The LOGIC as to why gay marriage should be ILLEGAL

[brightmorningstar]

To ToddNotTodd,

Two are necessary to reproduce.

true. How do they do that then? Do they use the sexual reproductive organs to intercourse?
I suggest they do. So are the penis and vagina not sexual organs? So how does same sex fit in if the penis and penis are to go together?
This is why reproduction has a logical tie to marriage, which has been shown over and over again, so please suggest how the sexes and sexual organs that do got together functionally should somehow be equal with one sex together?

1) Unmarried heterosexual couples can reproduce.

Heterosexual means having opposite sex attraction so a heterosexual couple might not be able to reproduce if both are men who have opposite sex attraction.
Heterosexual and homosexual are words used to deceive.
All your points make assumptions that aren’t necessarily true to the meaning of the words. If you thought of this in terms of the sex of people rather than their sexual desires you would be in touch with reality.

 

[quatona]

Well first a start, if everyone was gay, then that lifestyle choice would result in the extinction of mankind. Thats a pretty good place to start (and yes i know gays and lesbians can 'join forces' to reproduce, so please dont bother pointing out the obvious).

Au contraire, I think it´s a particulary bad place to start since, well, talking about the obvious: only a minority are gay, and I can assure you that there are no plans in the homosexual agenda to change that and make everyone gay.
If everyone were a plumber or a guitar teacher that lifestyle would also result in the extinction of mankind, due to starvation. Nature and society need diversity in order to survive.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Well first a start, if everyone was gay, then that lifestyle choice would result in the extinction of mankind. Thats a pretty good place to start (and yes i know gays and lesbians can 'join forces' to reproduce, so please dont bother pointing out the obvious). Secondly, lets look at male homosexuality. Its clearly UNHYGENIC (to the millionith degree) for a man to penetrate somewhere where the ONLY thing that comes out is human feaces (if that doesnt revile you i dont imagine anything will) - (and yes im aware gay women have 'sex' differently, so no need to bring that up, again just pointing out the obvious). Lastly, the disproproportiantly high STD rates amongst gays, its a big tick in the 'being gay is illogical' box, and secondly it consumes such a large percentage of hospital care on such a minority. Everything about being gay is wrong, and its all self, and its based on lust, and it opens doors to warped viewpoints

But everyone ISN'T gay, so its a silly argument. If everyone were male, the species would die out too, but so what? Not everyone is male, just like not everyone is gay, so its stupid to condemn something because of what would happen if a non existant condition were met.

Next, who says all homosexual sex involves the anus? And even if it did, so what? Its unhygenic, well, so is patting your dog. Does that make it immoral? Shouldn't your argument be against anal sex, be it hetero or homosexual, rather than merely targeting all homosexuals and assuming they all engage in anal sex, while assuming no heterosexuals do?

Who told you that homosexuals disproportionately represent in hospitals? I'd like to see the evidence please.

Is it your contention that proportion of disease equates with sinfulness or immorality? You are aware that lesbians are far less likely to suffer STDs or sexual trauma than heterosexuals right? By your logic, doesn't that mean that lesbians are more moral and righteous than heterosexuals?

I'd also point out that, since we are talking about homosexual MARRIAGE here, rather than all homosexual sex, wouldn't increasing the liklihood that homosexuals will settle down with a dedicated monogomous life partner through recognition of their marriages, DECREASE their incidence of STDs and the other things you seem so concerned about?

Let the special pleading comence.

 

[MoonLancer]

Well first a start, if everyone was gay, then that lifestyle choice would result in the extinction of mankind. Thats a pretty good place to start.

If everyone was a priest and didn't farm for food or didn't do things that were beneficial to society, Mankind of become extinct, thus priests are illogical and immoral.

Yup that's some logic

 

[MoonLancer]

Secondly, lets look at male homosexuality. Its clearly UNHYGENIC (to the millionith degree) for a man to penetrate somewhere where the ONLY thing that comes out is human feaces (if that doesnt revile you i dont imagine anything will) - (and yes im aware gay women have 'sex' differently, so no need to bring that up, again just pointing out the obvious).

Did you know males actually get [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] by having their rectum penetrated? that's a strange thing to have happen if god crated man, right?

Lastly, the disproproportiantly high STD rates amongst gays, its a big tick in the 'being gay is illogical' box, and secondly it consumes such a large percentage of hospital care on such a minority. Everything about being gay is wrong, and its all self, and its based on lust, and it opens doors to warped viewpoints

Lesbians have the lowest transmission for stds. so they balance out the gays so when compared to heterosexual sex, its about even. Thus your logic is once again WRONG.

 

[MoonLancer]

most of your logic ONLY addresses male/male sex, but not female/female sex. So why would you prevent lesbians from getting married?

Its illogical penalize both when all your issues only comes form one side.

Thus i hypothesis your 'logical reasons' are not actually the reasons why you hold your view. They are your excuses to deflect criticism.

 

[OllieFranz]

Well first a start, if everyone was gay, then that lifestyle choice would result in the extinction of mankind. Thats a pretty good place to start (and yes i know gays and lesbians can 'join forces' to reproduce, so please dont bother pointing out the obvious).

Others have pointed out that it is not true that everyone is gay. In fact even the most generous estimates do not place the proportion much above 10%. Even if you throw in bisexuals who chose to live a "heterosexual lifestyle," you probably won't get much above 50%. Our problem is overpopulation, not extinction.

And nature shows that it is possible for species to thrive when as little as 1% of the population actively reproduce. Just look at a beehive or an anthill

 

[David Brider]

Well first a start, if everyone was gay, then that lifestyle choice would result in the extinction of mankind.

Being gay is neither a lifestyle nor a choice.

How many more times does this need to be said? People don't choose to be gay.

 

[KCKID]

Our problem is overpopulation, not extinction.

And yet these folks who desire that more and more babies be born into the world seem to be wearing blinders when it comes to the issue of overpopulation. They appear to desire a world that resembles an overcrowded fish tank. Why? Maybe I'm being selfish but I'd prefer that the hoards of people that have crowded into my city in recent times would go away.

Something else. It's my understanding that few will be 'saved', from a Christian/Bible perspective. If that be the case, then why in God's name do these folks want more and more people to be 'lost'? Does any of this make sense? The world has no need of MORE people!

We're supposed to be talking logic here but Star Trek's Mr. Spock would cringe at the lack of logic displayed on this thread if he were here.

 

[Yahya Snow]

Some chruches allow same sex marriage. What is the ratio of churches pro/against? Anybody know?

I would imagine much more churches are against it but it would be interesting to know how many are pro same sex marriage. I wonder if these churches cite any Biblical scripture to support their views.

Is there any Biblical scripture the anti-same sex marriage Christians quote? If so, which, I would like to peruse through it. PM with it, if you like.#

Thanks

Peace

 

[valuecard]

Who told you that homosexuals disproportionately represent in hospitals? I'd like to see the evidence please.

Reuters is reporting on the latest release from the Centers for Disease Control on Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Nationwide, STDs are skyrocketing. While the full report shows increases all across the country in many demographics, some of the worst are very interesting.
The Reuters article says this:

Syphilis has increased each year since 2000 — its rate is up 81 percent — with gay and bisexual men representing 65 percent of cases, the CDC said.
​

This, when homosexuals only make up 2.9% of the population. The implications are staggering: 2.9% of the population is responsible for 65% of Syphilis cases. You do the math.
But syph wasn’t the only area where homosexuals had vastly disproportionate infection rates.
With gonorrhea, homosexual men were four times more likely to have the disease than heterosexual men (36% versus 9%).
And according to the CDC, some 72% of male AIDS cases are linked to homosexual behavior

I could go on and on, but face facts guys, the statistics on STD's are HEAVILY against homosexual behaviour. Again this is one of many factors, which SHOULD turn a reasoning person away from being in favour such a perverse course of lifestyle, nevertheless, its like the moth to the flame, some people never learn until they get burned...

 

[valuecard]

Also, some more stats for you to consider, regarding lesbians...

Surveys of lesbians that did not have heterosexual control groups have raised the possibility that morbidity is greater among lesbians than among heterosexual women: lesbians have a higher rate of nulliparity and late parity3,4 (increasing their risks of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer) and a higher mean body mass index13 (possibly increasing their risks of breast and endometrial cancer, heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes). In studies that did not use probability samples or heterosexual control groups, lesbians and bisexual women have also had higher rates of cigarette smoking,3,4,5 alcohol consumption,5,6 illicit drug use,3,4,5,6,7 and unsafe sex8,9,10,11 than heterosexual women.

Once again the statistics are CLEARLY painting homosexuality as a detremental lifestyle. Why would one choose such a wayward path??

This is from

Use of preventive health behaviors by lesbian, bisexual, and heterosexual women

 

[KCKID]

Some churches allow same sex marriage. What is the ratio of churches pro/against? Anybody know?

I have no idea.

I would imagine much more churches are against it but it would be interesting to know how many are pro same sex marriage. I wonder if these churches cite any Biblical scripture to support their views.

Probably the scripture that references the 'love' command, the one that encompasses all of the law and the prophets.

Is there any Biblical scripture the anti-same sex marriage Christians quote? If so, which, I would like to peruse through it. PM with it, if you like.

Just look for the text in Leviticus that sits right next to another text pertaining to the 'putting down' of disobedient children and a whole slew of other bizarre laws. Single out and focus on the 'man lying' text and ignore all the rest like the rest of us do.

 

[KCKID]

Reuters is reporting on the latest release from the Centers for Disease Control on Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Nationwide, STDs are skyrocketing. While the full report shows increases all across the country in many demographics, some of the worst are very interesting.
The Reuters article says this:

Syphilis has increased each year since 2000 — its rate is up 81 percent — with gay and bisexual men representing 65 percent of cases, the CDC said.
​

This, when homosexuals only make up 2.9% of the population. The implications are staggering: 2.9% of the population is responsible for 65% of Syphilis cases. You do the math.
But syph wasn’t the only area where homosexuals had vastly disproportionate infection rates.
With gonorrhea, homosexual men were four times more likely to have the disease than heterosexual men (36% versus 9%).
And according to the CDC, some 72% of male AIDS cases are linked to homosexual behavior

I could go on and on, but face facts guys, the statistics on STD's are HEAVILY against homosexual behaviour. Again this is one of many factors, which SHOULD turn a reasoning person away from being in favour such a perverse course of lifestyle, nevertheless, its like the moth to the flame, some people never learn until they get burned...

An academic appraisal of a subject needs to be devoid of personal touches, valuecard. Just thought I'd mention that.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To KCKID,

Probably the scripture that references the 'love' command, the one that encompasses all of the law and the prophets.

How? How could one love one’s neighbour if they were of the opposite sex to ones sexual orientation?

 

[KCKID]

Also, some more stats for you to consider, regarding lesbians...

Surveys of lesbians that did not have heterosexual control groups have raised the possibility that morbidity is greater among lesbians than among heterosexual women: lesbians have a higher rate of nulliparity and late parity3,4 (increasing their risks of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer) and a higher mean body mass index13 (possibly increasing their risks of breast and endometrial cancer, heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes). In studies that did not use probability samples or heterosexual control groups, lesbians and bisexual women have also had higher rates of cigarette smoking,3,4,5 alcohol consumption,5,6 illicit drug use,3,4,5,6,7 and unsafe sex8,9,10,11 than heterosexual women.

Once again the statistics are CLEARLY painting homosexuality as a detremental lifestyle. Why would one choose such a wayward path??

This is from

Use of preventive health behaviors by lesbian, bisexual, and heterosexual women

Ditto as above.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To KCKID,

An academic appraisal of a subject needs to be devoid of personal touches, valuecard. Just thought I'd mention that.

Which is why valuecard made such an academic appraisal devoid of personal touches.

 

[KCKID]

To KCKID,
How? How could one love one’s neighbour if they were of the opposite sex to ones sexual orientation?

We're talking about treating everyone with respect and dignity (love) ...not having sex with them!

Did someone spike your tea?

 

[KCKID]

To KCKID,
Which is why valuecard made such an academic appraisal devoid of personal touches.

I bolded his 'personal touch'.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To KCKID,

...not having sex with them!

So the homosexual and heterosexual is irrelevant. If you are talking about homosexual then you a specifying a sexual preference and its a sexual attraction not one of similar hobbies or political views.

The Bible however including Jesus NT teaching excludes and condemnes same sex sexual relations, if you dont think it does dont expect we can see what it says about love either, we will simply deal with people who are open to see all of what the Biblical testimony says.