BF2S Forums Why shouldn't gay marriage be allowed?

CameronPoe wrote:

The reason gay marriage shouldn't be allowed is because under the law married couples get tax breaks aimed at those who will procreate and generate the tax paying and pension supporting citizens of tomorrow. Last I heard gay men don't have wombs and gay women don't have testes. So why on earth should taxpayers money give a couple breaks to ease the burden of supporting a family when the couple can't have kids?

With that argument, surely 2 women getting married + sperm bank = twice the procreation potential, Lesbian marriage should get double benefits.

Nothing for the blokes though.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The point is that the definition of marriage was recently extended to be less ambiguous as to what it (marriage) exactly defined.

When was the definition of marriage ambiguous?  And when has it ever changed?  It means, and always has meant, what ive already stated it means.

And I havent changed my position on this issue: if you think about what I have posted, you'll see that i believe the concept of a marriage is a fundamental pillar of society.  The legal definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman is based on the concept as it appears in the Bible.  Altering this meaning to include the concept of a civil union means we are forgetting the values we base our society upon i.e. our religious heritage.

Were really only arguing over semantics here, my point is simply that gay people have every right to be together, and they have every right to have their partnership recognised by the state, but it shouldn't be considered equivalent to a marriage between a man and a woman.

I personally don't care. I did attend a friends "service" this summer. It was as normal as any other wedding.

The issue is mom's and dad's don't know what to tell Timmy when he asks why two guys are holding hands.

{HMS}_Sir_Del_Boy wrote:

HurricaИe wrote:

It's not like it hurts anyone. It's not murder, rape, child abuse etc... it's just two people who happen to like the same gender getting married. Only difference between them and a straight marriage is the genitalia.

The only difference is genitalia?? I beg to differ. The difference between men and women goes beyond genitalia. Examples of such would be hormones, physical differences, organs, behaviour, etc, etc.

Anyhow, back to the topic. Gay marriage shouldn't be allowed cos...well it's just plain unnatural. Nuff said

Driving a car is plain unnatural, yet people don't care so much about that.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

What the bible (or any 'holy' text) says about the issue of marriage or homosexuality should have no merit in this argument.

It should have no merit in any argument.

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

What the bible (or any 'holy' text) says about the issue of marriage or homosexuality should have no merit in this argument.

It should have no merit in any argument.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

What the bible (or any 'holy' text) says about the issue of marriage or homosexuality should have no merit in this argument.

So what text should we consult, New York Times?

colonelioan wrote:

BECAUSE IT' S NOT NATURAL GOT IT? NOW STOP ASKING THIS STUPID QUESTION EVERY FRIGGING MONTH.


Sorry for the caps, but I had to do it, Hey why not marry a pig? why you can't? Use your thinkbox of yours and you will find the frigging answer.

who the fuck are you to say it's not natural? shit has been going on for thousands of years. how about you open up that "thinkbox" of yours and realize that it's 2008.

lol look what came up in ads

ig wrote:

colonelioan wrote:

BECAUSE IT' S NOT NATURAL GOT IT? NOW STOP ASKING THIS STUPID QUESTION EVERY FRIGGING MONTH.


Sorry for the caps, but I had to do it, Hey why not marry a pig? why you can't? Use your thinkbox of yours and you will find the frigging answer.

who the fuck are you to say it's not natural? shit has been going on for thousands of years. how about you open up that "thinkbox" of yours and realize that it's 2008.

Plenty of animals have homosexual tendencies.  Therefore it occurs in nature.  He's obviously lacking in intelligence.

Perhaps under US law the concept of marriage isnt defined clearly enough.  However, under UK law, it is.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gayrights/sto … 53,00.html

He added that marriage was, by "longstanding definition and acceptance", a formal relationship between a man and a woman primarily designed for producing and rearing children.

"Parliament has not called partnerships between persons of the same-sex marriage, not because they are considered inferior to the institution of marriage, but because, as a matter of objective fact and common understanding, as well as under the present definition of marriage in English law ... they are indeed different."

...in his ruling, Sir Mark said the common law definition of marriage under English law was: "The voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others."

I disagree with you when you say that marriage is just a term.  I believe it is more than that, it is an institution, a foundation for building a family.  It is important for us therefore to differentiate between a marriage and a civil union, and that involves labelling them differently.

adam1503 wrote:

Perhaps under US law the concept of marriage isnt defined clearly enough.  However, under UK law, it is.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gayrights/sto … 53,00.html

He added that marriage was, by "longstanding definition and acceptance", a formal relationship between a man and a woman primarily designed for producing and rearing children.

"Parliament has not called partnerships between persons of the same-sex marriage, not because they are considered inferior to the institution of marriage, but because, as a matter of objective fact and common understanding, as well as under the present definition of marriage in English law ... they are indeed different."

...in his ruling, Sir Mark said the common law definition of marriage under English law was: "The voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others."

I disagree with you when you say that marriage is just a term.  I believe it is more than that, it is an institution, a foundation for building a family.  It is important for us therefore to differentiate between a marriage and a civil union, and that involves labelling them differently.

too bad, but marriage is just a fucking term. explain why the divorce rates are through the roof if it's what you say it is.

ig wrote:

too bad, but marriage is just a fucking term. explain why the divorce rates are through the roof if it's what you say it is.

Divorce rates are so high because people just dont respect the idea of marriage any more: they get married without really being comitted to each other.  The idea of marriage is that its for life.  Sadly, people seem to have forgotten that.