That is my guess, and it's the only possible explanation if you think about it. They have no reason to get married because according to religion, God does not approve of homosexuality, and they cannot be allowed to marry. So, essentially this becomes a leftist anti-religious movement to pervert marriage by creating a paradox where those who are not eligible to marry, can marry.

o dear

Excalibur_Z

United States12237 Posts

March 07 2004 08:40 GMT

#342

On March 07 2004 17:35 TeCh)PsylO wrote:

Show nested quote +

o dear

If you can think of another reason I'd love to hear it.

TeCh)PsylO

United States3552 Posts

March 07 2004 08:42 GMT

#343

what reason do straight couples have to get married?

ObsoleteLogic

United States3676 Posts

March 07 2004 08:42 GMT

#344

Familial stability, perhaps? True sign of commitment? Maybe to people who can't hold to a promise its worthless, but to honorable people that pledge, you know, "till death do us part" is rather reassuring.

TeCh)PsylO

United States3552 Posts

March 07 2004 08:44 GMT

#345

On March 07 2004 17:42 ObsoleteLogic wrote:
Familial stability, perhaps? True sign of commitment? Maybe to people who can't hold to a promise its worthless, but to honorable people that pledge, you know, "till death do us part" is rather reassuring.

exactly

ObsoleteLogic

United States3676 Posts

March 07 2004 08:45 GMT

#346

Notice I said "familial" stability, and as I already pointed out, a gay couple can't really have a family, of their own accord. Before you post a reply, stop and think about it!

TeCh)PsylO

United States3552 Posts

March 07 2004 08:51 GMT

#347

geeze. do u not agree with adoption at all? if a family only exists if u have kids " of your own accord" then no adoption would provide familial stability. if a family can exist without kids, then its a non issue. think about it! indeed. u make it seem as if your argument is based on a couples natural ability to reproduce, but are you against seniors marrying? what if a man is sterile? a woman that has "complications" ?

ObsoleteLogic

United States3676 Posts

March 07 2004 09:00 GMT

#348

Adoption is a good thing, but it only exists because of *gasp* a lack of a good family (with heterosexual parents) in the first place.

As far as infertile couples marrying, thats ok, from both a religious and logical standpoint, just as homosexual marriage is not. As I said early, there have been inexplicable cases of "infertile" couples conceiving. As far as seniors go, I think its alright for them to marry, but not to have sex. I mean, when your body stops working, it probably has a good reason. The more you mess with these things, the more they screw up.

Hot_Bid

Braavos36379 Posts

March 07 2004 09:03 GMT

#349

so you wouldn't have premarital sex for pleasure with your girlfriend? =(

ObsoleteLogic

United States3676 Posts

March 07 2004 09:04 GMT

#350

Nope.

To add to that, no contraception, no abortion.
My entire family follows by that. And we're pretty happy people, you know?

Liquid`Drone

Norway28695 Posts

March 07 2004 09:05 GMT

#351

"I posted the worst analogy ever but I was sarcastic"

sure thing

hot_bid of course he wouldnt

but hahaha dude are you for real about thinking seniors should stop having sex? that's just insanely fucked up.
hahshfasdh

Bill and Bill

United States167 Posts

March 07 2004 09:05 GMT

#352

On March 07 2004 17:16 Excalibur_Z wrote:

Show nested quote +

Of course it's a religious institution! You are getting married under God, by a pastor/priest/minister/what-have-you, and that's the whole point. By definition an atheist would want no part of that.

Do you know what marriage is? That stuff you do in a church isn't getting married. That's just tradition. You can do that 1000 times over and you won't be married. You will only be married when you get a marriage license from someone who is qualified to marry you, whether it be a priest, pastor, judge, clerk, or whoever. How you choose to carry out your ceremony has to do with you, not God.

TeCh)PsylO

United States3552 Posts

March 07 2004 09:07 GMT

#353

so your arguments is more based on the idea that u should only have sex for procreation, and you are applying that to gay marrieages? i suppose then u are against gay relationships as well?

Bill and Bill

United States167 Posts

March 07 2004 09:10 GMT

#354

On March 07 2004 18:00 ObsoleteLogic wrote:
Adoption is a good thing, but it only exists because of *gasp* a lack of a good family (with heterosexual parents) in the first place.

As far as infertile couples marrying, thats ok, from both a religious and logical standpoint, just as homosexual marriage is not. As I said early, there have been inexplicable cases of "infertile" couples conceiving. As far as seniors go, I think its alright for them to marry, but not to have sex. I mean, when your body stops working, it probably has a good reason. The more you mess with these things, the more they screw up.

For some reason I don't think you are getting your information from a Psychology/Biology reference.

ObsoleteLogic

United States3676 Posts

March 07 2004 09:14 GMT

#355

Psylo, you should only have sex for procreation + unity of a couple, something which can't really happen in both a physical and emotional way with homosexual couples.

The human body works a certain way. Get that through your head.

Liquid`Drone

Norway28695 Posts

March 07 2004 09:15 GMT

#356

obsoletelogic there's a reason why you're the only person here who feels that way about sex. and it sure as hell isn't that you're the smartest forum poster.

Meat

Netherlands3751 Posts

March 07 2004 09:15 GMT

#357

On March 07 2004 18:14 ObsoleteLogic wrote:
Psylo, you should only have sex for procreation + unity of a couple, something which can't really happen in both a physical and emotional way with homosexual couples.

The human body works a certain way. Get that through your head.

Yes but now we get back to reality and we realise there are also 1000's of children waiting to be adopted.

ObsoleteLogic

United States3676 Posts

March 07 2004 09:22 GMT

#358

What is that reason then, Drone? I'm brainwashed? "Durh durh durh, do what the Church says don't listen to reason don't think for yourself?"

Mora

Canada5235 Posts

March 07 2004 09:31 GMT

#359

sex feels good.

It should be had as much as one can have it. U should always use contraception and protection.

Sex is NOT ONLY about pro-creation. (unless of course oral-sex is about pro-creation).

--

sorry excal, u are not the religious zealot, OL is.

on that note - i do not believe gays should have the right to a Christian Marriage. I believe they have a right to Marriage. If that's called a civil union, then that's what i support. However, i WAS under the impression that a civil union is not entitled to as many rights as marriage. The only type of marriage i want gays to have rights to is the one by law. Full rights and privaledges. I have no desire to pervert your religion, it certainly doesn't need any help.

TeCh)PsylO

United States3552 Posts

March 07 2004 09:32 GMT

#360

why cant homosexual couples have sex for the "unity of a couple". not being gay, we may not understand the emotional and physical connection, but that does not mean it does not exist, and that certainly does not mean we have to deny people rights becuase they do understand it.

i am perfectly aware of how the body works, and it is irrelivant. but what you are implying by your that, is that homosexuality is not natural. but homosexualality is not a current phenomenon. it has been apart of humanity for thousands of years. it is a part of differant species beyond humans. gays take up a much larger percentage of our population than most people may think. homosexuality is indeed natural. if it was not occuring naturally, how then would it be occuring?