And that was the reasoning behind what I posted. It wasn't aimed directly at you. I can't, and even if I could disprove the existence of a God it would be for my own sense of smug satisfaction, and wouldn't really serve a purpose. People need their religions to help them through their lives, and that's great. It's a way to live your life, not the way. My point in all this is that this way to live one's life in peace is hampering another's way to live their lives in peace, and it absolutely is a wrong thing.
ok then name some things that aren't for the benefit of future generations. Yes, it is the basic logic behind all of our actions. It's called instincts. You're first example only would be similar if homosexuality is a choice and I doubt you want to take that position. I.Q. test and obstacle course are solved with natural selection, duh. And no one could outrun a lion so why would we be required to do that. Let's take your logic to its extent. What if everyone was gay, and no one reproduced? That would be horrible. What would make wings evolutionary perfection? You obviously don't understand the concept of evolution, so why should your view of how life works relating to evolution be taken seriously? And you don't view life like that? You may not consciously but everyone thinks like that subconsciously. What makes you think a girl is attractive. Do you consciously go through mountains of thoughts like "She has a pretty face", etc.? No. Your brain sizes her up to see if she would be a good mate, and very shortly after seeing her you already know if you are attracted to her. Now sometimes consciousness gets in the way of our instincts, but I'm talking about the basics here. The only difference between masturbation and necrophilia is that some people find one disgusting. Let's make necrophilia legal!! Note: Your entire paragraph is arguing against something that I'm not proposing. Where did single people come from? I never said that we should all make a baby a day or something ludicrous like that. No, I'm saying homosexuality is always detrimental, you are obviously not using my logic and just putting words in my mouth. Overpopulation fixes itself eventually. here is an example of how most of the points offered for debate here are old-news and not original. No one used bible verses or even mentioned God when arguing against gay marriage so you all are like "A lot of people think this way so I will disprove this" even though it doesn't actually apply to anyone in this thread. P.S. Who misspelled "marriage" in the tags? lol
You playing Halo. You argued that being gay is bad because gays don't have babies and thus don't contribute to evolution. He's correctly noted that if we make legal decisions based on what we think is best for evolution, then we'll quickly walk down the path of government controlled selective breeding. You've not argued that point, instead choosing to argue semantics about nobody being able to outrun a lion and the word choice present in his analogy instead of actually saying he's wrong. Argue with what his argument actually means, instead of pretending you're so stupid that you didn't understand what he was getting at. Also, his logic doesn't say that he thinks homosexuality to be something he wants more of, so you can't extrapolate that to the extreme of everybody being gay. All he and the rest of us supporters want is for gay people and straight people to be equal under the law. See, here's the thing. Straight guys like you and me look at a girl and say yeah, she'd be a great mate(lay), but gay people don't. Gay men and women for one reason or another get that reaction when looking at or thinking about other members of the same sex. That fact can't be argued. Plus, you said it yourself, your argument, even if it was true, doesn't mean anything because consciousness supersedes base instincts. Necrophilia infringes on the rights of the dead and their relatives. The courts have upheld again and again that the dead and their families have rights. For example, that is why you have to register as an organ donor for anyone to legally take your useful organs after you die. You are proposing it though: If homosexuality is detrimental because they aren't reproducing, then being a woman and not being pregnant is equally detrimental. You can't apply that standard only to a group of people you don't like. Oh, do tell us how, I'm curious. I won't even argue with you yet, I want to know why you believe that human overpopulation will fix itself. It appiles to the person he was quoting, who said that the religious take one side, and the rationalists take the other.
Necrophilia is not even on the same playing field as masturbation. Comparing that to homosexuality vs. heterosexuality doesn't equate. If a guy likes ****, he likes ****. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean you get the right to say it's wrong.
Artificial insemination. You're kidding me right? Functioning wings would be advantageous to humans. And badass. Someone doesn't agree with you, so they OBVIOUSLY mustn't know anything about evolution. That's because to use *your "logic", i'd need an irrational hatred of gays. What's a guy gotta do to have gay sex around here?
Art. Come up with some convoluted justification for art using your evolution obsessed perspective and I'll swing back with gay people can produce art, or any good, just as well as anyone else and keeping them unhappy needlessly hampers their product output. Ok, say my first example was about a woman who can't become pregnant, ever. Does this absence of choice somehow change things? Is your stance really "A woman can choose to not have a baby, sure, but it had better be a choice! If I find out she can't have children due to forces beyond her control then so help me god I'll have her marginalized faster than you can say grave injustice." Outrunning a lion is the most useful human attribute in the event that society collapses and wild animals begin to roam through our crumbling cities. Ain't no ***** gonna be carrying my baby less I know she can keep it out of the hungry jaws of a transient lion. Is this why you're so worried? Well you should be. The insidious gay agenda has indeed been plotting to achieve worldwide assimilation. If your opposition to gay marriage is actually fear of enforced homosexuality well then you are totally justified. So our natural inclination to search for the most capable mate is the prime driving force behind our feelings of attraction? What convinced you of this? Is it the rail thin models that currently represent our society's standard of beauty? The ones with hips barely large enough to connect their legs, let alone pass a baby. Is this some evolutionary fueled desire; to lust after mates who appear unable to move under their own power? And anyways that isn't what I was arguing, I wasn't trying to start a nature vs nurture debate. I was referring to your insistence that the evolution of the species is of the utmost important, to the extent that all aspects of life should be changed to reflect this importance. My point is that sane people don't think this way. Eldiablo, what if I get with a girl because I enjoy having conversations with her but suspect that she may not be a proficient mating partner? What if she doesn't even want kids!? Can we still get married? Please reply soon.
And here's an example of how your ignorance will be your own undoing. Please read the thread thoroughly before making more of your asinine statements. If you think for one moment that religion doesn't come into play when making the decision to make same-sex marriage legal, then you're so out of touch with reality it's not even funny.
Okay I have a real quick question, whenever you think of homosexuality, do you think of two men or two women first?
Yes, it is for anyone and I suspect that most guys will think of two gay men first, which is naturally repulsive for most heterosexuals. This may be why laws were made the way they were. If homosexuality was made with women coming to mind first then maybe things would be different. I'm certainly not going to deny that a double standard exists. I would like seeing two girls kissing, that's how my mind is wired. So if for another person, it's wired differently who's got the right to say it's wrong?
Because guys are normally less opened-minded to concepts they disagree with, they will normally only bring up the issue of two men together, as two women together attracts them. So unless there's a very large movement of women against lesbians, that view will never change. Or at least that's my interpretation.
And as such, men who are opposed to gays are biased and those for are ignoring their bias. That's a big assumption, but I'll make it anyways.
I beleive in the bible, and I beleive that marraige is between a man and a woman. Look, if you want to be gay, that's fine by me, best of luck to you, but as far as Im concerned, same sex marraige is not marraige because it is not between a man and a woman. If you want to flame me for this, go right ahead, but before you do, think to yourself, he has as much right to say what he wants as we do.
Norlinsky "Do you ever question your Bible?" All the time, but if I look hard enough, I can always find an answer for those questions. What about you? Do you ever question your beleives?
Questioning my beliefs doesn't really work the same way. You're basing it on a book, I'm basing it on a my personal experiences. Anyways, the question still stands. What gives you the right to infringe on someone's love. You say you're fine with people being gay, but they aren't allowed to be married? Why is that? "It isn't marriage!" Bullshit, it's being married to them, so let them do it.
I not infringing on any thing. If they want to get "married", I could care less. I'm simply giving my point of view. There is nothing wrong with that. Am I wrong giving my point of view?
I've changed my beliefs many times throughout my life. Specific to this case, gay marriage. A few years ago if you asked me, I'd probably tell you that gays shouldn't exist, and that homosexuality is blasphemy, but that was only fueled by public opinion and religious propaganda. Now I just have one question that I ask myself all the time: "who cares?". How does two homosexuals getting married affect me, really? Is our world going to implode because we allow equal freedoms to everyone on the planet? No And I ditched Christianity a little before I shaped this newly formed outlook, because I realized that the only reason I kept searching for "God" was because my family and the church made me feel so unimportant because I didn't think like them. Brainwashing, some may call it.