The LOGIC as to why gay marriage should be ILLEGAL

[CoderHead]

Here's logical:
The problem is that the system should have tiers. One tier is heterosexual couples that might soon have children. Another is other couples. And a third is those who have their own children. Every single one of those tiers is logical.


Using any of these division and excluding the others is likewise logical, and is based on jurisprudence, not logic. But then, you wouldn't be able to call someone illogical.

Here's logical: you're either married or you're not. A tiered marriage system? Really? Even if you go that route, why can't homosexual couples be one of those tiers? How is it logical to exclude them?

You, hetero couple with no kids, you're in this tier.
You, hetero couple with kids, you're in this tier.
You, homo coup...wait a second, get outta here!

You just enjoy typing out "jurisprudence," don't you?

 

[MoonLancer]

Here's logical:
The problem is that the system should have tiers. One tier is heterosexual couples that might soon have children. Another is other couples. And a third is those who have their own children. Every single one of those tiers is logical.


Using any of these division and excluding the others is likewise logical, and is based on jurisprudence, not logic. But then, you wouldn't be able to call someone illogical.

Why not intact forced sterilization of 'invalids.' I mean you don't want retards having kids. think of the children. Oh i i couldn't tell was this your definition of marriage?

 

[Freodin]

Here's logical:
The problem is that the system should have tiers. One tier is heterosexual couples that might soon have children. Another is other couples. And a third is those who have their own children. Every single one of those tiers is logical.

Well, that is not "logical", but reasonable.

And I agree that it would indeed be reasonable to introduce such "tiers" - or even more simple: provide different advantages for couples and children.

Using any of these division and excluding the others is likewise logical, and is based on jurisprudence, not logic. But then, you wouldn't be able to call someone illogical.

If it is not based on logic then how is it logical.

Sorry, but you are contradicting yourself... and that IS illogical. Perhaps it was just a mistake, was it?

 

[JustMeSee]

I'm sure you take good care of your child. That's not what I'm getting at.
You have to think about the cruelty of the world the child will have to face once she gets away from the safety of your home. Unless you plan on keeping her sheltered all her childhood once she gets in school and the kids find out or other parents find out people are very cruel. This is all I'm concerned about, is her.I hope it doesn't happen.

This is the EXACT argument my parents received from family and 'friends' when they were pursuing marriage. . . Yet, another parallel to interracial marriages.

Can't you see that you are negatively contributing to the discrimination when you make such statements?

Society is moving towards greater tolerance of homosexuality. You can continue to fight it in vain, stand on the side lines, or embrace it.

Children are resilient. At one time or another, most of them experience discrimination or bullying for the most insignificant reasons. You can't protect them from everything. The best thing possible is to encourage them to embrace positive people, and ignore the bigots.

 

[Chazemataz]

Actually, the most logical thing to do would be to remove the word "marriage" from all legal documents and replace it with the word "civil partnership" and make it open for any two people and their potential children, period. Marriage would therefore be a religious institution, and you could say you are "married" or "partners" or "girlfriend/boyfriend", whatever floats your boat but legally it would be "civil partnership".

However, there isn't really any politician brave enough to attempt this much-needed reform.

 

[nhisname]

So...people who have the potential to make a child who will have a big nose, or freckles, or a stutter should be prevented from having children? People are cruel, regardless. If they want to find something to pick on, they'll do it without your help. I think your view is naive and condescending.

Are you serious? The way a child looks has absolutely nothing to do with this...I'm talking about the parentage of a child who had no say so in the choices the parents made but they are the ones who will have to endure the rudeness of society..

 

[JustMeSee]

Has Fated given his definition of marriage yet?

 

[Freodin]

Are you serious? The way a child looks has absolutely nothing to do with this...I'm talking about the parentage of a child who had no say so in the choices the parents made but they are the ones who will have to endure the rudeness of society..

The child never has anything to say in the choices its parents made. And these choices can be quite varied, and can result in as varied "rude" results for the child.

But you still haven´t answered the question... what do you propose to do against that?

 

[CoderHead]

Are you serious? The way a child looks has absolutely nothing to do with this...I'm talking about the parentage of a child who had no say so in the choices the parents made but they are the ones who will have to endure the rudeness of society..

Are you serious? The way a child looks earns unwarranted ridicule and harassment much more frequently than their parentage. Your argument is that a child with two mommies or two daddies is going to be subject to ridicule, so you shouldn't do that. My argument is that a child who interacts with other children is going to be subject to ridicule, regardless. That's why some people with heterosexual parents have identity issues and fight depression through adolescence.

How many children do you know who do have a say-so in the choices their parents made? Think about it. I'll wait.

 

[nhisname]

This is the EXACT argument my parents received from family and 'friends' when they were pursuing marriage. . . Yet, another parallel to interracial marriages.

Can't you see that you are negatively contributing to the discrimination when you make such statements?

Society is moving towards greater tolerance of homosexuality. You can continue to fight it in vain, stand on the side lines, or embrace it.

Children are resilient. At one time or another, most of them experience discrimination or bullying for the most insignificant reasons. You can't protect them from everything. The best thing possible is to encourage them to embrace positive people, and ignore the bigots.

What I'm telling you is that some things will not be accepted in society, why why bring a child into something that is going to be difficult for them. Life is hard enough for children why bring them into something that you know will harm them, only for the sake of the parents need for a baby. Sorry but you want a perfect world and that's not possible.

 

[MoonLancer]

What I'm telling you is that some things will not be accepted in society, why why bring a child into something that is going to be difficult for them. Life is hard enough for children why bring them into something that you know will harm them, only for the sake of the parents need for a baby. Sorry but you want a perfect world and that's not possible.

So ugly people shouldn't have kids then? Its almost assured that the resulting kid will be ugly and teased.

 

[MoonLancer]

It has already been pointed out your augment has been used before when dealing with mixed marriage. I find that very sad.

 

[JustMeSee]

Simple definition for the purpose of this discussion:

Marriage is the legal contractual union of two consenting parties.

---
People get married for a variety of reasons. Some do it as an act of love and commitment. Others do it for financial reasons. Some do it because it is part of their religious faith. Or a combination of these things. The government is not in the business of dictating the reasoning of the couples.

When I applied for a marriage license, they asked few personal questions, none of which involved our motivations for getting married.

 

[cantata]

What I'm telling you is that some things will not be accepted in society, why why bring a child into something that is going to be difficult for them. Life is hard enough for children why bring them into something that you know will harm them, only for the sake of the parents need for a baby. Sorry but you want a perfect world and that's not possible.

I got teased a lot at primary and secondary school for being clever. How terribly cruel it was of my parents to teach me to read before I started school.

 

[CoderHead]

What I'm telling you is that some things will not be accepted in society, why why bring a child into something that is going to be difficult for them. Life is hard enough for children why bring them into something that you know will harm them, only for the sake of the parents need for a baby. Sorry but you want a perfect world and that's not possible.

False assumption #1: Society will never accept homosexuals.
False assumption #2: Children of same-sex couples are inherently placed into harm.
False assumption #3: Same-sex couples want or need babies for different reasons than heterosexual couples.

True assumption: As long as there are people in this world that think the way you do, it will never be a perfect world.

Using your reasoning, since life is so hard anyway, nobody should bring children into the world - especially minority ethnic groups or anybody who lives in countries that aren't as developed as (for example) the United States. It's absurd. Please think about what you're saying.

 

[CoderHead]

Marriage is the legal contractual union of two consenting parties.

I'll go along with that. Any objections from Fated?

 

[Chazemataz]

What I'm telling you is that some things will not be accepted in society, why why bring a child into something that is going to be difficult for them. Life is hard enough for children why bring them into something that you know will harm them, only for the sake of the parents need for a baby. Sorry but you want a perfect world and that's not possible.

It's not like they're going to be running around with a tag that says "MY PARENTS ARE GAY" or something. Anyways the only regions where gays are actually openly and casually discriminated against- like mean comments to their faces discriminated- is basically the South. It happens elsewhere but it's very predominant and people go out of their way to do it in Southern states.

 

[nhisname]

Are you serious? The way a child looks earns unwarranted ridicule and harassment much more frequently than their parentage. Your argument is that a child with two mommies or two daddies is going to be subject to ridicule, so you shouldn't do that. My argument is that a child who interacts with other children is going to be subject to ridicule, regardless. That's why some people with heterosexual parents have identity issues and fight depression through adolescence.

How many children do you know who do have a say-so in the choices their parents made? Think about it. I'll wait.

This is where I think people should step up and take responsibility for their actions before going through with a decision that will have an effect on their children.
No matter how hard people want change, society just does not accept certain things.

 

[JustMeSee]

What I'm telling you is that some things will not be accepted in society, why why bring a child into something that is going to be difficult for them. Life is hard enough for children why bring them into something that you know will harm them, only for the sake of the parents need for a baby. Sorry but you want a perfect world and that's not possible.

How do you KNOW it will be difficult for them?
Why don't you address, or at least consider, the testimony of FlamingFemme? She has a school aged child that is doing quite well.

If parents gave into your logic, there would be far fewer people on the planet. Society is cruel, but people are willing to take the risk of having children.

Why not fight to change society's overall opinions towards tolerance and acceptance of differences?


Well, I am glad my parents didn't give in to concerns like yours. I wouldn't be alive today to discuss this subject.

 

[CoderHead]

This is where I think people should step up and take responsibility for their actions before going through with a decision that will have an effect on their children.

...like purposely not breeding if they're ugly? Where are you drawing the line?