And ANOTHER State Inches Forward....

tadpole256

Former Staff
May 2005
14,314
60
Planet Earth (Mostly)
garysher said:


Simple



A same sex couple = 2 men or 2 women



A mixed-sex couple = one man and one woman



Which coincidentally is what it takes to produce new life in the form of a baby




But you knew that so why did you ask?


So by your definition, a marriage is for the sake of having a child, not for love?

Should infertile people be banned from marriage as well?
 
Nov 2005
9,542
4,133
California
garysher said:
Simple

A same sex couple = 2 men or 2 women

A mixed-sex couple = one man and one woman
Ergo, it's gender discrimination.

If the difference is gender, and one form is allowed based on gender, and the other is prohibited based on gender, it is GENDER DISCRIMINATION.



And as we keep pointing out, but you continue to ignore, it does not matter if two things are different.

A jew is different from a christian.

But the law still treats them the same.





garysher said:
Which coincidentally is what it takes to produce new life in the form of a baby
That would be relevant if procreative capability were a requirement for marriage, but it's not.



This is just another attempt to work "literacy" in the issue when the real emphasis that is desired is "anti-black".





tadpole256 said:
So by your definition, a marriage is for the sake of having a child, not for love?
That's what I love about people who argue about "damaging marriage".

In the end, their rush to turn to requirements which have nothing to do with the fundamentals of marriage demonstrate PRECISELY a desire to "damage" marriage.



Love is irrelevant.

Being able to have a baby is tantamount.

And THAT is the "sacredness" of it all...
 
Feb 2007
34,677
17
Los Angeles
foundit66 said:
Ergo, it's gender discrimination.

If the difference is gender, and one form is allowed based on gender, and the other is prohibited based on gender, it is GENDER DISCRIMINATION.



>>>>>>>>>>



Why do you always want to describe anything you don't approve of as "DISCRIMINATION"?



Men and woman are different - it's just the way God made us! IT has nothing to do with DISCRIMINATION!



When will you get that through your skull??













And as we keep pointing out, but you continue to ignore, it does not matter if two things are different.



>>>>>



As WE keep pointing out - yes it does, when it comes to marriage and many other social institutions.



Otherwise polygamy and prostitution would not be illegal






A jew is different from a christian.

But the law still treats them the same.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>



Providing they conform to the same rules, as per marriage







That's what I love about people who argue about "damaging marriage".

In the end, their rush to turn to requirements which have nothing to do with the fundamentals of marriage demonstrate PRECISELY a desire to "damage" marriage.

>>>>>>>>>>



What?









Love is irrelevant.

Being able to have a baby is tantamount.

And THAT is the "sacredness" of it all...


I could not disagree more



Love between husband and wife is vitally important to the success of a marriage. Especially if they decide to have a family.



But love is not the only pre-requisite for marriage



For example, you may love your sister, but that doesn't qualify you to marry her.



And so another one of your cuddly-feely generalisations gets shot down
 

Hio

Former Staff
Apr 2007
1,763
1
Geez, what is up with gary's homophobia.....



Tad, I agree with you wholeheartedly on your post against gary with marriage is ONLY about producing and not love so infertale people should be banned.



And Jax I agree with your points aswell. Well put.
 

Hio

Former Staff
Apr 2007
1,763
1
garysher said:
I could not disagree more



Love between husband and wife is vitally important to the success of a marriage. Especially if they decide to have a family.



But love is not the only pre-requisite for marriage



For example, you may love your sister, but that doesn't qualify you to marry her.



And so another one of your cuddly-feely generalisations gets shot down




Ok, what about arranged marriages over in India and other places where their culture abided by those rules? The men and women there dont especially LOVE eachother as man and wife but still have a family and their lives are a success in their eyes.



And Gary, if you just said that love is not the only pre-requisite for marriage then what was the point of stating the first paragraph about how a marriage's success is based on the LOVE of the husband and wife. Your second phrase just negated your first paragraph completely.
 

tadpole256

Former Staff
May 2005
14,314
60
Planet Earth (Mostly)
garysher said:
Do you always use slurs against people who have the moral fortitude to take a stance?
He didn't use slurs against us... He used slurs against you, the person who does not have the cojones to do what's right!
 

Hio

Former Staff
Apr 2007
1,763
1
garysher said:
Do you always use slurs against people who have the moral fortitude to take a stance?


its not a slur, its a condition. Which to alot of people on this forum think you have due to your complete "outrage" you have against same-sex marriage.
 

tadpole256

Former Staff
May 2005
14,314
60
Planet Earth (Mostly)
Hio said:
its not a slur, its a condition. Which to alot of people on this forum think you have due to your complete "outrage" you have against same-sex marriage.
He's a textbook homophobic all the way down to his denial...
 
Feb 2007
34,677
17
Los Angeles
Hio said:
Ok, what about arranged marriages over in India and other places where their culture abided by those rules? The men and women there dont especially LOVE eachother as man and wife but still have a family and their lives are a success in their eyes.



>>>>>>>>>>



I was referring to western cultures such as the US









And Gary, if you just said that love is not the only pre-requisite for marriage then what was the point of stating the first paragraph about how a marriage's success is based on the LOVE of the husband and wife. Your second phrase just negated your first paragraph completely.


How???



Try READING my post before replying this time