Figure what ? how do i figure it's physiologically wrong, it's an exit port not made to have things penetrate it, do a little read up on it.
Anybody can make it sound ok, but does'nt mean it is.
Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as absolute or objective morality; relative morality is all we have.
I don't think that position would stand up in a court room ,how can you use it here
If I kill your family and steal your goods and claim a relativistic mindset ,will you accept that as justifiable reasoning. I will bet you would think it's wrong, regardless of the fact I claim there is no right or wrong and felt it was right to harm your family
Who are you to want to impose your views on people who agree with me? Who are you to impose your views on people who do believe in an absolute morality, but also believe that morality allows same-sex marriage.
If you hold to that position, will you also hold to it if your child grows up and kills someone and you turn to him and say ,son that was wrong and he says, you told me everything is relative. That means there is no right or wrong so do what you will.
Regardless of your personal feelings on homosexuality, given that same-sex-parented families exist and will continue to exist whatever happens with the law, why would you be opposed to normal legal protections for what is most definitely a family unit?
As much as you philosphize this thing and spew your politcal correctness and relative garbage, it's still unnatural and immoral and physiologically wrong.
A child could figure this out if he had the knowledge of human anatomy, it's sad some adults are just so philosophical they become clouded to the truth.
IOW, your main objections to same-sex marriage aren't related to the immediate issue at hand, but what you think that same-sex marriage might lead to? If your mind could be eased that allowing same-sex couples to marry wouldn't "open a pandora's box", then would you consider it societally acceptable? Is that a fair assessment?
Think for moment the state of our society if gay life was permitted and endorsed fully and completely.
It would sure aid in the over population crisis.
50 years ago, it was considered societally acceptable to have the "coloured" people drink out of a different water fountain. Is that society really the one you want to aspire to be like?
Hardly the same thing, but spew your poor examples anyways.
There's lots of evidence about the long-term effect of same-sex marriages on children: being raised in a loving home is good for kids, regardless of the orientation of the parents; being raised in a troubled home is bad for kids, regardless of the orientation of the parents.
I think it may be healthy in some cases where love and nurture is present.
If that's all you choose to read while excluding the articles that clearly state the contrary and psychological effects of children having to daddies, or 2 mommies.
Do you think that making life difficult for same-sex parents by denying them and their families the usual rights and benefits of law helps or hinders their ability their ability to provide a loving home for their children?
I understand we can't deny them equal rights,but can't that same line of reasoning be used to those who want to have sex with animals, incest, etc.
Do you think they should be excluded for wanting to express themselves freely.
Do you comprehend where this could lead, we give rights to women to abort babies, euthansia, same sex marriage, what is next for the next group of people who arise from the miniority wings and claim to be entitled to equal rights.
Does anybody consider where this can lead, or are they wilfully ignorant
It is an acceptable practice, so why is this an issue?
It's acceptable to those who I think ease their weary and guilty conscience by endorsing such unnatural practice so as not to feel guilty or condemned about their own immoral practices
How exactly do you think that creating a lifetime commitment through marriage is living "just in the feeling of the moment
To be honest ,I think that it becomes more of a diligent pursuit to propagate the freedom to express the lifestyle than it is to actually live it. It becomes a cause more than a lifestyle.
I have been to a gay parade, just to witness the antics and it is nothing more than an arrogant expression of sexual perversion.
People want to be gay and love the same sex, fine, but when you watch men dressing like women and taking on feminine roles, wearing high heels and women taking on a role as a male dominent, it;s just a contridiction of terms and quite amusing to watch.
Looking into that behavior one see's the confusion and disorder among such practices.
God made man and women, yet gay couples always have a dominent and a passive which is seemingly clear they are resorting back to an order that is obviously natural.
Why is that.
Is anyone gay that could shed some light on this, why do they resort back to a natural order of role playing.