It is true that since homosexual's don't use protection as often, honestly why would you, you can't get a man pregnant... But the lack of a condom greatly increases the chance of spreading aids/hiv. That and some health issues that I will not discuss here, as they may be inappropriate...
This seems to be your main point of argument. Unless you provide facts or sources on exactly how homosexuality, bisexuality or gay marriage does this; you are wrong. Why not tackle the problems that have obvious negative affects on society, such as murders or rape, those problems could use some help knowing in detail precisely why you think they are wrong.
That, and, grave, you keep using all these supposed "studies" showing how gay people are bad. You haven't linked or cited these studies which leads me to believe they don't exist. Please, cite your sources so that we might at least see some validity in your claims.
Uhm, 'sxuse me, but I believe that you are wrong sir! I believe a man should be able to marry another man. I mean comeon,Some guys just marry women for money/perks(Vice Versa)yet they do not love each other at all. Marrige without love is nothing. Yet when 2 men love each other, it's "Blasphemy." And you morons who support that, you're blind...You're blind to the corrupted government. The only reason why the Government bans gay marrige is to 'cause entropy in society, distraughting people from the REAL issues. Like why are we still in Iraq?Why are the oil prices still rising even when we steal it from the Arabs? Also remember, this is a FREE country.If a gay guy wants to be miserable like a married couple (man & woman)then let them! I mean really...it's only fair.
Strictly related to the GAY MARRIAGE issue and not just gays in general I don't support gay marriage because: a) marriage has ALWAYS been defined as between a man and a women b) Most Strait people make babies thus needing marriage benefits c) You don't need to be married to live your life with someone Most importantly points A and B.
By definition marrige is a union between a MAN and a WOMAN, not two men or two women. If gays would like to live together and share eachothers lives thats fine, but dont call it marrige. call it a life union or something likethat, but not marrige. on a side note: why are people always trying to bring the war in Iraq ino everything, there is a debate post for that and the war has nothing to do with gay marrige.
Does the union between man and woman as a definition of marriage matter? I mean...words have meaning, yes. But as a whole, there is a general terminology amongst the word itself: The bringing together of two people, who deeply care about each other. With that in mind, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman together in "holy" matrimony is just as beautiful a thing as a man and a woman. I personally am not homosexual, nor bi-sexual. But I feel strongly in the fact that holding these people back from anything such as marriage is similar to racism.
I don't care what you call it, religion should not have a say in a legal benefit situation. It shouldn't matter what the bible says a marriage is, if what the homosexuals are interested in is the legal benefit side. I believe that the term marriage is just the easiest way to say it. I personally don't care if you call it marriage or not, I'm fine with "partners." But I want it to be a legal binding document, that would have legal benefits equal to a marriage, and to separate you would have to go through a divorce, Just like a marriage. But then why not just call it a marriage...? Wouldn't that just be easier...?
^^^^^ What about the fact that homosexuals can't make babies, doesn't that change how benefits should work? You're basically just restating what you said last time, but the only difference is that you put even less time into it. This isn't the off topic forum. Double edit ftw: Asper he never responded to it so I restated it for him again.
HtL did you just completely ignore my response? please reply... EDIT: thanks proj, it's kinda hard to remember that sig thing =/
Marriage isn't about babies, marriage is about two people who love each other enough to be in a legal bond together.
Does the union between man and woman as a definition of marriage matter? I mean...words have meaning, yes. But as a whole, there is a general terminology amongst the word itself: The bringing together of two people, who deeply care about each other. What's wrong with calling it something different? I'll cover the second part later. With that in mind, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman together in "holy" matrimony is just as beautiful a thing as a man and a woman. I disagree. Being that I'm a christian I certainly don't see either of those combinations as being "holy" (quite the opposite in fact) and the beautiful part is also skewered because of that. I personally am not homosexual, nor bi-sexual. But I feel strongly in the fact that holding these people back from anything such as marriage is similar to racism. They have a full right to marriage, they can still marry anyone assuming that they are of the opposite sex regardless of wether they love them or not. I know that that sounds stupid but its actually equal considering that two non homosexual males can't marry each other either. You can say its not fair, but it sure as hell is equal. You also didn't mention anything regarding what I said about child-birth. I'm fine with some type of binding contract for gay and ******* couples as long as it isn't called marriage and doesn't include marriage benefits.
Well, once again, it comes down to an opinion...which is unquestionably not going to be answered for a long time. I disagree with you. You disagree with me. Great end result, wouldn't you agree? EDIT: I figured I would just respond to HtL's comment below me without spamming by editing this post... I have to agree, there is hope for this section...
Wow thank you, I figured that we would argue the same points for multiple pages and would end up receiving infractions for getting too into it. That worked out much better, maybe there is hope for this section.
Maybe if I reword it this way, maybe some words will stick to your brain. Seeing that you, a christian, a believer, obviously you would agree that "God created us in his image". There is proof that you are born being homosexual, bi, or straight, so god created people that way. You believing that homosexuals can't get married, is like denying the supreme creator equality. You are denying people who are different from you the right of marriage, which isn't equal. Im not religious, but I know Jesus lingo too.
I really don't want this to turn into christianity vs. homosexuality, that goes way beyond the marriage issue and would get out of hand and I don't want that. You do have a decent point that I do have a response for but I know where that discussion would head and I'd much much rather steer clear of that. I know we disagree here, but I'm just going to leave it at that.
I have no problem with gays. The ONLY problem i have with gay marriage is wording. Call it anything other than marriage and im fine with the concept. Marriage refers to religion, and every religion that I have done research on has something about denying gays, inferring that gays cannot have a religious marriage. I am not saying I agree or disagree with these religions, but all I'm saying is change the wording and its fine.