View Single Post
  (#26 (permalink)) Old
Marvin Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Name: Marvin
Gender: Male
Location: USA

Posts: 1,576
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: HoMoSeXuAlItY - The scourge of the earth? - July 15th 2009, 03:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitten View Post
I knew people were going to go into infertility.
Naturally, without any abnormal mutations or diseases or physical deformations. A man and woman can reproduce. Therefore even if they are infertile it would in an Ideal situation be possible in nature if they were not infertile. So they are entitled to marry ofcoarse. Being infertile is not their fault. And people who have no wish for children, no. I do not think they should get married either. rather be in a union aswell.
Excuse me? So being gay is their fault? Um... NO. And actually, some people have operations to make themselves infertile. Some people live lifestyles that may lead to infertility (e.g. smoking), etc. So for some, it IS self induced and therefore their fault.

In an ideal situation they could have kids, but the fact is they can't. Yet there are plenty of ways for gays to have kids, and not only adoption.... but say straight people adopt, should they not be allowed to have kids? I mean if marriage is about reproduction? (though in our society, it really isnt). And what about gay couples raising kids? If marriage is for the kids, surely the gays should be able to get married too?

And seperate but equal reinforces division and prejudice. Just reading your first poll option 'they'... it makes in and out groups. Us vs them. 'They' are trying to steal something from 'us', make 'them' come up with their own name.

Also your argument is absurd. Marriage has never been uniquely about children, so the word marriage isnt reserved for that. So if you are claiming gays should have unions with the same rights, but a different name... why? Surely there's a better argument that the legal benefits of marriage are to aid in bringing up kids.... You are pointlessly defending some rigid, not greatly throught through position on pragmatics. Words are arbitary symbols that represent a meaning... they often change. Just look at the work gay. 100 years ago, gay did not mean homosexual.

Last edited by Marvin; July 15th 2009 at 03:48 PM.