Seriously, is there any logical argument against gay marriage?

reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic



Nope, marriage is a religious fabrication they may call it marriage but its not a “real” marriage as it has no religious component. I think if you looked into it a bit more you would find that its not officially called “marriage”.

I just want to ask all the "gay marriage haters", what if... what if it was only socially acceptable to be gay and get married. Then how would you feel being heterosexual? you would want the same exact rights gay's want now.

reply to post by Helious



Marriage has been around a lot longer than Christianity. Logic fail.

Originally posted by Schkeptick
reply to post by Helious

 

Marriage has been around a lot longer than Christianity. Logic fail.

finally someone whos thinking., thank you.. this thread is a whole lot of making stuff up

Originally posted by Jugtalicus
Now before I make my point, let me make myself clear and state that I do not vehemently appose gays or hold some disgust or hate against them.

My logical argument against gays ISNT against the demographic as a whole, but rather the warped and unnatural behaivior of SOME extreeeeeme gays. The kind that go out of thier way to really show the world that theyre gay.

Aside from it being plain annoying when youre getting hit on by one, its as if said person who is being overly extravagent about it is really trying to let everyone know, as if they cant contain it. Normal people don't really behave that way.

One last thing before I make my point...my close friends uncle is gay and hes a really cool, down to earth guy. You would never think he were gay. He doesnt look gay, act gay, or talk gay and I can appreciate that. If one man truley loves another man that they want to be with them then so be it. You cant really argue against THAT.


Now...those things being said, my argument against gays is the unnatural behavior of SOME (not all) gay persons which I believe is the biproduct of massive doses of overconsumerism and warped media...secondly, it is the inability to reproduce. Yes...make life. 2 human beings of the same sex (and this goes for the vast majority of organic life) cannot procreate. This is where some people will say, "WELL ITS NOT ALL ABOUT SEX YOU KNOW!!!!!!!111" and I agree, it doesnt have to be, but lets be realistic...who doesnt want to get it in every once in a while? This aspect of not being able to naturally procreate and engage in NATURAL sexual activity is the most major issue I have with it. Ask yourself what would happen if the majority of people in the world were homosexual...yup.

Regardless, I consider most of them human beings unless they act otherwise...the end.

Peace

Should a sterile woman or man not be allowed to marry too then? They can't create life either. Should you never be able to have fun casually dating someone, no intent to create life there. Should your every and sole purpose in life be just to have children and if you don't you're a horrible monster to every man who lacks compassion and empathy and logic?

I used to be against it. Now I just don't care. As I have become more educated and open minded, my ideology has moved from the religious right to libertarian over the last several years and I have found this topic to be more and more pointless. I guess it all comes down to what you believe in regards to why gay people are gay.

I used to think that they chose to be gay, and because of that they shouldn't be allowed to get married. I have since changed my belief to they are born gay. If they are indeed born gay then how can they be an abomination unto God? Why would God allow an innocent child to be born gay, thereby instantly becoming an abomination unto him by no fault of their own? The next argument is that homosexuality isn't natural or normal. I used to think that is a good argument, but if gay people are born that way then it is certainly normal and natural to them, and who am I to decide or judge what normal or natural is anyway?

Biologically speaking, homosexuality is not natural, in the sense that two men or two women are not capable of reproducing. So is that what marriage is all about... propagation of a species? If so, then gay marriage clearly isn't biologically acceptable.

If marriage is about finding someone to share and spend the rest of your life with then it should be perfectly fine for gays to get married, shouldn't it? The last point for me is the word marriage. The word marriage already has a definition, and it implies a union between a man and a women. So is it a matter of semantics? Would most people be alright with a "civil union"? Would gays be alright with a civil union if it had all of the privileges and rights of marriage?

So they dont have to suffer like the rest of us married folks? I could care less that 2 men or 2 women want to get married.In reality how is it affecting anyone other than them? And why should the rest of the world give a #?

Originally posted by Funshinez

Originally posted by Jugtalicus
Now before I make my point, let me make myself clear and state that I do not vehemently appose gays or hold some disgust or hate against them.

My logical argument against gays ISNT against the demographic as a whole, but rather the warped and unnatural behaivior of SOME extreeeeeme gays. The kind that go out of thier way to really show the world that theyre gay.

Aside from it being plain annoying when youre getting hit on by one, its as if said person who is being overly extravagent about it is really trying to let everyone know, as if they cant contain it. Normal people don't really behave that way.

One last thing before I make my point...my close friends uncle is gay and hes a really cool, down to earth guy. You would never think he were gay. He doesnt look gay, act gay, or talk gay and I can appreciate that. If one man truley loves another man that they want to be with them then so be it. You cant really argue against THAT.


Now...those things being said, my argument against gays is the unnatural behavior of SOME (not all) gay persons which I believe is the biproduct of massive doses of overconsumerism and warped media...secondly, it is the inability to reproduce. Yes...make life. 2 human beings of the same sex (and this goes for the vast majority of organic life) cannot procreate. This is where some people will say, "WELL ITS NOT ALL ABOUT SEX YOU KNOW!!!!!!!111" and I agree, it doesnt have to be, but lets be realistic...who doesnt want to get it in every once in a while? This aspect of not being able to naturally procreate and engage in NATURAL sexual activity is the most major issue I have with it. Ask yourself what would happen if the majority of people in the world were homosexual...yup.

Regardless, I consider most of them human beings unless they act otherwise...the end.

Peace

Should a sterile woman or man not be allowed to marry too then? They can't create life either. Should you never be able to have fun casually dating someone, no intent to create life there. Should your every and sole purpose in life be just to have children and if you don't you're a horrible monster to every man who lacks compassion and empathy and logic?

edit on 22-5-2011 by Funshinez because: (no reason given)

someone medical condition doesnt hinder their intentions. if you wanna call being gay a medical condition, go ahead.

Originally posted by ProRipp
If your building something, you use nuts and bolts ?
If you try to build something with bolts and bolts, or nuts and nuts, everything falls apart !
A bit like SOCIETY really ?


Peace

Well, I can't speak for the fairer sex, but luckily we guys are equipped with nut and bolt

reply to post by akushla99


oral sex and hand masturbation is purely pleasure based with no other intentions
just because some enjoy them doesnt mean they should get "married" right?
also I'm tired of peole trying to justify wrongs with other wrongs - highly illogical

Originally posted by No Retreat No Surrender
I would simply say because its not natural and is not as nature intended. Neanderthal man knew that man was ment to be with women. Otherwise half the world would now be gay. Man is not ment to be with man. Thats the wrong way to go.

I think this statement discredits evolution, as a Neanderthal I would assume that the priority was survival, our world now has an overwhelming population and survival/procreation is pretty easy. Also, since we were not there and there is limited to no documentation, it is unfair to assume there were not any gay tenancies. Homosexuality has been documented through out history (ancient Greeks, etc) and has even been shown to exist in apes. It is unfair to say it is "abnormal" when it has been shown to be so prevalent.

As others have said, marriage is a legal state of a relationship. I was married by a Justice of the Peace in a non religious ceremony. Even though I wasn't married in a religious setting I still get to say my husband and I are married and we can still share health insurance, file taxes together, adopt, etc, etc. Marriage has evolved to be a gesture of love and companionship and to rob anyone of that opportunity is a horrible thing to do. Along with that are the benefits those of us in a heterosexual relationship take for granted, health insurance, visitation rights in a hospital, property rights, the list goes on. To me it seems like such a terrible thing to tell a couple who is in love that they cannot have any of the benefits of a legal union (under any name, be it marriage or civil union) when love and ease of expression is barely taken seriously anymore.

Of course this is all just my own opinion, but if you ask me, life is for all of us to experience it in our own way. If no harm is being done (don't start about salvation of souls here) then who are we to tell someone how they are to experience their own life. As an American I always hear about the importance of fairness, justice, and the right to be what we want, we can't pick and choose who gets to have those rights.

Originally posted by Myendica

Originally posted by akushla99

...and i suppose the mouth or the the hand were not either?!
...ever done this yourself...hypocrite?
Pathetic
Akushla

tell me, why do you believe gay marriage is ok? once again, I haven't a problem with it.. I just like to know your opinion.. why a gay marriage as opposed to a straight one?> you seem like you play the role of all knowing

edit on 22-5-2011 by Myendica because: (no reason given)

Bothe are unions of love.
The celebration of Love is what marriage is (in my opinion) which is why hetero couples who do not have any intent to have children can, like gay couples, get married.
We must all be very careful to not slide unknowingly towards the horror which was brought about by so-called, humans, where races of people (read humans!), were bought and paid for like animals, or gassed like vermin!
The logic of all this is revealed in the outcome of exclusionist dogma, perpetrated by religion or bigotry. History is replete with this kind of 'us and them' crud. One would have thought that society had grown up a little...perhaps not...
Akushla

Originally posted by Myendica

Originally posted by arbitrarygeneraiist
reply to post by Myendica

 

Heterosexual couples selfishly get married without the intent of starting a family. Consider young hot blondes who marry rich old men. Or consider drunk men in Vegas marrying a drunk stripper.

Heck, if you want to get down to the nitty-gritty of marriage with the intent of starting a family, that action is selfish as well because they -want- to get married and -want- to start a family. People really don't need to get married to start a family, and people don't even need to start families. It isn't as if the world is hurting on people. I think the population is plenty full.

what you said here is speculation. U have no idea the mindset of the people getting married. none. Stop making up BS to fulfill your view. Like I said.. I have no p[roblem

Lol bud, I think missed the point. I indicated how marriage isn't always about a plan to create a family. People get married for a broad many reasons, which you seem to realize. I also pointed out that no matter what a person does, the action, decision, or choice will by definition be selfish.

People who want to get married and start a family, that is selfish. Gay people who want to get married, that is selfish. Gay people who want to get married and start a family, that is selfish. People who want to get married because they love each other and want to solidify that bond of love, that by definition is selfish.

So what BS did I make up exactly? Or did just not fully read and comprehend my post?

Something very interesting has struck me reading through this thread, I have not read all of it but its already clear what is happening.

People propose a logical and sensible argument against homosexual marriage in the whole, from what I have read, these arguments are not homophobic however there are a few exceptions. Then those who support secularisation come crawling out of the wood work and flame them for it. This thread is seems has became a Mecca for those who just want to make out all religious people are homophobes. Why is that we are being persecuted for our beliefs?

There does not seem to be any logical argument for forcing the religious orders who view homosexuality as a sin to change. This is one of the biggest problems with these stupid liberal notions of “freedom” you can’t have freedom of sexuality and freedom of religion if your going to force a suppression the rights of the religious folks to appease the rights of the homosexuals. This also shows up how stupid freedom of speech is, I can’t say that I am against homosexual marriage without being made out to be some kind of monster because I do not hold the same stupid liberal views as you. Quite strange because when you really start to look at this argument “Is homosexual marriage acceptable” it shows just how stupid the ideals of liberalism are because it just doesn’t work. I don’t think any of you liberals can have a view on this because either way you go your contradicting yourself and your ideology.

Liberalism (Classical) is what is destroying our society.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Marriage is a religious ceremony preformed by a leader of that religion such as a priest. ...

...


In short, marriage is a religious ceremony and if ones religion dictates that this ceremony is not compatible with the lifestyle of homosexuals then it is not for other men to dictate to others how to practice their religion. However there is no logical objection form a religious perspective against the civil partnership of homosexual partners.

Marriage is a LEGAL concept, as well as a religious one. When *I* was married, I was NOT married by any religious entity. I was married by the court.

It is not any given religious group's providence. If it was, only individuals in that religious group would be considered for marriage. Rather, it is a legal binding, and so any given religious group's views on what it is are only applicable within members of that religious group. If One's group does not believe gay marriage should take place, members will not be forced to marry as gays.

If, however, One does NOT believe religiously that gay marriage is a problem, it should not be one group of religious views dictating to another set. This merely favors one religious view - which is a joining of church and state... And We know the evil that comes from THAT marriage!

reply to post by kevinunknown


Its not so much about the topic, its about your attitude towards your fellow humans who have feelings, families, love and souls, just like you... They are equal and if they wish for a marriage to be recognised by the State/Govt and performed within a religious institution that does/ or does not hold fast to a Jewish God ( the one the desert nomads worshipped while lost for 40 years several thousand years ago), then in this day and age of virgin births (artificial insemination) its probably about time people with bigoted attitudes came out of the dark ages, otherwise it translates as discrimination.... which is the same basis that kept slavery acceptable.

Every time I hear a Christian belt out abuse and recite bible sentences I remind them that they are forgetting the sentence where it says its not your part to make judgements. So allow people to make mistakes if that means living their life in happiness now. If it was a mistake I'm sure they will awake to that if that is the plan.
In the meantime... if they want to get married its none of anyone else's business, but it also needs to be given the same recognition as a hetero marriage by the State/Govt.

Originally posted by Funshinez

Originally posted by quietlearner
gay relationships are purely pleasure based,
, gay unions main purpose is to enjoy the affection and "love" from your partner
The anus was not meant to be used for sexual penetration - fact

How bad do you want to get #ed? It's ok to tell me. I won't judge you. Oh if only the anus was "meant" to be used for sexual penetration i could enjoy so much love and affection from the man of my dreams.

edit on 22-5-2011 by Funshinez because: (no reason given)

you did judge me there, and you also didn't add anything to the discussion
you just make yourself seem like you think that anyone that opposes gay marriage is afraid of being gay themselves
which of course is not true

My logical argument is this: Marriage is a religious ceremony. Aside from the civil union which recognises gay partnerships
In law- absolutely right that gay couples have the right to inheritance etc, acceptance and acknolwedgement of their love and commitment to society- "MARRIAGE" is a religious ceremony, hence it must adhere to whatever beliefs and protocols (no matter how wacky or illogical) that that Religion prescribes. If you go in for these religions, then you must be prepared for whatever idiot ideas they spew forth. Its your option to come out of it or start your own religion! So I believe marriage should be for religious people, if you have a problem with their rules, take it up with the religious leaders and community. Civil Unions are a government issue and gay couples should have the same rights, why not? I see no logical argument against that.

reply to post by markyjayxyz


except that there are many churches that would marry if the could legally so really it is your beliefs against mine (in general) which should never be a matter of law here in the US

reply to post by OptimusSubprime


Beautiful post!

I wish I could give you a hundred stars!