do you disagree or agree that heterosexual relations have more biological importance than homosexual relations? Please explain your answer.
 
JJ Rage said:
Nothing, but it's the only argument BeanClown can use that won't directly implicate him for his personal prejudices.
Click to expand...

I believe heterosexual relations have important biological importance that should be respected and recognized. By saying homosexual relations are "the same" or "equal" to heterosexual relations just further disrespects the process of reproduction and the importance it plays in human evolution.

These views go along with my views on abortion as well as how the government acts with rewarding people with tax credits that have too many children that they cannot provide for. It should be the reverse. People who want to have children should have to pay extra to encourage responsible reproduction.
 
Beantown said:
I think its odd first cousins can marry and I think a person should be of legal age to get married.

A question back at you:

Do you disagree or agree that heterosexual relations have more biological importance than homosexual relations? Please explain your answer.
Click to expand...

I think you should probably answer honestly if you think homosexuality even exists in the first place. People are arguing with you on the presumption you acknowledge homosexuality as a baseline, but then have your own ideas about how it pertains to the institution of marriage. But if you don't believe homosexuality is real, that sort of changes the argument. Then you're simply preventing sick or confused people from making a mistake, not deciding whether healthy people with alternative lifestyles have the same rights as those with more mainstream lifestyles.
 
billyshelby said:
I think you should probably answer honestly if you think homosexuality even exists in the first place. People are arguing with you on the presumption you acknowledge homosexuality as a baseline, but then have your own ideas about how it pertains to the institution of marriage. But if you don't believe homosexuality is real, that sort of changes the argument. Then you're simply preventing sick or confused people from making a mistake, not deciding whether healthy people with alternative lifestyles have the same rights as those with more mainstream lifestyles.
Click to expand...

I believe homosexuality is real but I believe it comes from gender disorders and enviromental factors. Heterosexuality is brought by biological factors and natural selection. Heterosexuality is backed through male and female anatomy. Their bodies are designed for eachother. Nature has not created a way for homosexuals to have intercourse directly though genital to genital contact. The homosexual relation has no biological importance or physical evidence for existence.
 
Beantown said:
I believe homosexuality is real but I believe it comes from gender disorders and enviromental factors. Heterosexuality is brought by biological factors and natural selection. Heterosexuality is backed through male and female anatomy. Their bodies are designed for eachother. Nature has not created a way for homosexuals to have intercourse directly though genital to genital contact. The homosexual relation has no biological importance or physical evidence for existence.
Click to expand...

I don't quite see how you can think it's real, then. In others words, you're saying it's real because people are deluded slash damaged, right? You don't believe that a person exists who is genuinely attracted to the same sex, right? And by genuine, I mean that they were born with that same sex attraction hard wired into their being, whether it's god, biology, genetics, or something else that made that happen? The type of homosexuality which, I assume, is the same type of heterosexuality you feel--absolute, unwavering, who you are?
 
billyshelby said:
.And by genuine, I mean that they were born with that same sex attraction hard wired into their being, whether it's god, biology, genetics, or something else that made that happen?
Click to expand...

Any belief on this question, one way or the other, seems to be largely a matter of choice. It is hardly a circumtance which has been scientifically proven.
 
Hopper said:
Any belief on this question, one way or the other, seems to be largely a matter of choice. It is hardly a circumtance which has been scientifically proven.
Click to expand...

Well, the same lack of evidence relates to heterosexuals, right? I haven't seen any "evidence" that heterosexual love is any more verifiable than homosexual love.
 
billyshelby said:
I don't quite see how you can think it's real, then. In others words, you're saying it's real because people are deluded slash damaged, right? You don't believe that a person exists who is genuinely attracted to the same sex, right? And by genuine, I mean that they were born with that same sex attraction hard wired into their being, whether it's god, biology, genetics, or something else that made that happen? The type of homosexuality which, I assume, is the same type of heterosexuality you feel--absolute, unwavering, who you are?
Click to expand...

Homosexuality is a result from nature with biological importance, homosexuality is a result of environmental factors with no biological factors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top