Gay Marriage is a Lie: Honest or Disagree?

[Redfish]

God was taken out of our schools, and look what has happened. Now slowly God is being taken out of marrige. I'm glad i'm saved

Really? So if a Christian enters a public school, your God abandons them? If a Christian bows his head and prays silently, your God doesn't hear him?

This sort of nonsense is ridiculous. If your God abandons his followers because of a rule against school led prayer, he wasn't much of a god to begin with.

no one said any of that, you made it up

 

[gallantwarrior]

Defining deviancy down, trying to re-order nature itself. The natural order of things...it doesn't work, and never will...only fosters turmoil.

And should we be able to prove, to your satisfaction, that gay is "natural", then what? Will you be okay with it then?

Some deviancy is always "natural" because deviant behavior occurs naturally. That does not make deviant behavior is normal.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I would restate it---------The purpose of marriage is to provide a sound foundation with a father and mother for the reproduction of the species.

Other than for tax and inheritence purposes, without children there is no need for being married. Since gays cannot reproduce, then they do not need marriage, they, and childless man/woman couples, need a civil union for legal purposes.

So Marriage is only for people who are going to make babies then? Okay, since babies do tend to come later, even if not exactly nine months later, what union do people without children yet have in the beginning, a Marriage or a Civil Union?

men and women have married in every culture since the dawn of man. The purpose was to provide a firm foundation for children. In modern societies a marriage contract is also a civil contract, so your question is moot.

How can it be moot? I have to get a license from the state so how do they know which one to give me? Does it start as a Civil Union and then become a Marriage if I have children? They are treated the same right they just have different names? What if I adopt a child, does my Civil Union then become a Marriage? What if I already have a child, am I automatically called Married then?

 

[gallantwarrior]

And should we be able to prove, to your satisfaction, that gay is "natural", then what? Will you be okay with it then?

Is it really? I don't have a problem with the behavior other than the FORCED ACCEPTENCE aspect...and NO you can't re-arrange nature and expect normalcy.

What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?

It certainly is fashionable.

 

[OKTexas]

I think that no matter how many words you use, or how pretty you try to dress things up, anything other than full equality will clearly shine forth as 'separate but equal.'

And therefore unacceptable.

Considering true equality is impossible I guess nothing is acceptable.

Gay marriage is as much a lie as gay sex. Sex is a biological activity intended to procreate not just the manipulation of sexual organs to bring about pleasure. If you libs are really about science then you know that a faghodist marriage can never ever be equal to a traditional marriage, you can say it is, buy you'd be wrong.

 

[WinterBorn]

a civil union would do exactly the same thing, for you or a gay couple. The word "marriage" applies only to the union of one man and one woman.

The gay agenda is not about equality or justice. Its about forcing the acceptance of the word marriage to describe a homosexual union.

As long as any straight couple who gets joined in a civil ceremony is said to have had a civil union, I have no problem with it.

But there are religions, recognized by the gov't, that have no problem with gays being married. Why can't they be married in that faith?

That church could sanctify their union, but their union is not a marriage.

What is so critical to you gays about the word "marriage" ? I know the answer, just want to hear one of you honestly admit it.

Because as long as there are separate institutions, there will be separate rules. Once marriage is for gays and straights, the inequality is gone.

Why are you so adamantly opposed based solely on what the union is called? It would seem to me that the name is the most trivial factor in a marriage.

But if you want to make all unions made without a religious segment Civil Unions, I am fine with that. But as long as Christian unions are called marriages, then unions performed by other faiths should be called marriages as well.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Defining deviancy down, trying to re-order nature itself. The natural order of things...it doesn't work, and never will...only fosters turmoil.

And should we be able to prove, to your satisfaction, that gay is "natural", then what? Will you be okay with it then?

Some deviancy is always "natural" because deviant behavior occurs naturally. That does not make deviant behavior is normal.

Isn't Deviant just different than the Norm? A deviation from the norm? I mean brown eyes are normal for us so having blue eyes makes you a deviant? If gays were the majority, would that mean that your sexual orientation was unnatural, deviant?

 

[bodecea]

you brought it up, you clarify it.

I will, when you answer. What should XX be allowed to marry, men or women, XY or XX?

Is it XX and XX, or XX and XY?

99% of men are XY and 99% of women are XX.

Are you suggesting genetic testing as a prerequisite for marriage?

You might want to re-check that 99% figure.

 

[Redfish]

I will, when you answer. What should XX be allowed to marry, men or women, XY or XX?

Is it XX and XX, or XX and XY?

99% of men are XY and 99% of women are XX.

Are you suggesting genetic testing as a prerequisite for marriage?

You might want to re-check that 99% figure.

Ok, tell us what % of the world's population carries genes opposite of its genitalia.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But if you want to make all unions made without a religious segment Civil Unions, I am fine with that. But as long as Christian unions are called marriages, then unions performed by other faiths should be called marriages as well.

And what of Marriages perform by the state, who issues the Marriage Licenses to all? Would the faithful have both a Civil Union license and a Marriage License from their church?

Satanists can get married but agnostics have only civil unions?

 

[WinterBorn]

God was taken out of our schools, and look what has happened. Now slowly God is being taken out of marrige. I'm glad i'm saved

Really? So if a Christian enters a public school, your God abandons them? If a Christian bows his head and prays silently, your God doesn't hear him?

This sort of nonsense is ridiculous. If your God abandons his followers because of a rule against school led prayer, he wasn't much of a god to begin with.

no one said any of that, you made it up

jknowgood claims God was taken out of our schools. Exactly how did someone manage to remove an all-powerful, omnipotent being?

 

[Redfish]

As long as any straight couple who gets joined in a civil ceremony is said to have had a civil union, I have no problem with it.

But there are religions, recognized by the gov't, that have no problem with gays being married. Why can't they be married in that faith?

That church could sanctify their union, but their union is not a marriage.

What is so critical to you gays about the word "marriage" ? I know the answer, just want to hear one of you honestly admit it.

Because as long as there are separate institutions, there will be separate rules. Once marriage is for gays and straights, the inequality is gone.

Why are you so adamantly opposed based solely on what the union is called? It would seem to me that the name is the most trivial factor in a marriage.

But if you want to make all unions made without a religious segment Civil Unions, I am fine with that. But as long as Christian unions are called marriages, then unions performed by other faiths should be called marriages as well.

you keep confirming that the gay agenda is not about equality and tolerance and rights. Its about the govt forcing the majority to accept behavior that it considers deviant as normal.

 

[bodecea]

Defining deviancy down, trying to re-order nature itself. The natural order of things...it doesn't work, and never will...only fosters turmoil.

And should we be able to prove, to your satisfaction, that gay is "natural", then what? Will you be okay with it then?

Some deviancy is always "natural" because deviant behavior occurs naturally. That does not make deviant behavior is normal.

So, left-handed people are deviant.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

you brought it up, you clarify it.

I will, when you answer. What should XX be allowed to marry, men or women, XY or XX?

Is it XX and XX, or XX and XY?

99% of men are XY and 99% of women are XX.

Are you suggesting genetic testing as a prerequisite for marriage?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this simple question?

Is it XX and XX, or XX and XY?

You seem to be holding something back? Why is that?

 

[Redfish]

Really? So if a Christian enters a public school, your God abandons them? If a Christian bows his head and prays silently, your God doesn't hear him?

This sort of nonsense is ridiculous. If your God abandons his followers because of a rule against school led prayer, he wasn't much of a god to begin with.

no one said any of that, you made it up

jknowgood claims God was taken out of our schools. Exactly how did someone manage to remove an all-powerful, omnipotent being?

the open acknowledgement of God has been taken out of schools.

what exactly does "endowed by their creator" mean to you? If the founders did not intend for the nation to be governmened by religious principles they could have said "endowed by us,the founders"

 

[Redfish]

And should we be able to prove, to your satisfaction, that gay is "natural", then what? Will you be okay with it then?

Some deviancy is always "natural" because deviant behavior occurs naturally. That does not make deviant behavior is normal.

So, left-handed people are deviant.

the hand you write with is not the same as whether you put your dick in a vagina or another man's ass.

 

[gallantwarrior]

What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?

no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....

One breeding pair: male, female, and related offspring.
******* someone of the same gender is a choice. Reasons for making that choice may vary, but it is not a biologically normal relationship.
Better ask whether monogamy is natural for homo Sapiens.

 

[Redfish]

I will, when you answer. What should XX be allowed to marry, men or women, XY or XX?

Is it XX and XX, or XX and XY?

99% of men are XY and 99% of women are XX.

Are you suggesting genetic testing as a prerequisite for marriage?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this simple question?

Is it XX and XX, or XX and XY?

You seem to be holding something back? Why is that?

how many times need it be answered? men are XY and women are XX.

you are not making sense---must be a liberal thing.

 

[gallantwarrior]

What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?

no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....

Correct. These people wish to redefine the natural order...and force everyone to accept it...it doesn't work, NEVER will.

That is the crux of the issue, whether using force of government, and law, really makes their choices legitimately normal.

 

[bodecea]

99% of men are XY and 99% of women are XX.

Are you suggesting genetic testing as a prerequisite for marriage?

You might want to re-check that 99% figure.

Ok, tell us what % of the world's population carries genes opposite of its genitalia.

You are the one stating a 99% figure. And I said you might want to recheck that....have you yet? Or are you going to stand by that 99%?