? made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve
Options
Comments
-
I mean if you ? just go be ? and deal with your choice. Dont go making it seem like you need specail rights and laws rewritten just beacause you CHOOSE something out of the norm.
-
let them ? get married.
they'll be miserable & get divorced just like the rest of us.
that's more money for the courts, duhhh.
sidenote: ? be violent tho. like i've seen some lesbians get skulldragged by they ? . i be like "damn." -
shoot let them get married , and make it illegal for them to get divorced.
-
I think the last argument against ? marriage used a sports analogy... comparing a heterosexual marriage to tennis. If both people decide to commit to play "tennis" with each other for ever, it represents the sexual exclusivity between a husband and a wife ...a privileged and highly prized bonding activity. were nothing else is comparable...lol
The other point they made was that ... Yes they're infertile women and men... but they're still initially partaking in an activity (tennis) which is highly structured, organized, and designed to win games even when you lose.
So for the infertile couples.. their marriage is losing outchea.
so many holes -
The focus on ? marriages actually worries me. Personally, I don't care about what they do. But America being so hard pressed to give a damn makes me wonder if there is something else behind this. I wouldn't be surprise if this anti-? marriage campaign is being fueled by ulterior motives.
-
I mean if you ? just go be ? and deal with your choice. Dont go making it seem like you need specail rights and laws rewritten just beacause you CHOOSE something out of the norm.
? people don't choose to be ? , that's just how they are. Think about what you're saying - you're saying people who are straight are choosing to be ? . I'm assuming you're straight and I'm sure the idea of doing some ? ? would be the last thing you would want to do. Therefore if you would never choose to be ? , why do you think other straight people would?
Anyway back to the original question, one of the main arguments I hear as to why ? people shouldn't be allowed to marry is because they can't have children. Statistics show that a stable marriage is the best environment in which to raise children. Children benefit from having a mother and a father. By allowing ? marriage society is devaluing marriage as a means of raising children. Personally I don't agree with this view as I don't see marriage as being predominantly about having children. -
And homosexuality is 'natural' and found in almost all animal species.
Have they found more than one male in a species who is 'dedicated' to liking only other males? Their lineage wouldn't go far. It's only 'homosexual' behavior that is found in nature. They aren't doing it because they like the same sex but because they will ? either sex. Dogs for instance, will ? you friends legs, is the dog inter-species sexuality? -
Statistics show that a stable marriage is the best environment in which to raise children. Children benefit from having a mother and a father. But America being so hard pressed to give a damn makes me wonder if there is something else behind this.
-
? ......
-
genocide_cutter wrote: »? ......
lol @ this thread being about your "alternative" lifestyle. -
I would like to hear a valid, secular argument against ? marriage. I have never in my life come across one.
Marriage is not a Christian idea, it's found in almost all (if not all) cultures. Even if the 'traditional' definition of Western marriage has always involved a man and a woman, the traditional definition of marriage in most cultures (except maybe for hunter-gatherer cultures), including Western culture, has been an economic exchange between a man and his father in law. Women have traditionally been considered property or at least subservient, the idea of marriage being a union between equals and an expression of romantic love is relatively recent. The traditional definition of 'person' in the United States doesn't (entirely) include Black people and Canada didn't legally regard women as persons until 1929, women have traditionally not held the right to vote, southern states have not traditionally allowed interracial marriages etc. Countless traditions have been discarded when general consensus has come to view those traditions as unethical or irrational. There's nothing sacred about tradition, culture evolves.
I'm not even sure why marriage should be a legal institution to begin with but as long as it remains one, there is no legal or moral justification for denying an entire group of people (homosexuals) the same legal privileges and opportunities that another group (heterosexuals) has. Denying ? the legal right to get married and have the legal privileges that marriage, and not just civil unions, provide is no different than denying people of color/women the right to public facilities, the same education as whites, the right to vote etc.
Simple logic.
More smart dumb ? ? . Funny how you frequently hide idiotic presuppositions underneath loaded questions and polysyllabic ramblings. -
jonlakadeadmic wrote: »idc just dont be doin anything in public
Co-sizzle
Im apathetic to this issue. But more so because like a good neighbour I mind my business. As Chris Rock says "? have a right to be as miserable as everyone else" -
new Trix commercial....silly ? , ? are for girls!!!!!!
-
Who gives a ? who gets married, straight people failing harder at marriage than ever before and you want to talk about the sanctity of marriage, ? outta here.
-
let them ? get married.
they'll be miserable & get divorced just like the rest of us.
that's more money for the courts, duhhh.
sidenote: ? be violent tho. like i've seen some lesbians get skulldragged by they ? . i be like "damn."
No offense But I would let you skulldrag me. I see your sleeves too not bad good luck at the office LOL just playing -
i hope everyone in the world turns ? so the human species dies out. I really do.copperkid27 wrote: »I bet ur already doing "your part"
Sonned into Oblivion -
Smh @ this ? Huruma's threads.
-
Disciplined InSight wrote: »Smh @ this ? Huruma's threads.
its really ? up and funny cuz i think the kid be sincere. lol -
Nothing against civil unions completly against marrige ? want to redifine marrige how can my marrige be the same as two dudes marrige.
just give the same rights as married folks and call it civil union not marrige -
Theres no ? and marriage should be between two consenting adults. End of story.
-
I think you meant: "? are for chicks"....new Trix commercial....silly ? , ? are for girls!!!!!!its over: 2012! wrote: »Homosexuality, stops life. Period.
Whether thru Aids ? or the inability to procreate, especially, proves that homosexuality stops life.
...can't get anymore unnatural, than that!
This is flawed:
1) ? /AIDS has not been proved to be spread by ? /bi folk. That's mass panic and fear rationale, cause straight people have been passing out that dragon for decades.
2) Straight, married also have the idea not to procreate if they don't want. Doesn't that have the same effect - or NON-effect - on the population as married ? couples as well? I mean, this IS such a thing as birth control, and this is pretty much why it came out. -
Who gives a ? who gets married, straight people failing harder at marriage than ever before and you want to talk about the sanctity of marriage, ? outta here.
it falls hand and hand with people who also don't go to church when you get marriage counseling you get a set of guidelines that if you actually follow will easily hold your marriage up nobody doing that so there for we have od divorce rates -
-
there's no point. if they need a certificate that ? badly then go for it. paper wont keep you together. maybe they're getting greedy and want some tax breaks? or maybe its a simple case of "you cant have this nah nah nah nah boo boo" either way, there is absolutely no evolutionary point to being ? . It defies evolution which mainly consists of passing down your gene's, which they can't do...whatever.
-
because it breeds a society of ? . Our government and even some churches letting homosexuals force their agenda down their throats, nh. Giving in to politically correctness, giving in to the demands of a group of people with severe mental dysfunctions. By allowing ? marraige, we are allowing psychologically damaged people to fully operate in our society. who want to have the same rights and standards as the normal people. instead of aiming to help these people get back to normal, we just give up and let them have their way.
a man can't have two wives? a man can't have a wife who is 16? but yet a man can marry another man?
its all kinds of faulty logic here
