so then you are a bigot, i am part of a large group of bigots, that beleive not that gays are unequal, but they shouldnt be able to be married. you are obstinately and intolerantly devoted to your own opinions and prejudices (almost a direct quote). also, you can take me saying we arent the same, as me saying that we are unequal, but thats not what i meant at all. its like saying apples and oranges are the same. they are both fruit, no doubt. but they have their differences, so they are equal in ways, but all together they are different.
Nope - you're still a bigot and we're not. We believe in equality, which includes marriage, you believe in suppressing gay rights (in this case - marriage) because you're a bigot.
what, i was qoting someone else, who made the statement that gays are women born in the wrong body. as if to say i think that gays can be either male or female. if your going to try to crucify me, pay attention.
You quoted and agreed, i.e. you are saying the same thing.
so to avoid any more trouble, or the possibility of being banned. im ending this now.
What trouble? Why would any of us get banned?
Im in agreement that the thread is, right now, going nowhere. Its a shame that you feel your opinion cant change, so your saying that even in the face of logic and scientific study, you will disagree? You haven't really explained why.
so then you are a bigot, i am part of a large group of bigots, that beleive not that gays are unequal, but they shouldnt be able to be married. you are obstinately and intolerantly devoted to your own opinions and prejudices (almost a direct quote).
If you could provide credible evidence showing homosexuality to be a choice and homosexual marriage to be detrimental then I would side with you and agree that it would be wrong. Instead you have ignored the evidence at hand I have sided with that evidence, that's not being intolerantly devoted to ones own opinions, that's being rational.
But what was your reasoning for them not being allowed to marry? "It's gross" Your personal opinion which you have intolerantly held in regard to the treatment of a group.
also, you can take me saying we arent the same, as me saying that we are unequal, but thats not what i meant at all. its like saying apples and oranges are the same. they are both fruit, no doubt. but they have their differences, so they are equal in ways, but all together they are different.
Rather poor analogy. We aren't dealing with two different species of the same kingdom we are dealing with two of the same species that only differ on sexual preference. It's like saying two people with red hair can't get married. Or if you still insist that's it's a choice it's like saying two Christians can't get married.
Avorne - I sense 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. 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. 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'd like to put forward one thing before we proceed - you are in fact sharing the same name as nevetsthereaper - therefore I propose that you are in fact the same person just looking to get back into this thread after failing so hard before.
I am by no means a 'bandwagon jumper'. I argue the points I feel deserve arguing and try to defend the minorities from bigots. Until either of us can prove that Homosexuality is just genes or just choice then we might as well leave that alone - and why should it matter? Homosexuals deserve ALL the things that heterosexual couples have.
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"
This is fine and good. However, when you become a dominant species that no longer struggles to survive then quirks may appear. Furthermore such genes can be in there for population control.
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.
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.
