believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'
Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.
1. Which makes the gay (pun intended) claim that not having access to marriage stops love.<quoted text>
Thanks for the stream of consciousness, I suppose. Here are my responses in order if you are interested:
Love exists even in the void of marriage (for straight people and gay)
Lots of committed relationships have nothing to do with mar
riage (or sex)
Human rights are innate, not granted
Equate… diversity … redundancy.. what???
Surely, sacred religions aren’t afraid of the doing of you or I…
Violate history? Oh yeah, bring back slavery and the dark ages! Yipee!
Things don’t get better without change
Laws do change this – for instance the marriage tax credit
WTF is duplicating sexuality
So children of single parents are also condemned? Really?
WTF is design of sexual union
Evolution has no laws. Not one... none at all…
Pray tell, what is the unhealthiest relationship of all?(hint: it’s not SSM)
Reproduction doesn’t require marriage; and marriage does not imply kids
Dilute.. the..what, huh?
2. Of course rights are innate. However, certain rights are unique to select people/groups. You avoid answering the assertion; Why discriminate with only gays relationships instead of all relationships?
3. You don't need marriage to acquire any legitimate rights due a gay couple.
4. Another simpleton response... Using a classic analogy, Marriage is the union of Mars and Venus, Gay couples are the collision of Uranus and Uranus.
5. You are not just culturally insensitive, you are culturally stupid. All major religions hold marriage sacred. Calling gay couples married is a sacrilege.
Slavery and intellectual repression have been rejected over and over through history. Gay couples being designated married has never been accepted or legal in any culture from start to finish in all of human history. Simply because they are viewed as a defective distinct relationship.