300,000 oppose gay marriage in biggest petition since election

page: 16
18
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


star for you....not for op.




posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
The Institution of marriage has been around for thousands of years i dont see any point in ruining it just because of a social trend



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by JBD1979
The Institution of marriage has been around for thousands of years i dont see any point in ruining it just because of a social trend


A social trend?

Maybe red hair is a social trend too. Let's deny all red heads the right to marry.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Gay's say they are fighting for equal rights but this is not the case. They are fighting for Gay rights. Because it is impossible for two people of the same sex to procreate it is impossible for them to create a family within the confounds of marriage, by the very definition of the word. Both parents cannot biologically be the parent of one child. Because of this simple biological fact Gay's are not fighting for either a human right nor even equal rights.


I do not necessarily agree with this. Plenty of hetero couples are unable to procreate where the child is biological of both parents or either for that matter. There is nothing wrong with gays reproductive systems. Many gays have produced children in a straight marriage. Gay or Lesbian couples using a surrogate or sperm donor is no different then thousands of hetero couples. They are Equal.

Just the other day in the news was an article where the husband did not make sperm. So his father is going to be the sperm donor.

Maybe before modern techniques it was true. But Gays weren't fighting for marriage rights before these modern techniques were available.

I still say they are fighting for Equal Rights - - as well as Civil Rights.


edit on 25-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by davesmart
 


Show me how to prove love.

You don't get to be the thought police, mr big brother.
edit on 25-3-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
I do not necessarily agree with this. Plenty of hetero couples are unable to procreate where the child is biological of both parents or either for that matter. There is nothing wrong with gays reproductive systems.


Two men cannot biologically make a child. Ever. Interestingly currently, it is grounds for the annulment of a marriage that the partners are not of the opposite sex

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

Section 11 Grounds on which a marriage is void.

A marriage celebrated after 31st July 1971 shall be void on the following grounds only, that is to say—(a)that it is not a valid marriage under the provisions of [F11the [F12Marriage Acts 1949 to 1986]] (that is to say where—

(i)the parties are within the prohibited degrees of relationship;
(ii)either party is under the age of sixteen; or
(iii)the parties have intermarried in disregard of certain requirements as to the formation of marriage);
(b)that at the time of the marriage either party was already lawfully married [F13or a civil partner];
(c)that the parties are not respectively male and female;


Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The National Archives. Available from www.legislation.gov.uk...



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Annee
I do not necessarily agree with this. Plenty of hetero couples are unable to procreate where the child is biological of both parents or either for that matter. There is nothing wrong with gays reproductive systems.


Two men cannot biologically make a child.


Two men can make a baby - - just the same as an infertile couple - - who have the right of marriage.

End of story.
edit on 25-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Two men can make a baby - - just the same as an infertile couple - - who have the right of marriage.



Two men can make a baby?

Not without a third party who has a womb.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Annee
Two men can make a baby - - just the same as an infertile couple - - who have the right of marriage.



Two men can make a baby?

Not without a third party who has a womb.



With your kind of logic - - - hetero couples should first have to prove they can reproduce before they are allowed to marry.

Uh - - Duh! An infertile hetero married couple - - would have to use a third party or "buy a sperm or an egg".

EQUAL!



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by CodyOutlaw
 


Still takes a man + woman = new life (baby)... your a real genius...lets say we had this discussion 100 years ago when there was not invetro...blah blah...if we all spontaneously turned gay societies youngest would be 111 or so years old...

GAY IS NOT NATURAL nor NORMAL...

However I support it...let all most men go gay...more woman for me...

From a Marine Sniper serving in the mountains for far too long...need some nice American tail... : )



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
chipmunks or deer who are into anal sex need to be banned as well.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by marinesniper0317
if we all spontaneously turned gay societies youngest would be 111 or so years old...


Gays have produced children the hetero way for centuries. Humanity would not die off.

But - how would you feel if you were forced to live as a gay in a gay society? Its very unfair - - and unnatural for gays to be forced to live as hetero in society.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by JBD1979
The Institution of marriage has been around for thousands of years i dont see any point in ruining it just because of a social trend


A social trend?

Maybe red hair is a social trend too. Let's deny all red heads the right to marry.


If only we could have I wouldn't have married my 1st and 2nd wife



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by badazz
chipmunks or deer who are into anal sex need to be banned as well.


No one is suggesting that chipmunks, deer or gays should be banned.

The question is, should gay pressure groups be allowed to extend the meaning of the word 'marriage' in a legal sense to include same sex civil unions.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
But - how would you feel if you were forced to live as a gay in a gay society? Its very unfair - - and unnatural for gays to be forced to live as hetero in society.


No doubt it would be if someone was actually forcing them to do so. No one is is. Gays have gay civil unions, gay bars and gays friends.

This thread isn't about forcing gays to do anything.

It is about gays trying to force the meaning of the word 'marriage', in a legal sense, to encompass gay civil unions.


edit on 26-3-2012 by ollncasino because: spelling



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Annee
But - how would you feel if you were forced to live as a gay in a gay society? Its very unfair - - and unnatural for gays to be forced to live as hetero in society.


No doubt it would be if someone was actually forcing them to do so. No one is is. Gays have gay civil unions, gay bars and gays friends.


How nice of you to isolate gays from society.

How nice of you to also allow gays their own special Civil Union.

Separate but Equal? NO SUCH THING.

edit on 26-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Annee
But - how would you feel if you were forced to live as a gay in a gay society? Its very unfair - - and unnatural for gays to be forced to live as hetero in society.


No doubt it would be if someone was actually forcing them to do so. No one is is. Gays have gay civil unions, gay bars and gays friends.

This thread isn't about forcing gays to do anything.

It is about gays trying to force the meaning of the word 'marriage', in a legal sense, to encompass gay civil unions.




No, it's not. It's about bigots who are scared of things they don't understand.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
How nice of you to isolate gays from society.


On the one hand you say that gays are being forced to live as hetrosexuals in society


Originally posted by Annee
Its very unfair - - and unnatural for gays to be forced to live as hetero in society.


But when I point out that they aren't being forced to be hetrosexual- gay bars, pubs and the gay scene, you respond


Originally posted by Annee
How nice of you to isolate gays from society.


Is your argument that gays are forced to appear hetrosexual to be accepted by society?

Is their much truth to that these days?

Most people in this day and age are very accepting of gays. One gay couple often visits my brother's house and very nice they are too when I bump into them.

Why do you insist on making out that being gay makes you special or oppressed in some way?

Get over it. Gays are just people like the rest of us. They aren't special and they aren't oppressed. And they certainly aren't excluded from society.



edit on 26-3-2012 by ollncasino because: spelling



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Garfee
No, it's not. It's about bigots who are scared of things they don't understand.


So in other words, you can't justify why the meaning of the word 'marriage', in a legal sense, should be extended to encompass gay civil unions, so you desperately lash out with a ad hominem attack?

It isn't terribly impressive you know.

The pro gay marriage group has not done itself any favours in this thread with its aggressive and arrogant personal attacks on anyone who disagrees with them.

You won't convince people with an approach like that. In fact, you may well find it is counter-productive.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
On the one hand you say that gays are being forced to live as hetrosexuals in society


That is NOT what I said


But when I point out that they aren't being forced to be hetrosexual- gay bars, pubs and the gay scene, you respond


They have been forced to live on the fringe of society and create their own society - - because of people like you.


Is your argument that gays are forced to appear hetrosexual to be accepted by society?


NO


Most people in this day and age are very accepting of gays. One gay couple often visits my brother's house and very nice they are too when I bump into them.


Gays are fine - - but . . .


Why do you insist on making out that being gay makes you special or oppressed in some way?


I don't separate them. You do.


Get over it. Gays are just people like the rest of us. They aren't special and they aren't oppressed. And they certainly arn't excluded from society.


Then there is no reason for them not to have the right to marry.

edit on 26-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
18
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Reality Remix is on-air in 17 minutes.
ATS Live Radio Presents - Reality Remix Live SE6 EP6

atslive.com

hi-def

low-def