Total Posts:78|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why shouldn't gay marriage exist?

SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 10:24:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

Good Luck....
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 10:53:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Wow. I hope this kicks off. I would argue that religious institutions should be forced to accept gay couples, if they come looking for marriage, unless there are very good reasons otherwise. Still, I'll be keeping track of this very carefully, indeed.

Viel Gluek...
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:03:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 10:24:10 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

Good Luck....

I know that it most likely will not happen, but it does not hurt to try.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Iredia
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:19:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
It's improper. Marriage is best between opposite sexes. That's my 'reason'.
Porn babes be distracting me. Dudes be stealing me stuff. I'm all about the cash from now. I'm not playing Jesus anymore.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?
P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:41:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:19:06 AM, Iredia wrote:
It's improper. Marriage is best between opposite sexes. That's my 'reason'.

But is that reason to impose your beliefs on others?

At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
I think the procreation argument is the best.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

So should straight couples that cannot have children be unable to marry?

And how do you decide if it is "traditional" marriage or not? How do you come up with that conclusion without involving religion?
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:46:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Any marriage shouldn't exist... If you are with someone you are with someone, whoever it is. As if marriage makes you be more with that someone... seriously...
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?
P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:58:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


lol I just want to know why you think that and why that is a reason to ban Gay Marriage.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:01:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:58:33 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


lol I just want to know why you think that and why that is a reason to ban Gay Marriage.


It's not saying we should ban gay marriage necessarily. It's just saying we shouldn't set gay marriage equal to traditional marriage.. which is usually what people mean when they say "legalize gay marriage."

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:05:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:01:41 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:58:33 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


lol I just want to know why you think that and why that is a reason to ban Gay Marriage.


It's not saying we should ban gay marriage necessarily. It's just saying we shouldn't set gay marriage equal to traditional marriage.. which is usually what people mean when they say "legalize gay marriage."

Why? You do realize you are using arguments people used in the 50's to banned interracial marriage?

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
Iredia
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:05:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:41:03 AM, SNP1 wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:19:06 AM, Iredia wrote:
It's improper. Marriage is best between opposite sexes. That's my 'reason'.

But is that reason to impose your beliefs on others?

It is. Beliefs are imposed more or less. The importance if state, for instance, is an imposed belief.
Porn babes be distracting me. Dudes be stealing me stuff. I'm all about the cash from now. I'm not playing Jesus anymore.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:08:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:05:36 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:01:41 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:58:33 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


lol I just want to know why you think that and why that is a reason to ban Gay Marriage.


It's not saying we should ban gay marriage necessarily. It's just saying we shouldn't set gay marriage equal to traditional marriage.. which is usually what people mean when they say "legalize gay marriage."

Why?

Because in its very nature, procreative unions affect society in a complete difference than gay marriage does.

You do realize you are using arguments people used in the 50's to banned interracial marriage?


I'm arguing that, in its very essence, TM affects society differently than gay marriage. I don't see how this works for interracial marriage.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:11:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 10:24:10 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

Good Luck....

*goes off in homophobic gays going to hell rant and how you're damned too*
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:12:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:08:46 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:05:36 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:01:41 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:58:33 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


lol I just want to know why you think that and why that is a reason to ban Gay Marriage.


It's not saying we should ban gay marriage necessarily. It's just saying we shouldn't set gay marriage equal to traditional marriage.. which is usually what people mean when they say "legalize gay marriage."

Why?

Because in its very nature, procreative unions affect society in a complete difference than gay marriage does.

Not really.

You do realize you are using arguments people used in the 50's to banned interracial marriage?


I'm arguing that, in its very essence, TM affects society differently than gay marriage. I don't see how this works for interracial marriage.

Why though?

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
Iredia
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:14:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:46:47 AM, nummi wrote:
Any marriage shouldn't exist... If you are with someone you are with someone, whoever it is. As if marriage makes you be more with that someone... seriously...

If I said a part of me didn't envy porn stars for this I would be a liar. In any case, being committed to a person for life is cool. The world needs people like that,kids need parents like that.
Porn babes be distracting me. Dudes be stealing me stuff. I'm all about the cash from now. I'm not playing Jesus anymore.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:15:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:12:32 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:08:46 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:05:36 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:01:41 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:58:33 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:57:10 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:55:13 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:52:32 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:50:35 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:48:12 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:44:48 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:40:35 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:39:08 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:34:19 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 10:05:29 AM, SNP1 wrote:
I agree that forcing religious institutes to have gay marriage is wrong, but what is wrong with allowing a homosexual couple to go to the town hall (or wherever you register for it in your city/county/etc.) and register for marriage license?

When we take out religion as a reason against gay marriage, why should people be against it? Even Emperor Nero of the Roman Empire married a man formally, twice.

So, why do you think that homosexual marriage should not be allowed WITHOUT bringing religion into it?

Please be polite with your responses. I would like to avoid hostility with this topic.

I think the procreation argument is the best.

Are you banning someone who cant have children from Marriage?

No. But even if I were, I don't see why that's a big deal... lol.

What if someone literally fried their sperm. Would ypu deny them marriage?


No. I'd make them eat it.
So why is the procreation argument the strongest one?

Because nothing affects society like procreation does. Anything that affects society will be affecting an existing society. Procreation is what builds that society. Thus, anything else will be parasitic on procreation.

lol


lol I just want to know why you think that and why that is a reason to ban Gay Marriage.


It's not saying we should ban gay marriage necessarily. It's just saying we shouldn't set gay marriage equal to traditional marriage.. which is usually what people mean when they say "legalize gay marriage."

Why?

Because in its very nature, procreative unions affect society in a complete difference than gay marriage does.

Not really.


One builds and affects society. One only affects an already existing society. The former has a society-building aspect that the latter does not.

You do realize you are using arguments people used in the 50's to banned interracial marriage?


I'm arguing that, in its very essence, TM affects society differently than gay marriage. I don't see how this works for interracial marriage.

Why though?


Because interracial marriage isn't essentially different than non-interracial marriage. It's an accidental difference, not a substantial one.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:17:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:15:28 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:12:32 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:

One builds and affects society. One only affects an already existing society. The former has a society-building aspect that the latter does not.

So what you are saying is that GM doesn't build on to society?
You do realize you are using arguments people used in the 50's to banned interracial marriage?


I'm arguing that, in its very essence, TM affects society differently than gay marriage. I don't see how this works for interracial marriage.

Why though?


Because interracial marriage isn't essentially different than non-interracial marriage. It's an accidental difference, not a substantial one.

Hm? I never said there was a difference
P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:18:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:17:41 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:15:28 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/3/2014 12:12:32 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:

One builds and affects society. One only affects an already existing society. The former has a society-building aspect that the latter does not.

So what you are saying is that GM doesn't build on to society?

Gay marriage does not produce a society. TM does.

You do realize you are using arguments people used in the 50's to banned interracial marriage?


I'm arguing that, in its very essence, TM affects society differently than gay marriage. I don't see how this works for interracial marriage.

Why though?


Because interracial marriage isn't essentially different than non-interracial marriage. It's an accidental difference, not a substantial one.

Hm? I never said there was a difference

I know.

P1: Relationships which affect society the greatest should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.
P2: Traditional marriage affects society the greatest
C: Traditional marriage should be regulated/recognized by the government as such.

Now obviously traditional marriage affects society more than gay marriage does. Traditional marriage literally builds society. Gay marriage affects a society built by gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is parasitic on traditional marriage, and cannot be as fundamental as traditional marriage, nor should it be put on par with traditional marriage.

And of course, I view the family as the building block of society, and think that if we encourage gay marriage, we would be degrading the family.

I disagree btw

Fo shizzle, mah nizzle.

kfc

Do you mean kfs?

KENTUCKY FRIED SPERM
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:20:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 10:53:21 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Wow. I hope this kicks off. I would argue that religious institutions should be forced to accept gay couples

Why? Does a private institution not have the right to deny who they want to serve/accept?
On my personal property do I not have the right to deny who comes into my house?
Nolite Timere
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:36:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:14:52 PM, Iredia wrote:
At 3/3/2014 11:46:47 AM, nummi wrote:
Any marriage shouldn't exist... If you are with someone you are with someone, whoever it is. As if marriage makes you be more with that someone... seriously...

If I said a part of me didn't envy porn stars for this I would be a liar. In any case, being committed to a person for life is cool. The world needs people like that,kids need parents like that.
Marriage has nothing to do with this "commitment". If you want to be with someone your entire life you will be with that person no matter whether you "marry" or not.
TheShade
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:43:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:19:06 AM, Iredia wrote:
It's improper. Marriage is best between opposite sexes. That's my 'reason'.

Well, if it was the other way with you, as your sexual interests, would your view on other's "reasons" be hostile?