"I KNOW BUT ONE CODE OF MORALITY FOR MEN WHETHER ACTING SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY"
--Thomas Jefferson
Got Natural Law?
Got Socio-Biological Fitness?
"Gay" penguins don't - not even in the San Francisco zoo
FAIL.
Simple. God’s way or mans way.
OK...now give me five good reasons against gay marriage without referring to god, religion, or the bible directly or indirectly.
Excellent
Pingage...
Libertarians take notice.
Sadly I am more and more convinced that we are losing this battle.
The end of DADT will accelerate this progressive movement.
How did we end up with a generation of young adults that see homosexuality as just another race or sex?
"I KNOW BUT ONE CODE OF MORALITY FOR MEN WHETHER ACTING SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY"
--Thomas Jefferson
Just a joke, lighten up.
Here is a reason I give to my gay friends- Do you really want big brother having a list of who all is gay? Do you want to be on some government's list? What happens if by some weird twist of fate, you get some Fred Phelps type person in charge?
Homosexuality is just having someone else help you masturbate. Homosexuals are the most self-absorbed, self-serving and self-centered people in the world. An empty, short life.
“The religious content has to be taken out and marriage has to become just one more reason to file paperwork with the government.”
This is why so many accept the premise of “gay marriage” in the first place. Many have been conditioned over the last 100+ years to think the institution is simply a collection of benefits and strictures that can be taken away and resumed as long as the state says it is OK. A recent poll has 40% of folks thinking marriage comes from man and thus the state. So gay marriage is possible because the state says it is possible, as the state defines marriage, at least for many.
It was always a danger, at least in modern times, as the state’s definition is simply going to be whatever judges, pols, or the majority think it is at the time. But there are some faiths whose definition is never going to change, as they recognize they don’t have the authority to change it. It’s just a shame the state has the power to punish if one disagrees with its ever devolving take on the institution.
FReegards
A marriage is a union between a man and a woman. You would have to redefine marriage.
It would be like changing the definition of “African American” to include white people so whites could get contracts geared towards the African American community.
I oppose it because, It isn’t right, says so in my Bible. Also they cannot reproduce only recruit.
6. “Gay marriage” is icky.
Bump. Excellent article.
My biggest single objection is...Adoption.
Hawkins make the unconscionable, deadly mistake of offering a concession in “civil unions.” Anyone who falls for this atrocious deceit is already drunk unconscious from the Koolaid.
Only need one reason, it’s absurd.
I first heard of the concept when Vermont legalized civil unions, before that I never conceived of it. I never tried to wear gloves on my feet either.
Logical and reasonable points, politely presented... Gotta be a new low for hate speech. These hateful people who don’t want to grant special privileges to all these homosexuals who only want total acceptance of their loving and normal perversions are totally sickening. Such speech needs to be banned, just like it is in Canada and the UK... Oh, wait. It almost IS!!!
“Once the definition of marriage is arbitrarily transformed to make gay activists happy, there’s no chance it’s going to stop there. For example, you could make a much better case for polygamy than you can for gay marriage. It has a much more robust historical tradition, it’s more consistent with religious values, it produces children — there simply is no compelling, logical reason why gay marriage should become the law of the land without also granting polygamy the same legal status.”
Excellent point. I truly fail to see why anyone who opposes marriage being limited to between one man and one woman would have any problem with polygamy legalization.