Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Gay Marriage-Should it be Legal or not?

Posted Aug 21, '10 at 1:06am

Moe

Moe

1,780 posts

When a species develops a trait that leaves it at a disadvantage they only end up in one place, extinct. You can claim all you want that Homosexuality is the genes talking but if thats true what they are saying is "out of the pool"

Good luck finding an entire species that developed the same harmful trait.

 

Posted Aug 21, '10 at 3:10am

nevetsthereaper

nevetsthereaper

558 posts

haha wrong again avorne. david is not me, for sho......

you'll never get it............

 

Posted Aug 21, '10 at 4:12am

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,673 posts

Knight

There is no right or wrong here, it simply is what it is. Even you acknowledge that the best a gay couple could hope for is to be the surrogate for a child whose bioloical (and by definition opposite sexed) parents have somehow been rendered unable to raise the child. The fact remains that same sex couples can have sex until the cows come home and they will produce exactly zero progeny, end of story and species. Thus all morality aside how can you even begin to infer that this is some kind of biological force at work. Nature doesn't work that way. When a species develops a trait that leaves it at a disadvantage they only end up in one place, extinct. You can claim all you want that Homosexuality is the genes talking but if thats true what they are saying is "out of the pool"

I've already pointed out how same sex couples can produce viable offspring through in vitro fertilization and other methods are being developed. Weather then can or can not produce children shouldn't be a factor in weather they should or should not get married. There are plenty of same sex couples who also are unable to produce children for various reasons. I've already showed how biological forces are at work through gene expression. As for your argument about it not being in nature humans are not the only species to display homosexual behavior, thousands of other species have been observed with this same trait.

 

Posted Aug 21, '10 at 10:14am

Asherlee

Asherlee

5,189 posts

Knight

Mage, you are correct, but still missing some points.

So, this is to whomever you quoted. The issues There are MANY heterosexual couples that cannot and/or will not produce children. So, by your logic they should not marry.

Also, homosexual couples can have children just like heterosexual couples. There are many options. For example, my brother will be the donor to my wife.

My point is the reproduction is not a viable status for or against homosexual marriage. Or marriage at all.

 

Posted Aug 21, '10 at 2:11pm

greenupgroove

greenupgroove

23 posts

I believe that it should be legal. Even though they marry to the same sex its still love and they should be able to get married.

 

Posted Aug 21, '10 at 4:15pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,673 posts

Knight

My point is the reproduction is not a viable status for or against homosexual marriage. Or marriage at all.

I believe I said that. (with a typo)

Weather then can or can not produce children shouldn't be a factor in weather they should or should not get married.

 

Posted Aug 22, '10 at 12:05am

Hypermnestra

Hypermnestra

1,283 posts

I'm going to tell you all that nevets is a troller, and has pretty much admitted to being a troller. He's also claimed to have BAs in things that they don't give out BAs for, so if I were you I would take his "opinions" with a grain of salt.

 

Posted Aug 22, '10 at 12:17am

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,673 posts

Knight

I'm going to tell you all that nevets is a troller, and has pretty much admitted to being a troller. He's also claimed to have BAs in things that they don't give out BAs for, so if I were you I would take his "opinions" with a grain of salt.

I take it with 10% less then the lethal dose.

 

Posted Aug 22, '10 at 12:40am

Hypermnestra

Hypermnestra

1,283 posts

Sowait, there's no one else opposed to gay marriage other than Steven over there?
Fine, then I'll start a branch-off debate. How's that?
I for one, don't actually think that people who think gay marriage should not be legal are actually bigots, nor were people in the 60's racist, etc. etc. Now, I'm not saying that the things they believed in were good or that I support them, I'm saying that a lot of them were good people who were just corrupted by what their parents told them, and what their grandparents told them, and what society told them. It's like religion; if you're told something is true from birth, by people you trust like your parents(who themselves sincerely believe that what they're teaching you is true) then of course you're going to believe them, and you can't be faulted for that.
So hopefully, we'll have some better opposition on that front, eh?

 

Posted Aug 22, '10 at 12:54am

Hypermnestra

Hypermnestra

1,283 posts

I sense

I'm sorry, this is kind of mean of me and I know it's nitpicky but you left yourself wide open for it...You do not want to argue here. These are not the homosexuals you're looking for.

from your posts that you are one of those cause "bandwagon jumpers" who would be willing to argue anything from spotted owls to global warming just for the sake of playing the victim role.

That's kind of mean of you. What gives you that impression, other than to pad your argument with a healthy dose of insulting?

Your own comments show the fundamental flaw in your argument. The bottom line is same sex couples are by definition different than opposite sex couples.

I won't dispute that.However, whether they are different or not does not change the fact that they should have the same rights, y'know?

There is no right or wrong here, it simply is what it is.

I'll give you that one, but it's kind of irrelevant.

Even you acknowledge that the best a gay couple could hope for is to be the surrogate for a child whose bioloical (and by definition opposite sexed) parents have somehow been rendered unable to raise the child.

It is possible for same-sex couples to have children. I would go into this in detail, were it not for the fact that details about this have already been posted time and again in this thread, and any more of the exact same already-debunked argument would probably cause the thread to go into some kind of coma.

The fact remains that same sex couples can have sex until the cows come home and they will produce exactly zero progeny, end of story and species.

This would be true, if everyone was homosexual, which they're not. Heterosexual couples still exist, therefore the species will not go extinct. Furthermore, the extinction of the human race is not even a viable issue. We are living comfortably, our lives are not threatened by anything but each other, and therefore the only way we could possibly go extinct is by our own stupidity in causing WW3, not because some homosexuals were allowed to marry. And on that subject, who said that homosexual couples won't have sex before their marriage? That just...the whole sex thing is just a ridiculous and overused argument.

Thus all morality aside how can you even begin to infer that this is some kind of biological force at work. Nature doesn't work that way. When a species develops a trait that leaves it at a disadvantage they only end up in one place, extinct.

This is very true, heredity and natural selection, science aside, should root out any traits detrimental to the species. However, and I just want to say it is not my intent to compare these people in any way, our society is so coddled and far advanced that evolution for the human race is practically at a standstill. Why? Because back in the day, if you were dumb and stuck your fingers in an electrical socket, you died and your genes were erased from the gene pool, nowadays they have breakers. That's just an example.

And for another thing, You can claim all you want that Homosexuality is the genes talking but if thats true what they are saying is "out of the pool"

Read the above. Evolution in the human race is irrelevant, and we should not shun people for something that they cannot control.

 
Reply to Gay Marriage-Should it be Legal or not?

You must be logged in to post a reply!