Should gays be allowed to marry?

[Mrs. Kyo]

Originally Posted by Inimicable

If he is telling you that he has the ability to control himself and not do it, but to prove a point he does it, what would you say?

That he could've been lying?

How can that person actually be certain about it?
Did you know that you can actually control how a person thinks? Forcefully?

Your brain emits alpha and beta waves. Projecting your own version of waves can alter the way a person thinks. Certain chemicals have the capability of giving people hallucinations and even cure depression.

[Mrs. Morris]

How does someone being gay mean that they don't improve society? Because they simply are attracted to someone of their own gender?

Retards are outcasts too, lets ban them from getting married.

[Mrs. Kyo]

Originally Posted by Mrs. Morris

How does someone being gay mean that they don't improve society? Because they simply are attracted to someone of their own gender?

Retards are outcasts too, lets ban them from getting married.

Humans are created and are attracted to one another mainly for the larger purpose of propagation. When homosexuals meet....they do not actually contribute to society as they can produce no offsprings.

Once they marry one another, possibly beneficial genes are forever lost from the genetic pool..

As for retards, they are not banned from marriage as there isn't really a need to do so. There are so few retards in comparison to the 'normal' population, and they don't really recognize marriage and don't ask for it. They are out of discussion considering their condition.

[alucart13]

Sure.
There's nothing wrong with gay people marrying eachother.

If you love someone, you should be allowed to marry them.

[Mrs. Morris]

Thats what I thought, the whole "They can't have babies" thing.

So despite how many whores are on the street popping out babies who will grow up to be worthless shits themselves, does it really matter that gays don't have babies? They can adopt. Do we really need people for the sole purpose of having babies?

What about couples that wish to never have babies.

Hell, lets just make a new law that says if you're going to get married, you have to start popping out kids! Cause thats just what we need is more mouths to feed.

[Theebomb1080]

Originally Posted by meeps

Thankies.


You are correct to state that they are part of society. However, they are considered outcasts of society as they do not help further the improvement of society.


You sure he actually chooses to? or perhaps there was some sort of chemical in the air that spawned such a response? How can you have the assurance that your thinking is actually yours?


I am a doll, hun.


Homosexuals can't have kids, can they? xD

(at least not natually) So, we shouldn't have problems with that.

You might be a doll, but you're not a puppet. =]

[Mrs. Kyo]

Originally Posted by alucart13

Sure.
There's nothing wrong with gay people marrying eachother.

If you love someone, you should be allowed to marry them.

But, it's a waste to the genetic pool.

Originally Posted by Mrs. Morris

Thats what I thought, the whole "They can't have babies" thing.

So despite how many whores are on the street popping out babies who will grow up to be worthless shits themselves, does it really matter that gays don't have babies? They can adopt. Do we really need people for the sole purpose of having babies?

What about couples that wish to never have babies.

Hell, lets just make a new law that says if you're going to get married, you have to start popping out kids! Cause thats just what we need is more mouths to feed.

But, you must take into consideration about kids being adopted. They will have their values and ideals about society shaped by their homosexual parents. I guess it's a good way to curb the population burst....

And, the main reason for people meeting and living together is to assure that their genes are passed onto the next generation. Immortality of sorts, I suppose.

Originally Posted by Theebomb1080

You might be a doll, but you're not a puppet. =]

I'm someone else's puppet; but, a doll on my own standing. =P

Can you not say that there is not a super being controlling you?

[Husky]

The world is over populated as it is, anyway.

[Mrs. Kyo]

Originally Posted by Inimicable

The world is over populated as it is, anyway.

Indeed. I guess I should revise my views on homosexuals. I guess they do help society. xD

Less overcrowding eventually.

[Hodizzle]

Wow, there is so much ignorance in this thread, that I don't even know where to begin.

1st off, while marriage may have began as a religious thing, it has lawful and monetary consequences. Beyond just tax breaks, people who are married have a say in their spouse's finances and well being. If you are gay, and your partner is deathly ill are hurt and the hospital deems only family can visit, guess what? You can't. Nor can you have any control of life-support decisions. If a will is not created for your partner, and they die, you get nothing. They also have no support in the case of a breakup after long-term (something that would have otherwise been a DIVORCE). I could go on forever. Now, you say civil unions do you? Often being in a civil union does not give you the same benefits as a marriage (despite the creation of them to be almost equal).

Biologically: More diseases? If you're talking about AIDS, well then let's get into the fact that yes, while the AIDS rate is higher in the gay population (we are talking gay males here, and I will explain why), the AIDS rate is higher in the black population as well. There are a couple reasons for this. It is higher in the gay male population because (there is some scientific evidence for this) it is easier to contract HIV through anal sex (basically because the anus does not have as good of mechanisms as the vagina for fighting viruses of the STD nature). Few lesbians get HIV because it is difficult to contract without the abundance of genital fluids that would come from a guy. Kay, now back to the black population example. POPULATIONwise, rates are higher because well, think of an isolated pond. If a couple fish (or organisms) are infected with something, it will spread because all the fish and other organisms are eating each other and interacting with each other in a cyclic pattern. Concentrated. So most of the organisms in that pond are likely to contract whatever this infection is simply due to the concentration. Now, most people have sex with people like themselves. This means: black with black, white with white, jew with jew, gay with gay, rich with rich, etc. creating people ponds, meaning infections of this nature are going to be much more likely to spread within the group. Next biological topic: Homosexuality is found everywhere in nature. Dogs, cats, monkeys, bugs, fish, dolphins, you name it, there are "homosexual" specimens of everything. With humans, yes they "choose" to partake in homosexual acts, but they do not "choose" to "be" homosexual (who would with all the stigma attached). Science has shown some evidence that homosexuality has a biological basis, but with humans probably has an environmental aspect as well. Also evolutionary theory has been trying to place homosexuals for awhile. It might exist to sort of section resources to other kin related to the homosexual. There are other theories as well, but I don't want to get into kin selection theory or other evolutionary theory right now.

As far as gays not giving anything to society: so if they discovered a cure for cancer they are still worthless to society? Um, wake up, we have already overpopulated. Humans are killing the Earth, do we really need to promote our genes to the fullest? I think not.

Retards are a small enough population that they don't fight back? No, the gay population is VERY small. The difference is, that gays have full brain capacity, meaning they can stick up for themselves, which is what they are doing. Retards, as it was put, are brain damaged. They don't have the option to stick up for themselves in the same way and many do not have the capabilities to understand exactly what sex/marriage/procreation is and entails.

For those of you that argue to let them marry because lesbians are hot (I paraphrased, excuse me). Newsflash: lesbians are not into you.

Also, the argument about gay marriage argues for two PEOPLE in who want to share their lives together. I absolutely hate when people bring in bestiality or objects into the discussion. No one is arguing for humans to marry other non-humans. End of discussion. If they arguing that, than it is for a different thread.

Ok, so I think that's all I can think of at the moment. I had many more points in my head, but I forgot some of them as I wrote. If you can't tell, I support gay marriage (or the title of civil union being placed on any group that does not marry in a church complete with full federal benefits). Personally I don't buy the whole 1 man 1 woman business. I actually support polyamory as well. If a group of people (2 or more) and I stress the word PEOPLE love each other enough to promise the rest of their lives to their partner(s) why shouldn't they be allowed?

Sorry for the overly-long post, but I was due for my opinion on the topic.