How can homosexuality not be a perversion?

It's a form of pornography.

 

Homosexuality is as old as mankind. What isn't old is the persistence in pushing the homosexuality, especially transgenderism agenda, off onto our children. Leave our children ALONE you f*cking freaks.

 

No one is “pushing” homosexuality or transgenderism onto children.

 

"Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy."
H.L. Mencken, 1916.
​

 

Haha...awesome!!!

 

Factually incorrect. Marriage predates government.

 

No god created LEGAL marriage.

 

Which makes it a culturally recognised union between people. God had dick to do with it.

 

I remember it being done when I was little, but hardly anyone does it nowadays.

 

​

Homosexuality and heterosexuality predate government. Marriage as a legal institution necessitates government.

 

Perversion is a subjective value. So while it is a perversion for them, it's not for others. Which is why anytime someone tries it as a reason for making something illegal it fails, at least logically. Now, that doesn't mean something can't be illegal regardless. Simply that "perversion" is never a legitimate reason.

 

Since he did stipulate statistically, it is not an opinion. It is a matter of fact. Which mean that it is possible to prove him wrong by showing statistics that counter his claim.

 

In what culture?

 

The gods did not create marriage, legal or illegal, monogamous, polygamous, polyandrous, homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual.

If you express yourself figuratively and mean that biological entities naturally engage in sex, that is correct. That ubiquitous activity is a separate matter from marriage.

 

What are those benefits?

 

You don't believe in any god do you?

 

The issue has already been settled. You just don’t like it. Tough ****.

 

That doesn't change the fact that marriage predates government, just as @Robert E Allen said.

 

lol

 

All this shows that you have no clue on what a legal marriage is. It simply is the establishment of a legal relationship that provides certain rights, benefits and responsibilities, and has no requirements for sex, love or children. A legal marriage has nothing to do with what marriage per a religion says it is. The Constitution absolutely allows the government to establish it's own version of marriage and the legal parameters there of. The Constitution also prevents the use of race, religion, sex, or age in the establishment of those parameters. Now before you go off on the child thing. Ability to give consent is a legitimate parameters. And while we set a rule of thumb age, it is possible to be legally emancipated to become a legal adult prior to that rule of thumb age, if the person can show themselves capable.

 

Nope, there is simply no requirement for a same-sex couple to have sex in order to obtain a marriage license.

Says you. In certain states close relatives such as cousins can marry as long as they can prove they can't procreate.

I suppose you could say that's "regulating procreation" but the same criteria could equally apply to same and opposite sex couples alike.

All that said, this thread isn't about same-sex marriage. All the arguments have been heard a million times already. It's a done deal. Get over it!

 

Yep they do. The male can get a vasectomy and the female a hysterectomy and they can still get married afterward.

Next!

 

You made my point so clearly when you actually compare a gay man to an animal. It makes it easy to hate when you dehumanize

 

How does the gov provide benefits for gay sex? Maybe I’ll have sex with a woman...what will I get?

 

That's circular reasoning there. You were doing better earlier, although you really are failing in trying to argue that gays get special or separate privileges. That is factually false. Your position that they are getting these benefits undeservedly has a more logical base from which to work. I still say you are wrong, but it is a better logical base to build from.