Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Marx
I've never understood the concept of this being the wrong side of history. I don't think you will ever convince the majority of citizens, whom also happen to be straight (what are the actual numbers of homosexuals in society? 1%? 3%? Maybe???), that homosexuality "has to be" acceptable.
|
And people said the same things about interracial marriages in the 1960s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Marx
From a natural stance, there's nothing natural about homosexuality. From a sexual stance, yes I understand it. Hell, I'm in porn. I'm a huge fan of women together and I understand people that want to see men together. But, from a natural stance, homosexuality cannot reproduce offspring and therefore is unnatural.
|
If it happens in nature then its natural. Also what does reproducing have to do with sex. People have sex for fun,love,entertainment and sometimes to have children. But for the most part its cause it feels good. I know when I'm getting a blowjob, I'm not thinking about having children with the girl. sex and reproducing are 2 different things for humans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Marx
Gays cannot have children. Were it not for socialistic options such as adoption, homosexual couples would not have families and would cease to exist as units exactly when the two parties involved died. It's just simple logic and math. Heterosexual couples reproduce for a myriad of reasons and it's something homosexual couples cannot accomplish without assistance from a 3rd party.
Now, do I accept someone loving whomever they desire? Absolutely. Do I believe there are persons that are born Gay? Absolutely. Do I think you will convince mainstream America that homosexuality is equal to and on par with Man/Woman relationships? Nope... Ain't never gonna happen.
|
Once again people said the same thing in the 60s about interracial marriages. And yes some people still aren't convinced its right. Lots of people thought it was unnatural and it was outlawed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Marx
Also, I have no idea why the government is in the marriage business anyway. It makes no sense. From a purely tax revenue standpoint, a marriage is no different than a partnership. The government doesn't care when you are married, they only care about what happens if you break up.
I don't think the gov't should recognize marriages. I think they should recognize that two people have joined in a partnership. If that happens to mean that the two people are both gay then so be it. Allow equality of those arrangements.
Marriage is something that's religious in nature. Leave marriage up to the religions. If someone can find a religion to marry them as homosexuals, then have at it.
Just my  |
The government is in the marriage business cause all the benefits you get from being married is from the government. Name me one benefit you get from the church/religion for being married? Also who do you go to for a divorce, that's right the government.
Personally the government and religion should have a hand in marriage. I'm atheist and will never get married in a church on moral grounds, so I will go to the courthouse to do that. If people follow a religion then they can go to their church if they want.
Marriage has always been about gaining wealth and power, religion was only thrown on top so they could control it.