Pop23
Gold Member
Again I am going to ask Joe to explain how two sisters engaging in sex can produce deformed children?
You've made that statement several times and have yet to clarify.
Get to it or get lost.
I didn't discuss that issue, so, no.
I mean, I guess you can make an argument that gay incest is okay, but no one is actually arguing for that.
Look, guy, tell me why the gay is bad, other than you think it's icky.
So this is your argument:
Family members should be excluded from Marrying each other because the children produced could be defective.
When I ask how that could be when the partners are not opposite sex?
What Joe? It's OK for same sex family member exclusion for what reason exactly? The potential they may create defective children? Yet that's impossible What is the States compelling interest in denying them their rights under the 14th amendment?
Are you not arguing that there is no rational legal basis for this denial? Yet you argue that the exclusion should remain?
If there is no rational legal basis, and no compelling State interest in denial of same sex family marriage, but there is one for opposite sex marriage, you are arguing that there should be separate standards of the two groups BASED ON THE ABILITY TO PROCREATE.
So it was unjust to discriminate based on procreation (same sex marriage), but it's appropriate TO discriminate based on procreation (opposite sex marriage)? How can that not be an argument in support of Civil Unions and against Same Sex Marriage?
Your view is absolutely laughable.