Why homosexuality should be banned

[USFREEDOM911]

No.

Yes

 

[DamnYankee]

Explain.

Because traditional marriage is the backbone of the family unit as far back as biblical times, refined to one man and one woman through centuries of trial and error. The union of one man and one woman has always met the traditional definition but queer marriage has never met it. Queer marriage is a massive step backwards and sideways.

 

[DamnYankee]

how in the world would it make any difference to anybody's marriage if people of the same sex got married??

Again, it affects the institution.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Because traditional marriage is the backbone of the family unit as far back as biblical times, refined to one man and one woman through centuries of trial and error. The union of one man and one woman has always met the traditional definition but queer marriage has never met it. Queer marriage is a massive step backwards and sideways.

So we should return to the practice of concubines!!
Oh
And taking your brothers widow into your home, as a second wife.

 

[leaningright]

So we should return to the practice of concubines!!
Oh
And taking your brothers widow into your home, as a second wife.

Uggh!!!!.........Have you seen my sister-in-law?

 

[MOe]

Again, it affects the institution.

voting is an institution as well. giving women and african americans the right to vote was most definitely a step sideways. change happens. dont be afraid.

 

[/MSG/]

Because traditional marriage is the backbone of the family unit as far back as biblical times, refined to one man and one woman through centuries of trial and error.

Is that why many world leaders at that time had multiple wives and harems of women?

The union of one man and one woman has always met the traditional definition but queer marriage has never met it.

Other than the sex's of the parties involved, how is it any different?

Queer marriage is a massive step backwards and sideways.

Speculative and conjecture.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Uggh!!!!.........Have you seen my sister-in-law?

You'll do and you'll like it, damn-it!!

 

[Topspin]

Gay's should have the same Joy of divorce straight people have.

 

[DamnYankee]

voting is an institution as well. giving women and african americans the right to vote was most definitely a step sideways. change happens. dont be afraid.

That was a step forward, more in accordance with the ideals presented in the Declaration of Independence: "all men created equal", which of course refers to the species of man. From this statement one can also infer that queers are not born that way.

 

[DamnYankee]

Gay's should have the same Joy of divorce straight people have.

They can enter into a financial partnership then enjoy that.

 

[Topspin]

They can enter into a financial partnership then enjoy that.

My ex took me for $200K nearly a decade ago, I think gay people should face the same kind of stress.

 

[DamnYankee]

Is that why many world leaders at that time had multiple wives and harems of women?

Other than the sex's of the parties involved, how is it any different?
Speculative and conjecture.

What part of "refined" is hard for you to understand?

I'd say the sex of the partners is a big damn deal.

 

[/MSG/]

That was a step forward, more in accordance with the ideals presented in the Declaration of Independence: "all men created equal", which of course refers to the species of man. From this statement one can also infer that queers are not born that way.

How so? Even if your speculation towards their 'choice' in the matter is true, it merely reinforces the idea that they are equal, regardless of their 'choice' and thus deserve equal opportunity under the law.

 

[/MSG/]

I'd say the sex of the partners is a big damn deal.

And I say it doesn't.

 

[DamnYankee]

My ex took me for $200K nearly a decade ago, I think gay people should face the same kind of stress.

They can without marriage. Open a joint account, a legal financial partnership and buy a house together.

 

[DamnYankee]

And I say it doesn't.

Then by all means, partake in that hairy chested man-love.

 

[DamnYankee]

How so? Even if your speculation towards their 'choice' in the matter is true, it merely reinforces the idea that they are equal, regardless of their 'choice' and thus deserve equal opportunity under the law.

If they are "equal" then they are desirous of equal things.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

That was a step forward, more in accordance with the ideals presented in the Declaration of Independence: "all men created equal", which of course refers to the species of man. From this statement one can also infer that queers are not born that way.

Then if all are created equal, then all should have the same rights and ability; without restrictions, unless they harm someone else or are geared to take advantage of someone else.

 

[MOe]

That was a step forward, more in accordance with the ideals presented in the Declaration of Independence: "all men created equal", which of course refers to the species of man. From this statement one can also infer that queers are not born that way.

ah but they are, and that, my friend, is what you are promoting. youre a prejudiced human being, as many who oppose gay marriage are. gays and lesbians are people just like you and me. they deserve the same rights, opportunities and privileges as anyone else... this includes the right to enter into a legal union with the person whom they love. such a union should be as available to them as to any heterosexual person.