ell...consider for a moment that "supposed to be" might be in the eyes of the beholder.
Marriage is an institution older than any civilization that currently exists. It is that way because it is the natural order. What it is "supposed to be" has been defined for millennia, so it's not like that is a subjective and relative concept.
The highest estimates of homosexuals are somewhere between 1% to 2% of a population. I would never support persecuting or harassing them in any way...but affirming a sinful behavior (of any kind) is a different subject.
Our society recognizes the "rights" of people to drink alcohol but there are limits to what is acceptable in public. No
behavior has a Constitutionally protected right, especially not a destructive one.
same for being "pro family". i've known and seen gay parents do a fine job raising a "family". as grant pointed out...there are far worse things that can be detrimental to a "family"...an alcoholic parent. an absent dad (or mom). an abusive (or neglectful parent). etc.
Using bad examples of what a family is "supposed to be" doesn't really make the case for homosexuality being a good situation to raise a family. Are there some good examples? I'll concede that there are, but you can't make that case from a few anecdotal stories.
Chastity Bono is one mixed up male/female-ish person, and I'd wager that confusion is more likely in most cases.
yeah, that argument has it's flaws, ted. for instance...you might have been discriminating against other women... but you didn't discriminate against me or anyone else in OUR choice of who we chose to marry.
The point wasn't about discrimination as much as it was about how there is, and should be, a special respect for the family unit. Gay marriage is a mockery of that.
it only destroys society if heterosexuality is banned and outlawed. is anyone really worried that's a likely outcome? really?
that justification for prohibiting gays from being married is wonky!
Not really. If you can show where any kind of aberrant sexual behavior became accepted as normal and that society continued to flourish, I'll concede your point here.
I'm not against some kind of civil union, or a society that wants to change the law were couples who live together (of any persuasion) are granted the same social benefits as married couples, but to corrupt an institution that has served civilization so well since eternity is a BIG mistake.
Actually, portraying homosexuality as normal does a disservice to all people. The lifespan of a homosexual is less than that of a heterosexual because of several factors, all behavioral.
I can't, in good conscience, condone any behavior that is destructive to the person doing it. So we are only "tolerating" the death of people when we act like this is simply choosing an alternative lifestyle. No, it's a path to death and hell. That is the truth which all who flirt with sin need to know.
so, what about a straight couple who decides they don't want children???? are they a threat and in danger of "destroying society"?
Right now, the society and culture of Europe is in real danger of disappearing because muslims on the continent are producing children at a 7 to 1 ratio of Europeans. So, yes, I think that statement is reasonable and accurate.
what about cpls in their 50's getting married? they won't be procreating either.
NO MARRIAGE FOR YOU! i know you don't see THAT as a threat to society.
Its never good to make policy based on an extremely small segment of statistics. My guess is that couples who marry later in life could already be grandparents in most cases. It's not a corruption of the institution of marriage either way though, because it has been the natural order of mankind since before history was recorded.
oh, there's probably a long list of reasons for the problems in chicago (and elsewhere)...i'd venture to say economics is a much larger factor.
Well sure, economics is a major factor...but that economic situation is caused by a breakdown of the family unit.
as for why gays would want to marry....c'mon, for EXACTLY the same reasons straight people do. for love. to show they're committed to one another. to write it all off as they're only doing it for the medical benefits, and to avoid probate and estate taxes is to see them as less than you and i. people.
To give anyone a civil rights status based on their
behavior (sexual or otherwise) is discriminatory against everyone else.
Gays constantly demand we accept their sexual behavior on public parade. When was the last time you saw "Adultery Pride Day" or "Pedophilia Pride Day" at Six Flags when you went there to enjoy a day with the kiddos?
Yet, they want anyone who criticizes this deviant behavior to be jailed for "hate speech"? This is an infringement of Constitutionally guaranteed free speech!
ted, i h
ave to ask. have you known any gay couples that have been together for awhile? cos' i'm callin' bullshit on that premise. the gay cpls i know and have known are together first and foremost because they're in love and have made the commitment to spend the rest of their lives w their partners. same as you and your wife. same as me and mine.
Yes, I have some friends who have been together for 29 years now. They do suffer some (mostly) economic exclusions for this choice, but they knew that when they made the choice. No one said life is fair.
being free of religious constraints that "dictate" i feel otherwise.....i see gay marriage as a total non problem. two adult people want to be together...it's none of my business whether they're the same gender. or different races. or deaf.
I don't think anyone in the discussion has yet said we are against anyone "being together". I'm not against a guy listing his boyfriend as benefactor of a health insurance policy or as a close family member that can visit his deathbed in the hospital.
But that doesn't mean that it's natural, nor does it mean that they have any right to corrupt the sacred institution of marriage.
yeah....it used to be against the law for deaf to marry because it was a concern they would produce more deaf! somehow society has survived that. i think it can survive gays marrying as well.
Being deaf is not a behavior.
there's so, so many other things seriously wrong these days that's it's amazing to me that intelligent people can spend so much time agonizing over anything like this
The common sense God gave to a housefly is all it takes to understand the reason why marriage is defined as a covenant relationship between one woman and one man.
So, yea, I don't know why intelligent people would agonize over this for more than a minute or two either.
Two wrongs still don't make right.