Total Posts:141|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Gay Marriage: For or against?

Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 10:07:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
If we're going to have the dodgy combination of a religious rite and a legal institution in the first place, then we shouldn't discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation.

Assuming the legitimacy of marriage as a legal practice in the first place, I'm for gay marriage.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 10:18:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I really don't care. They can do whatever the heck they want. I'm not going to spend my time arguing on their behalf.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 10:22:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 10:20:38 AM, innomen wrote:
I'm against all state administered marriage.

What about those that are religiously sanctified? I mean, marriages where there is no certificate issued by the state, but by a religious institution.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 10:33:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

Would you like to debate gay marriage?
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:24:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

It isn't illegal to be a homosexual, so there isn't a question of legalizing it. The question here is about marriage. So what does your article have to do with marriage?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:28:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:24:04 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

It isn't illegal to be a homosexual, so there isn't a question of legalizing it. The question here is about marriage. So what does your article have to do with marriage?

Infernal moron..... (sorry about that ad hom)
Homosexuality is not natural, therefore we should not promote something that is not natural (gay marriage).
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:41:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 10:22:14 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:20:38 AM, innomen wrote:
I'm against all state administered marriage.

What about those that are religiously sanctified? I mean, marriages where there is no certificate issued by the state, but by a religious institution.

I'm good with that.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:44:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

Against. The act of "marriage" should not be handled by the state, nor more than the state should handle Bar Mitzvahs, Baptisims, or any other religious ceremony/right of passage.

If the state wishes to provide benefits (such as tax breaks, visiting rights, inheritence, etc) for individuals that wish to commit to be together, that should be equal regardless of sexual orientation. However, it should not be under the guise of a religious ceremony, and any steps the state takes to increase its grip on that ceremony should be fought.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:45:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

Ignore the troll people.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:47:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

Most the food you eat isn't natural (plenty of synthesised chemicals in there), should that all be illegalized? Your car isn't natural, should that be illegalized? Your appeal to nature is a logical fallacy. Just because something is "natural" does not make it good, and just because something is unnatural does not make it bad.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:48:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

I read it, but it seems to give me support as to why homosexuality is not un-natural.

Furthermore, to make a claim as to what constitutes "natural", you must first define what it means for something to be natural.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:50:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:47:24 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

Most the food you eat isn't natural (plenty of synthesised chemicals in there), should that all be illegalized? Your car isn't natural, should that be illegalized? Your appeal to nature is a logical fallacy. Just because something is "natural" does not make it good, and just because something is unnatural does not make it bad.

If you noticed, I said internally natural.
All of those things that you described are external factors.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:50:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:28:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:24:04 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

It isn't illegal to be a homosexual, so there isn't a question of legalizing it. The question here is about marriage. So what does your article have to do with marriage?

Infernal moron..... (sorry about that ad hom)

Not sorry enough to not do it to begin with, I see. Apology not accepted.

Homosexuality is not natural, therefore we should not promote something that is not natural (gay marriage).

My point is that all marriage is not natural (being an artificial construct of humanity) that science makes no comment on (except, perhaps, anthropological depictions of types of marriages across time and cultures).

My ultimate problem with this is the underlying is-ought fallacy. Even if we accepted your conclusion about this article (which the article itself says is inconclusive: "The response could be biological or learned."), science is descriptive. It simply says how things are, not how things ought to be.
Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:53:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:52:13 PM, moreno wrote:
I'm for civil unions. Enough with the whole marriage concept. Its dying a slow death.

CU=/=Marriage. It is an unjust form of discrimination.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:54:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:50:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:47:24 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:03:23 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:53:03 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:35:53 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 11:23:42 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:33:39 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 10/27/2011 10:29:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/27/2011 9:56:11 AM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
Are you for or against gay marriage? If so, why; if not, why not?

I am against gay marriage as it violates both biblical and scientific standards.

What scientific standard is there for marriage?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

It states that response of homosexuals to synthetic chemicals is closer to a heterosexual person of the opposite sex.
"The finding builds on previous research that suggest that gay men responded in a way more similar to heterosexual women than heterosexual men when exposed to a synthetic chemical."(3)

Therefore, homosexuals actually have brain chemistry which is more similar to the opposite sex. As a result, homosexuality is not natural.

I don't see how the former entails the latter, but what does that have to do with the articial human-made political/economic/social construct of marriage?

Humans are not naturally homosexual. Read the article... then we will have an intelligent discussion.

Sure, once you tell me what this has to do with marriage.

sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

Most the food you eat isn't natural (plenty of synthesised chemicals in there), should that all be illegalized? Your car isn't natural, should that be illegalized? Your appeal to nature is a logical fallacy. Just because something is "natural" does not make it good, and just because something is unnatural does not make it bad.

If you noticed, I said internally natural.
All of those things that you described are external factors.

Special Pleading. What makes internal vs external significant?

You also failed to provide how it is unnatural. All you showed is that it was uncommon. For it to be unnatural it needs to be caused by something other than nature. If it is caused, or heavily influenced by nature, than it is natural.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 12:55:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:53:54 PM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:52:13 PM, moreno wrote:
I'm for civil unions. Enough with the whole marriage concept. Its dying a slow death.

CU=/=Marriage. It is an unjust form of discrimination.

Yeah, and Mens' and Womens' public restrooms are sexist!!! How dare they attempt to treat us under the guise of "seperate but equal." I demand to be able to take a piss next to some random women in a public restroom!
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 1:00:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:55:44 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:53:54 PM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:52:13 PM, moreno wrote:
I'm for civil unions. Enough with the whole marriage concept. Its dying a slow death.

CU=/=Marriage. It is an unjust form of discrimination.

Yeah, and Mens' and Womens' public restrooms are sexist!!! How dare they attempt to treat us under the guise of "seperate but equal." I demand to be able to take a piss next to some random women in a public restroom!

Please try and stay on topic.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 1:06:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

Not quite. According to the article, "Savic, who is the lead author of both studies, cautioned that neither study proves people are born gay. The response could be biological or learned. Determining an answer will require further study."

What distinguishes homosexuality as "unnatural?"
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 1:10:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/27/2011 1:06:27 PM, Ren wrote:
At 10/27/2011 12:08:56 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
sigh....
According to the article, humans are not naturally homosexual.
Why legalize something that is not internally natural for humans?

Not quite. According to the article, "Savic, who is the lead author of both studies, cautioned that neither study proves people are born gay. The response could be biological or learned. Determining an answer will require further study."

What distinguishes homosexuality as "unnatural?"

Agreed. And on a continuing note, would we then ban all unnatural tendencies?

Naturally, a tree is supposed to grow undisturbed. We cut them down. Naturally, a tree that is cut down becomes a prime location for other plants to grow and flourish. We shave it into shaped wood to build things with.

Things that are "unnatural" are not necessarily evil nor should they be illegal.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2011 1:14:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Also: I consider it petty, childish, and mean-hearted it pit yourself against something that does not affect you in any way, but makes others happy.