Hypocritical Arguments Against gay Marriage

Homosexual sex is no more honorable then all other types of sexual activity.
You kind of confirmed the fact that gay want special recognition of gay sex.

 

Nothing was said about "honour". Honour has nothing to do with what sets gay sex apart from other sexual activity.

Other forms of marriage, at least with regards to animals, children and inanimate objects are withheld on the basis of not being able to consent.

Incest is more complicated, but the overall concern is birth defects and the high probably of abuse playing some part. A marriage between a mother and daughter whose relationship isn't of a sexual nature REQUIRES the legalisation of incestuous marriage; this is unavoidable. The government would not want to put the "ultimate stamp of approval" on encouraging incest.

 

so, because perhaps incest bothers you then it's not OK?

Isn't that hypocritical of you?

 

Birth defects and a higher probability of abuse. Reasonably withheld.

Unless you support incest yourself, you obviously buy into those same arguments...

 

High Divorce Rates within Lesbian Couples is common knowledge in the Lesbian Community.

 

Again with the claim and still no source.

 

Again your touchy with anything that sheds light on such matters

 

Anyone can pull anything out of their ass and claim it as fact.

Obviously your persistence in not telling us your source is telling.

 

I just told you they call it "same-sex marriage", but that doesnt change what it is. And you only need to role your eyes up to the top of the page and see that "gay marriage" isn't the medias term, it is instead the gays, their advocates and the person who titled the thread term. You would need to read the court decisions that created gay marriages to see that this is their intent.

 

For (*)(*)(*)(*)s & giggles what do you guess the Lesbian Divorce rate is over last six years ? Don't be shy

 

Would you say it's higher than the Hetro Divorce Rate for a start ?

 

They do so, every single time they advocate for "gay marriage".

 

only in the fantasy world in which you dwell. back here in the real world though, this is a subforum titled gay and lesbian rights. if you want to talk about incestuous or platonic marriages, do so in a proper forum. NOBODY here is arguing those marriages shouldn't be allowed. You only WANT us to, because you are under the dedlusion that you are making a valid point.

 

Nobody has ever suggested that closely related couples would have a sexual, incestuous relationship. Revealing how frequently you all run there. As well the term "incest" means different things in differnt states. Some states have no laws against sexual relations between closely related couples. All states, even those with same sex marriage prohibit closely related marriages. Some of those make the marriage itself the crime of "incest", most states do not.

 

What are those reasons, in the states with same sex marriage, in the case of two adult brothers who have sex with each other or two brothers who do not have sex with each other? And in the states with same sex marriage, what are the reasons for annuling or dissolving a platonic marriage between two unrelated or related adults?

 

no state annuls or dissolves platonic marriages. not one.

 

As I suspected ,They demand links from me yet disapear after their homework proves my point when I fail to provide links

 

The 6 states with day marriage and every court case that has created a right to gay marriage or seeks to do so, is part of the real world.

 

*No one is saying that marriage should be denied to anyone that has two consenting adults with the exception of incest as it has probable harm to the child.

*Incest has been discussed because of your mindless rant about you and your brother getting married and reproducing.

*You are in a civil rights section about gay & lesbian rights, do you think we should be discussing toaster sex?

Try to keep up... You are distorting everything that is being said and providing nothing that betters your case. You are doing nothing but making yourself look foolish.

 

nope. and don't forget the rest of my post you completely ignored..........

 

and I'll say it again. It ain't about civil rights, it is about CASH. Take the financial incentive out of marriage period (tax rates, healthcare laws, inheritance laws, etc.) and see if the gays want to be married. If so, marry away. Until then, I want a tax reduction if or when the married gays get a tax reduction.

 

None of those decisions would have used the term "gay marriage" because you won't find the term in any peice of legislation ANYWHERE in the US. Legally "gay marriage" doesn't exist, because the implication would be that only gay people can have one. Not true. SSM is not a separate piece of legislation but a change in the legal definition of marriage. The correct term is and will continue to be same-sex marriage. I do not care what term the OP used, it proves absolutely nothing with respect to US law... The claim being that SSM "violates the Equal Protection Clause", which is made up BS.

 

If it was just about cash then gay men would just go marry lesbians or straight women. They disproves your entire argument.

The point that many of us are trying to make is that gays want to be equal with the same protections and rights as their straight counterparts.

 

I have no idea.

As I said before until sources are provided with comparisons to heterosexual divorce rates your point is essentially meaningless.

 

Every Lesbian Couple I ever knew (Less than 20 and more than 5 ) broke up eventuially (Even all 3 who married) & Remember I lived in Culver City/Beverly Hills & West Hollywood ...