You don't have to like gays to support gay marriage.

Of course. Full legal parity--no more, no less.

 

I don't believe in solving a problem by making it more widespread. I think that gays have even less of an argument for favorable treatment (tax breaks) under the government because they can't naturally claim the child argument.

But overall, I don't care what people do. Ban marriage, support divorce '12.

 

OK, so just to be clear, you would get rid of government marriage?

 

Using abbreviations like 'WTF' can get you in trouble, I got dinged for using it....clean up your posts or I'll turn you in. There is no reason to give homosexuals any kind of tax break just because they are married. Helping procreational couples (heterosexual couples) is naturally beneficial to society. Activist homosexuals who are taking up U.S. courts time with silly lawsuits claiming discrimination wastes tax dollars.

Actually research shows that homosexual relationships compare poorly to heterosexual relationships with regard to raising children. Only a small minority of gay/lesbian households have children. Also, only about 30% of homosexuals choose to live with another person of the same sex.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

So, you have no proof to back up your outlandish statement...figures.

'Equality' doesn't mean you get what you want by claiming you are something you are not.

 

Yeah she 'chose' to be lesbian until a guy with a big wallet and a big wanker came along I guess.

 

I'm thinking "big wanker" is a large bloke who likes to masturbate.

 

You have given zero reasons why heterosexual couples with children should be preferred over homosexual couples with children.

Actually it's the opposite. Studies have found that homosexual couples raise children either equally as good or else better than heterosexual couples.

LOL, I'm not the one making the outlandish statement. If you really think that being raised in a loving home by homosexual parents would not increase a child's chance of success compared to living homeless on the streets or in an orphanage, that is your problem.

Equal means equal marital rights regardless of sexual orientation.

 

and I've refuted each and every one of them by pointing out that your state court arguments are losing in FEDERAL court. But you can't even grasp basic 6th grade civics, let alone a complex issue like constitutinal law.

 

nonsense. a gay man is no more or less qualified to raise the child.

 

which is why not a single person in this, or any other thread has argued that ONLY homosexuals should be allowed to marry.

this is just your same tired, retarded, long ago demolished strawman.

 

lol, because heterosexual lovers don't kill eachother?

 

the courts held no such thing

 

same sex married couples are similarly situated to heterosexual married couples who procreate, and IDENTICALLY situated to couples who don't.

 

?????the same is true of the married heterosexual wife who got knocked up by some guy at the club.

 

jut like MANY heterosexual couples where one or both are infertile. which once again refutes this tired argument.

 

even if she's raped?

 

if you want to be taken seriously, you'll need to prove the existence of your god first, before making idiotic statements like this.

no

 

then you aren't opposed to same sex marriage.

 

I provided you with a link you could go to get educated. There are many more. You have provided.....0

'Experts say' you are full of it. LOL

It does not...read the link I provided you before you embarrass yourself any further.

I see so if you want to marry your dog then the State should recognize that 'union?' After all, you would claim you are 'sexually oriented' toward canines and that the dog 'talks' to you. (Don't really mean you just using the word)

 

Start a new thread guys, this one is closed.