Gay marriage - what do you think?

[nick2 10]

Originally posted by TimmyR

As for artificial means, by the very nature of the word artificial it is unnatural.

 

Agreed, turkey basters shouldn't be part of the baby-making process.

[TimmyR 10]

Originally posted by melthebell

as were the worst form of life on this planet (and now in space) hating, killing, slaughtering, raping, destroying, stealing just for our own selfish wants

 

The thing is, we invented all these terms. The concept of "rape" is created because we define a social structure where consent is required for sex. Male animals screw whatever the hell they like, if they are dominant - the "alpha" male. Theft - we defined the concept of ownership in the first place. Slaughtering? Animals kill the children of their own species so that there own genes can dominate.

 

Its just we've invented more interesting ways of doing all these things.

[Kavita 10]

Marriage isnt between a man and women who love each other. It's just between two lovers. You cannot put a label on marriage. It is what it is. Why should it bother someone if two more people in the world are made happy through marriage? Why should they destroy it by thinking its wrong? They shouldn't. Its just love. Nothing is wrong with it. Full stop.

[intooblivion 10]

Originally posted by nick2

Agreed, turkey basters shouldn't be part of the baby-making process.

 

Necessary for some couples who want to have babies tho.

[TimmyR 10]

Originally posted by intooblivion

Necessary for some couples who want to have babies tho.

 

And so we return to the debate. Its ok for couples who can't have babies to have babies by "unnatural" means, but not ok for gay people to have relationships because it is "unnatural"??

 

If nature is to take its course the aforementioned couple should not be able to have babies but the homosexuals can do what they like!

[kirky 10]

but young kids don't need to be in an envioroment where "daddy and daddy" take the choclate choo choo up bornville boulyvard.

 

 

 

:hihi:

[TimmyR 10]

Originally posted by kirky

but young kids don't need to be in an envioroment where "daddy and daddy" take the choclate choo choo up bornville boulyvard.

 

 

 

 

:hihi:

 

 

As a child I wasn't aware of my parents doing anything of a sexual nature at all, so why should it matter what a gay couple do???

[intooblivion 10]

Originally posted by TimmyR

And so we return to the debate. Its ok for couples who can't have babies to have babies by "unnatural" means, but not ok for gay people to have relationships because it is "unnatural"??

 

If nature is to take its course the aforementioned couple should not be able to have babies but the homosexuals can do what they like!

 

I think people should do what they want. There are far too many tragedies and unhappy occurances in this life so if someone is doing something that makes them happy and isn't hurting anyone else why on earth stop because of some narrow minded people....

 

Social conditioning is not necessary and we should strip it away.

[Preacher Man 10]

To be fair, Timmy is advocating the rite of gay couples to adopt kids. That pretty much flies in the face of social conditioning...

[intooblivion 10]

Originally posted by Preacher Man

To be fair, Timmy is advocating the rite of gay couples to adopt kids. That pretty much flies in the face of social conditioning...

 

Yes I know, I wasn't going against what timmy said I was agreeing with him.

[Preacher Man 10]

Originally posted by intooblivion

Yes I know, I wasn't going against what timmy said I was agreeing with him.

 

err me too:rolleyes: :blush:

[Arfer Mo 10]

Do they have the same second name ? If so who?

Tim It's a matter of [give and take]following that the women [gives], and the man[ takes as] regards sex ,the answer is pretty obvious, no offence intended. Arthur.