I wasnt referring to race, gender, or number of spouses. I was referring to the exact basic meaning of people being married.
That is because it makes absolutely no sense. It's a pathetic attempt by [MENTION=70321]Maccabee[/MENTION] among others to justify their ignorant prejudices. Essentially they don't like things people do and that is good enough reason to make it illegal.
Im talking about in the context of legally/formally recognized union. I read online that, "Marriage is a contract between two people that (usually) entitles them to certain benefits from the state". Is that applicable when talking of other places or time periods?
no its a civil union of two people. Some yes. - - - Updated - - - Everybody has their own concept. Of what a marriage is or means. So as many married couples there are ever were or ever could be there could be that many individual concepts. - - - Updated - - - It seems like you're playing dumb
so a civil union and a legal/formal union are different? state benefits didnt exist in middle ages in europe.
Well marriage is a civil union, and it is a legal status. Formality is irrelevant. But I'm not aware of any other civil union, so I don't know what you are talking about. so?
Please provide credible sources for these "rituals" that every species has that makes you believe that they are akin to religions.
Are you now denying that you are denying science that has established homosexual behavior in 1500 species? And then you ironically follow that up with your next sentence denying the scientific findings of the study without any basis whatsoever for doing so. Scientific findings from studies are published in reputable journals for the express purpose of being peer reviewed to ensure that they follow all of the established protocols and that the data is credible. That is how science works. Just denying the scientific facts because you don't like them doesn't refute them. You need to establish that the scientific facts are not credible. Unless you can provide scientific studies establishing that the scientific studies on homosexuality in other species are not credible then you are just being a science denier. Get back to us when you have that scientific evidence, m'kay?
Those things benifit mankind. They help with the economy. Alright. Or waiting until you're married and staying faithful to your spouse. I never said it was, however my point is they are the most prone to contract it. It would be if that's what I did, which I didn't. No it isn't. There are ways of having a relationship with a relative without risk of causing inbred children. I don't expect it to not be challenged. Who said that incest will even lead to them having children? Isn't the excuse about homosexuals contracting HIVs is if they practiced monogamy and contraceptives the problem would go away? So why can't John marry his sister Jane if they practice the same thing? If you wish.
I thought we was talking about what makes a bigot. Actually I would argue that atheism killed off more people. Stalin killed millions. Then get government out of marriage.
What is your evidence that it applies to gays too? I could argue that it also applies to polygamists as well. Ok. We should encourage traditional marriage and both single parent homes and gay unions would die off naturally. Infidelity amount gays is still at near 100%. So something else must be at play if in fact what you said was true. I gave them. - - - Updated - - - Sorry, I forgot to add that some species express some sort of rituals.
No. I'm saying that those flies you've mention are not true homosexuals who would only mate with the same sex. What did I denied? Again, what am I'm denying?
Because all the reasons listed are due to combining income and support that is seen when uniting two people; stability, housing, finances, support... What evidence do you have that it doesn't apply to homosexuals? So you believe same sex unions should be illegal because it "robs children of a mother and a father" yet you believe we should encourage single parent homes? Explain? Why do the children of same sex partners not deserve the same amount of support and encouragement? I will admit that infidelity in gay male marriages have a higher rate of infidelity than heterosexual marriages (it's two men vs one man - the rate is just under double), it is no where near 100%. Also lesbian infidelity hovers in the single digits. So your assertion is a lie. You are aware that lesbians can have same sex marriages also, correct? I know it's typically a repulsion to two men having sex that disgust people like you but you cannot apply only things against gay men to deny gay rights. No, you made an argument about involuntary servitude - and attempted to make it about same sex marriage; An argument about children being denied a mother and father which is addressed above - I look forward to your reasoning there but at best it's an argument for on,y nuclear families being allowed to adopt; and an argument about the spread of sexually transmitted diseases which has shown significant declines in recent, a fearmongering fallacy. So again, who benefits from same sex marriage being denied.
Religion has been directly responsible for over 195 million deaths. Indirectly I cannot even fathom an estimate. That would be the most logical and economical option. Unfortunately, everyone wants to keep their benefits - they just want to deny them to others.
