Obviously Homosexuals cannot reproduce. Homosexual union cannot sustain the species. Lets look at something hypothetically. Lets say there are two islands separated by hundreds of miles of water. Island number one has only two people on it, two male Homosexuals. Island number two has only two people on it, a male and a female. Lets say all four of the individuals on both islands are 20 years old and the life expectancy is 75 years old. I think it would be safe to assume that in 55 years Island number one wouldn't have any people living on it and island number two would be populated. So a Homosexual union isn't equal to a heterosexual union on that basis alone. You can't achieve equality in bits and pieces it must be overall.
Jim
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin
With a population over 7 billion, heterosexuals are doing a mighty fine job of keeping the species going. In fact, given that we are adding roughly 100 million people every year, one might argue that heterosexuals are actually doing too good of a job.
Marriage may not produce kids. But marriages that do produce children also produce families and that's what a man women union is designed to do. The only argument gays have in the marriage debate is they think they should have the same legal perks as a married heterosexual couple has. It just so happens the sexual practices between homosexuals is still on the books as illegal in many states and that's one reason why homosexual marriages aren't legal in all states. Homosexual behavior is not regarded as a normal part of human culture, in fact studies of homosexual behavior in prisons between otherwise heterosexual inmates is due to their inability to cope with the stresses of prison life.
Jim
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin
I trust that you will be asking the state to declare invalid those marriages that fail to produce any children?
I trust that you will be asking that women over 45 years old not be allowed to marry, since they will be unable to produce children?
I trust that you will be asking that inmates who want to marry one of their groupies not be allowed to marry since the marriage cannot be consummated, let alone produce children?
Right? Since marriage is all about the children, then none of the above marriages should be sanctioned.
Marriage is a vow between a man and a woman.
The constitution was not written with homosexuals in mind, therefore I am glad that homosexuals are deprived of the same rights as heterosexuals.
I will allow that this issue will not die. The homsexuals are just like the race card players. They will not be satisfied with equal treatment, they want to be special and treated better than others. They want your acceptance and your pity for what they have endured.
Let the homsexuals have their own festive union or what ever they choose to call it.
Do not let them pollute and violate the intent and tradition of marriage
Originally Posted by rioseco
Equal rights are not special rights. Legally recognized marriages provides more than 1,000 rights, protections, and privileges. Heterosexuals have full access to these rights as soon as they say "I do". To deny these same rights to homosexuals makes them specials granted only to heterosexuals. I am glad to know that you are so strongly opposed to granting special rights. It is nice to have you join the side favoring equal rights for all.
One last thing, I don't give a flying wet shit whether you accept me or not, and I sure as hell do not need or want your pity. Neither does any other gay or bisexual person.
