Sundance Channel Developing show about a very confused person

I think all gays should get transgendered. At least they'd be closer to normal.

 

Umm except for heterosexual couples in Sweden marriage has been accessible since they were born. You can't expect every single gay couple to jump straight in all at once. Give it a few decades before analyzing statistics like these because they are pretty much meaningless right now.

Gay culture is more promiscuous by and large, I'm fully aware of that. Why do you think that is though?

 

I dont think my brother and I are worthy of marriage. I dont think two platonic friends are worthy of marriage. YOU seem to think that only heterosexual and homosexual couples are worthy of marriage, without any justification for this special treatment for sexual couples.

 

Platonic friends can marry as long as they are opposite-sex.

The difference is that aside from procreative ability gay couples are no different to heterosexual couples, and identically situated to elderly couples (no upper age limit) and sterile couples (no requirement to disclose medical information).

 

You and your brother are also not legal strangers to one another. If you had a child and your partner died, he could easily be next of kin for the child in the event of your death. An unmarried same-sex couple are legal strangers and if that happened to them, the non-biological partner would have no automatic rights. Your brother also has automatic hospital visitation rights due to the way nearly every hospital sets their policy with regards to family and married partners. An unmarried same-sex couple does not have those rights.

 

I like my penis thanks.

 

Obamacare will be the vehicle to get gays' minds 'right.' Think of it as unintended consequences. Remember, liberals will not always be running things.

 

Sexual identity is an on and off switch. Your brain either says you're a boy or you're a girl.

Sexuality is a dimmer switch. It can dim or brighten, at or to, any given point in a range; even to the point that a person is completely asexual. Conventional social paradigms have historically done a poor job at describing this process and simply tries to shame it out of existence. Usually with harmful consequences for an individual or to others.

 

Because monogamy is important to heterosexual couples, so they know who is the baby's daddy. Irrelevant in homosexual couples. Just like unprotected sex is higher among homosexuals while to the heterosexual couples, a condom is important to prevent procreation.

 

Next of kin has no automatic rights, and yet you are here insisting the gay couple be given these automatic rights.

 

Only the mother knows who the baby's daddy is, and sometimes not even she does. Daddy hopes he knows.

 

Unless one of the couple, in several states, sought an annulment of the relationship for a failure to consummate the relationship, or in the rest of the states a dissolution.

Actually, ANY couple made up of any two people who wished to marry, OTHER than a heterosexual couple, would be no different to heterosexual couples in that sense. Nothing special about those couples who happen to be gay that could justify such special treatment. And while encouraging all heterosexual couples to marry, reduces the # of single mothers on their own providing and caring for their children and increases the # of children with the benefit of both their mother and father in the home to provide and care for them. Encouraging homosexual couples to marry does not.

 

Thus the governmental encouragement of marriage between heterosexual couples. Here in the states the law presumes the husband is the father. I suspect you probably have something similiar.

§ 160.204. PRESUMPTION OF PATERNITY. (a) A man is
presumed to be the father of a child if:
(1) he is married to the mother of the child and the
child is born during the marriage;

 

Who made up that rule? Yourself?

 

except of course homosexual couples make babies all the time. not that it matters, since procreation is irrelevant to marriage.

 

Paternity law not a marriage law. if daddy isn't daddy, he has no responsibility. If he does not contest paternity then he voluntarily accepts responsibility.

this idiotic argument has been refuted already, and is meaningless to the topic.

 

lol.... whatever fits their agenda

 

Physical impossibility in the real world. Im sure anything is possible in your world.

 

No one has claimed it is any particuliar type of law. Try to avoid dashing off after every irrelevant strawman you can imagine.

Actually, even if he isnt the daddy he is responsible. Thats what a presumption of paternity does. A PRESUMPTION of paternity, regardless of actual paternity.

 

nope. homosexual couples have children all the time

 

more pathetic equivocation.

not in all states.

this remains refuted and meaningless to the topic

 

I'm not sure if you missed that class but you need a uterus, an egg and other female parts to make a baby

 

Yeah and they get those all the time (if they're not already women).

They're called surrogates. Heterosexuals use them too when their reproductive organs don't function in a way that makes babies.

But you already knew that didn't you?

 

The claim is that "homosexual couples make babies". When a surrogate is involved, that is ONE ofthe couple and the surrogate making a baby, NOT the couple

 

The claim is that "homosexual couples make babies". When a surrogate is involved, that is ONE ofthe couple and the surrogate making a baby, NOT the couple