What about infertile couples or couples who remain childless by choice, should they get a divorce? I'll admit right here right now I only got married to have children, otherwise I'd probably still be running lol... so I do understand your point, just don't think it can be applied across the board.
What ticks me off is those folks who used to procreate, but stayed married after they are done procreating and raising what they procreated. Old people are selfish like that. Their marriages should be automatically annulled by government when their marriage no longer serves its primary purpose. The minute those kids leave the nest get their own place, the marriage should end. Let the old folks do without like gays have for so long.
Any consenting adults who want to share their lives and be bound to each other by contract should be able to get married. This shows respect for people who are different from you, promotes social stability even without children, and beyond that people should be allowed to do what they want so long as it doesn't hurt others. To explain the social stability part, it's useful to keep in mind that marriage holds couples accountable to each other. That way the one with more power is less able to exploit the other if things end badly and they can divide responsibilities with extra security against exploitation.
There are no gay rights. There are civil rights. People like to frame them as special rights for gay people as a method of saying we shouldn't extend civil rights to gay people. The state ought to not be part of marriage at all. Their meddling has destroyed it far more than two fellows getting married.
Then gays can marry just as much as others because gays are not sterile - or are you one of those people who think they are?
Well gay is when someone is attracted to someone else of the same sex. And anyone who can procreate can get married, at least in the US because it's a free country and any two consenting adults are legally able to marry. What's the question we're debating?
Better tell all those people who are sterile that they can't marry then, oh and all those people over a certain age will have to divorce as well.
The only 'gay rights' there are, are the right not to be arrested and thrown in jail for being gay. Luckily the Supreme Court did away with that. Both straight and gay couples have the exact same rights when it comes to marriage.
Then by that premise alone, no gay marriage because it hurts people. Who does it hurt? It hurts people who object to it on religious grounds and it also takes a bold step toward eliminating our rights. How does it help eliminate rights? Because the bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman and that it is holy matrimony. When you decide gay marriage is normal then you are saying that there is no God because God says marriage is between a man and a woman. Then since it is said that we are born with natural God given rights, if there is no God, we got no rights. I know many will deny this but the government is this diabolical. Just look at he war on Christianity.
. LOL- 'look at the war on Christianity'- I keep trying to look at it but I can't find it. I have the right to say that there is no god. You have the right to say that there is a god. Neither has anything to do with marriage.
It doesn't hurt them it simply bothers them. Once anybody can tell me how me marrying my partner of the same sex eliminates any of their rights without making my sides split I'll divorce my husband and marry a woman and start a gay conversion camp. People say that there is no gods all the time. They have the right to say that. Only if you believe in the homophobe god. Many people believe in many different gods. Others believe in none. It is only said by people who believe in gods in which case they likely mean their god who may not have hang ups about gays. You men the 70% of this nation that wholly and completely surrender? If it's war you may have to start giving a damn
If you want to live in a theocracy go to Saudi Arabia. This is the US where we are not governed by religion. The bible belongs in church, it has no place in legislation.
You do know we have observed roughly 250 species which show homosexuality this includes dolphins, emperor penguins, female deer, primate species etc. So god clearly has in his will homosexual behavior so why would it be wrong for humans we are just another form of animal and the top species. It is good population control to have homosexual behavior as part of options for companionship and sexual release. I don't see an issue its not hurting anyone and religious organizations are free to disagree and not accept homosexuals in their churches, mosques and temples.
God doesn't and shouldn't have anything to do with laws made by a secular government. The people of a free country shouldn't be crafting their laws based on religion.
******* ROE 1. Demand a link or an explanation of the truth you are objecting to. 2. Reject all explanations as right wing lies. 3. Ignore any facts presented. 4. Ridicule spelling and typos. 5. Attack the person as being juvenile, ie: "are you 12 years old", or question their education, intelligence. 6. Employ misdirection 7. Lie 8. Play race card 9. Play gender card 10. Play gay/lesbian card 11. Make up crap. 12. Deny it constantly 13. Reword and repeat
People who are gay can procreate, as I think has been pointed out. So gay couples like heterosexual couples who can and choose to do so have that civil right. So what's your point, other than the obvious?
