A Defense of Marriage/Gay Rights Amendment

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by PissedGodzilla
Kevmaster, you are completely wrong... mentioning that marriage is a completely religious term is not a violation of separation of church and state. Homosexual people are, BY THE RIGHTS OF THIS COUNTRY WHICH MOST OF US LOVE, are SUPPOSED to equals to heterosexual people. Therefore they should be allowed to be bound in a civil union.

The amendment propsed is a very good one and well thought out.

Except the current laws say otherwise. Include the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress. So no, they do not have the RIGHT!!!!!

[dansim]

homosexuality is biologicalnerological, its not a choice, supressing it is a choice, but what if you had to supress your feelings towards women....wait thats what we do now, it helps keep us outa prison

[impostal22]

Originally posted by shartley

so we have to look to lower species to justify what the superior species does? then murder should be legal.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by impostal22


so we have to look to lower species to justify what the superior species does? then murder should be legal.

and you said you never posted anything silly...

[impostal22]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife


and you said you never posted anything silly...

i never said that #1...and #2, it's a summary of what sam just said.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by impostal22


i never said that #1...and #2, it's a summary of what sam just said.

yeah now that I look back, it was paintball1016 that said that.

I get you liberal wingnuts confused all the time....

[shartley]

Originally posted by impostal22


so we have to look to lower species to justify what the superior species does? then murder should be legal.

[impostal22]

Originally posted by shartley

i guess it could be used to see what is "natural," meaning beings inferior to us do it for no apparent reason other than instinct. we should not, however, just use the acts of inferior species to justify our own. if we did that, then like i said murder should be legal. but murder is different than homosexuality, because homosexuality does not harm anyone, while murder does. so i guess we should look towards other species to decide what occurs naturally (i.e. prove or disprove homosexuality being natural).

and just a note...i'm not TRYING to misconstrue what you're saying, i'm just really really really tired today and seem to be misinterpreting a lot because of it.

[daveymag]

http://www%2eautomags%2eorg/forums/showthread.php?threadid=72174

[spantol]

Offhand, I recall seeing documentation of a pair of chimps, and also a pair of penguins. Hazy recollections certainly aren't going to be enough to be persuasive, so I'll do some further research when I have a chance and post back. It might take me a day or so.

Originally posted by shartley

Okay?.. show me a case in nature where pair bonding for life takes place between sexually active animals of the same sex. And if you CAN find one, how often does that happen?

Now THAT would be a case to support homosexual marriage, not the occasional sexual release or encounter by animals of the same sex.

[mcveighr]

So again, it is only easy when YOU define the criteria, and then apply your own standards to it.

So what is the criteria? Why exactly do so many people disagree with it? Is it generally a religious thing? Or do they think that these people are just out to rip off the system? Or maybe that they don't actually love eachother?

Any ideas?

shartly, if you don't mind, could you share why you're against it?

And if you've already posted it, I apoligize but I didnt get a chance to read every post.

[shartley]

Originally posted by mcveighr


So what is the criteria? Why exactly do so many people disagree with it? Is it generally a religious thing? Or do they think that these people are just out to rip off the system? Or maybe that they don't actually love eachother?

Any ideas?

shartly, if you don't mind, could you share why you're against it?

And if you've already posted it, I apoligize but I didnt get a chance to read every post.

[hitech]

The reasons against "gay marriage" are basically the same as those used against black/white marriages so few years ago.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[shartley]

Originally posted by hitech
The reasons against "gay marriage" are basically the same as those used against black/white marriages so few years ago.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[impostal22]

Originally posted by shartley

animals cannot say "i do" so legalized animal marriage can't work. not to mention, animals don't want to get married...again, having multiple partners period is illegal. having sex with an animal is illegal. having a homosexual partner isn't illegal. there's a big difference between equalizing rights to those conducting legal actions and those who are illegal in their actions.