cardsfansince82 wrote:I'm pretty sure marriage isn't a requirement for procreation to occur.
Marriage isn't, but a male/female unity of some sort is........... and society has proven over and over again that although heterosexual marriage isn't perfect, it's by far the most effective means of successful procreation. Society has always believed this, and studies have shown that it's true. That's why society encourages it and rewards it.
The point is that was initially the purpose of marriage....... as a means of maintaining and encouraging societal procreation. You can't just redefine "marriage" to mean what you want it to mean.
So I guess you were lying earlier when you said you "don't have a strong position either way" on gay marriage. And also please don't confuse your religious beliefs are representative of society as a whole.
I don't have a "strong" position, but I see the issue with it. My homosexual niece got married a couple of years ago here in Iowa. I attended the wedding and was very supportive and happy for them.
Socnorb11 wrote:
I don't have a "strong" position, but I see the issue with it.
Quit being a coward. It's not that hard to say where you stand.
I'm not racist because I have a black friend, you guys.
Are you so close-minded that you can't accept that people can have a viewpoint without being judgmental of people who don't have the same viewpoint?
The answer to this, on issues like this, is an overwhelming "yes," Soc. People aren't, and shouldn't be, tolerant of other forms of prejudice and this is no different.
I think the real issue here is kids from underprivileged backgrounds who don't have the resources to fix their gayness. If only they could afford to pay for Marcus Bachmann's Straight Camp this would all go away. Maybe we should look into establishing a scholarship fund or some sort of government subsidy.
