Why homosexuality should be banned

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterBorn
  • Start date Start date
Southern Man said:
Those benefits can be realized or equalized with traditional marriage in simple ways instead of inflicting such a drastic change on society.

Most queers accept the concept of formalized social unions. It is only the most militant ones who insist on changing the definition of marriage. Have you asked yourself why that is?
Click to expand...

Some of them can. But many of them cannot without changing lots of laws. Which seems to be the basis of PMP's argument, he doesn't want the laws changed.
 
Southern Man said:
I was simply arguing that a society using queer marriage as its basis won't survive past one generation.
Click to expand...

And no one, anywhere, has suggested that we base our society on gay marriage. Your argument is, at best, a strawman. And at worst it is simply stupid.
 
Damocles said:
And I am pointing out that the statement is silly hyperbole. As the original post's video stated, a society based on everybody being a catholic priest would have the same genetic dead end. And if we all had to wait for green aliens to marry the result would still be the same and the statement just as silly.
Click to expand...
That's a silly argument, as Catholic priests don't marry...
 
Southern Man said:
That's a silly argument, as Catholic priests don't marry...
Click to expand...
Yet if we based society on everybody being a priest, the same genetic dead end would result.

Yes, it is silly. Just as attempting to say that somebody here is arguing for basing society on homosexual marriage.

Just as it would if we had to wait for the green alien and so forth. The silly hyperbole lowers the level of debate into junior high levels and you make yourself look the fool.
 
WinterBorn said:
And no one, anywhere, has suggested that we base our society on gay marriage. Your argument is, at best, a strawman. And at worst it is simply stupid.
Click to expand...
Yet, since queers can never reproduce naturally, when discussing the institution of marriage it is an appropriate argument.
 
Damocles said:
Yet if we based society on everybody being a priest, the same genetic dead end would result.

Yes, it is silly. Just as attempting to say that somebody here is arguing for basing society on homosexual marriage.

Just as it would if we had to wait for the green alien and so forth. The silly hyperbole lowers the level of debate into junior high levels and you make yourself look the fool.
Click to expand...

Yet priests have the ability to reproduce, so its not the same argument at all.
 
it does illustrate, however, that there can be a rational basis for objecting to having law changes forced down one's throat.....Winter has confessed to having difficulty understanding that......I merely wanted to enlighten him......while bestiality is not as widely engaged in as homosexuality and has not received the same level of public acceptance, the proposal to change the laws to permit a man to marry an animal is no different than changing the laws to permit same sex marriage......
 
Last edited:
Southern Man said:
You didn't answer my questions fully, as you just hissed about others for doing.
Click to expand...

Because I doubt you have polled "most queers", and I am not going to presume to try and figure why people do what they do.

Perhaps they want to be treated as equals. That would be a radical concept, wouldn't it?
 
Southern Man said:
Yet, since queers can never reproduce naturally, when discussing the institution of marriage it is an appropriate argument.
Click to expand...

No it is not. There is no chance that society will be based on gay marriage, and you know it.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
it does illustrate, however, that there can be a rational basis for objecting to having law changes forced down one's throat.....Winter has confessed to having difficulty understanding that......I merely wanted to enlighten him......while bestiality is not as widely engaged in as homosexuality and has not received the same level of public acceptance, the proposal to change the laws to permit a man to marry an animal is no different than changing the laws to permit same sex marriage......
Click to expand...
It is very much different, an animal could in no way give consent to such a relationship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top