10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong

[kevbone]

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

 

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

 

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

 

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

 

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

 

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

 

07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

 

08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

 

09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

 

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans

[Nitrox]

I'd rather see a list of 10 reasons why the government should be involved in any kind of marriage.

[denalidave]

So when are you and yer boy get'n hitched, Kev? Does yer wife know about it yet???

[summitchaserCJB]

1. An action isn't made right or wrong by the majority.You should know that.

2. There are some behaviors people can elect to partake in. Being tall is not one of them. Being gay, debatabley and to some extent, is.

3. Read crazy as immoral.

4. There is a big difference between marriage between one man and one woman and one between men or women, no? Anatomical hetromorphicreciprosity is one. Ability to create children is another. Should I go on?

5. Britney Spears' degradation of marriage is unfortunate. So, why not throw the homosex on to the list?

6. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, Kev. If each gay couple is required to adopt a child then I might just go for it.

7. There is some data out there on this subject. I think it hasn't found any causal relationships.

8. no comment.

9. Same argument as the Britney Spears' argument. It's like this one "but Tommy's parents let us smoke crack!" Two wrongs don't make a right.

10. Smmiling on gay marraige is the same as driving a car. Yep. You got it.

The fact is, either you support it or you don't. I don't think any of your arguments sway people one way or the other personally.

[rob]

1. An action isn't made right or wrong by the majority.You should know that.

2. There are some behaviors people can elect to partake in. Being tall is not one of them. Being gay, debatabley and to some extent, is.

3. Read crazy as immoral.

4. There is a big difference between marriage between one man and one woman and one between men or women, no? Anatomical hetromorphicreciprosity is one. Ability to create children is another. Should I go on?

5. Britney Spears' degradation of marriage is unfortunate. So, why not throw the homosex on to the list?

6. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, Kev. If each gay couple is required to adopt a child then I might just go for it.

7. There is some data out there on this subject. I think it hasn't found any causal relationships.

8. no comment.

9. Same argument as the Britney Spears' argument. It's like this one "but Tommy's parents let us smoke crack!" Two wrongs don't make a right.

10. Smmiling on gay marraige is the same as driving a car. Yep. You got it.

The fact is, either you support it or you don't. I don't think any of your arguments sway people one way or the other personally.

 

Gay sex is not immoral. Fucking religious right wing ass cheek.

[olyclimber]

Bumper Stickers Change the World!

[summitchaserCJB]

[olyclimber]

Russian gentleman: So who is to say what is moral?

Sonja: Morality is subjective.

Russian gentleman: Subjectivity is objective.

Sonja: Moral notions imply attributes to substances which exist only in relational duality.

Russian gentleman: Not as an essential extension of ontological existence.

[denalidave]

What about Ruger, Browning, Remington, Colt & Winchester?

[eldiente]

I think what he's trying to say is that not only is he opposed to equal rights for everyone, he is also a gun touting nut job that divides his time between Everydaynodayoff.com fantasizing about shooting home invaders and CC.com spraying about his latest FA on 30 foot tall piles of grass.

 

Funny as in 50 years, (it is only a matter of time) we'll all look back the time when we denied some adults the right to marry as a dark time much in the same way we look back at the time when Women weren't allowed to vote and think, "What the hell was wrong with those people?" Well what the hell is wrong with us?

 

-Nate

[denalidave]

I happen to know a few gun-toting lesbians, who are really quite nice. Just sayin, we all come in all kinds of shapes and sizes. Whatever floats yer boat. Still undecided on the whole gay marriage thang, but it sure seems like we have much bigger problems our gubment could be wasting it's time and our money on...

[rob]

Still undecided on the whole gay marriage thang, but it sure seems like we have much bigger problems our gubment could be wasting it's time and our money on...

 

Yeah, civil rights are not very important, are they?. I can't believe the government is "wasting" so much time on this issue.

 

Any other issues you're on the fence about? Have you come to terms with that whole "civil rights" debacle from the 60's, or does that still sting, too?

[summitchaserCJB]

I think what he's trying to say is that not only is he opposed to equal rights for everyone, he is also a gun touting nut job that divides his time between Everydaynodayoff.com fantasizing about shooting home invaders and CC.com spraying about his latest FA on 30 foot tall piles of grass.

 

Funny as in 50 years, (it is only a matter of time) we'll all look back the time when we denied some adults the right to marry as a dark time much in the same way we look back at the time when Women weren't allowed to vote and think, "What the hell was wrong with those people?" Well what the hell is wrong with us?

 

-Nate

you guys are pretty intolerant of the second amendment. Double standard much?

[summitchaserCJB]

What about Ruger, Browning, Remington, Colt & Winchester?

I personally don't own any of those but their reputation is very solid.

[Crillz]

I think what he's trying to say is that not only is he opposed to equal rights for everyone, he is also a gun touting nut job that divides his time between Everydaynodayoff.com fantasizing about shooting home invaders and CC.com spraying about his latest FA on 30 foot tall piles of grass.

 

Funny as in 50 years, (it is only a matter of time) we'll all look back the time when we denied some adults the right to marry as a dark time much in the same way we look back at the time when Women weren't allowed to vote and think, "What the hell was wrong with those people?" Well what the hell is wrong with us?

 

-Nate

you guys are pretty intolerant of the second amendment. Double standard much?

 

Just no tolerance for dumbfucks.

[eldiente]

You seem to be intolerant of the Fourteenth Amendment so I guess were even. (Full disclosure, gun owner myself. Mossberg makes a reliable firearm) Gun nuts everywhere like to cite the 2nd Amendment as a call to arms to protect citizen rights from intrusive governments. Citizens rights indeed, like the right to marry whoever you want? Sounds like something worth taking up arms to me. Thankfully the LGBT community is passive so you've got nothing to worry about. (till 2012 when the Supreme Court legalizes it.)

 

 

 

[rob]

Also a gun owner. Who has a problem with the 2nd amendment? I don't. And even if I did, at least I don't have a problem with civil rights. At least the libtards want to take EVERYONE's guns away, not just gay people's.

 

Glue sniffer.

[denalidave]

Still undecided on the whole gay marriage thang, but it sure seems like we have much bigger problems our gubment could be wasting it's time and our money on...

 

Yeah, civil rights are not very important, are they?. I can't believe the government is "wasting" so much time on this issue.

 

Any other issues you're on the fence about? Have you come to terms with that whole "civil rights" debacle from the 60's, or does that still sting, too?

No, that is not what I meant. I believe we should all have the same civil rights, including gays. However, I'm not convinced marriage is the best compromise. Why not do civil unions that offer the same benefits (more/less)? This could keep the right wing nuts happy (a bit anyway) and also give the libs the rights they want/deserve. As I stated, I'm am undecided on the marriage factor, but not for reasons of straight get this, gays don't. It is not as black and white, from my perspective... There has to be some compromises on both sides (IMO). Seems boths sides almost always have an all or nothing attitude, especially the right wing.

[rob]

Still undecided on the whole gay marriage thang, but it sure seems like we have much bigger problems our gubment could be wasting it's time and our money on...

 

Yeah, civil rights are not very important, are they?. I can't believe the government is "wasting" so much time on this issue.

 

Any other issues you're on the fence about? Have you come to terms with that whole "civil rights" debacle from the 60's, or does that still sting, too?

No, that is not what I meant. I believe we should all have the same civil rights, including gays. However, I'm not convinced marriage is the best compromise. Why not do civil unions that offer the same benefits (more/less)? This could keep the right wing nuts happy (a bit anyway) and also give the libs the rights they want/deserve. As I stated, I'm am undecided on the marriage factor, but not for reasons of straight get this, gays don't. It is not as black and white, from my perspective... There has to be some compromises on both sides (IMO). Seems boths sides almost always have an all or nothing attitude, especially the right wing.

 

 

OH! I get it now. Separate, but equal.

 

Wait, didn't we try that already?

 

By that logic, we should also make inter-racial couples have "civil unions." And when women vote, we shouldn't call it "voting."

 

That way we can at least keep the rightwing nutjobs happy.

Edited August 23, 2010 by rob

[Nitrox]

Rob, if two women get married how will the court know which one to fuck when they get divorced?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[rob]

 

Good point. Honestly, I'm with you. How did government get mixed up in this shit to begin with?

[summitchaserCJB]

You seem to be intolerant of the Fourteenth Amendment so I guess were even. (Full disclosure, gun owner myself. Mossberg makes a reliable firearm) Gun nuts everywhere like to cite the 2nd Amendment as a call to arms to protect citizen rights from intrusive governments. Citizens rights indeed, like the right to marry whoever you want? Sounds like something worth taking up arms to me. Thankfully the LGBT community is passive so you've got nothing to worry about. (till 2012 when the Supreme Court legalizes it.)

 

 

I'm gonna ignore the rest of your post because you are a fellow mossberg owner. Glocks are perfect as well.

We aren't guaranteed a right to marry whoever we want. That is why people can't marry trees or dogs. That's why were in this mess in the first place.

dangit I'm trying to upload a pic of my glock and it isn't working. Oh well. Back to drinking a beer.

[rob]

You seem to be intolerant of the Fourteenth Amendment so I guess were even. (Full disclosure, gun owner myself. Mossberg makes a reliable firearm) Gun nuts everywhere like to cite the 2nd Amendment as a call to arms to protect citizen rights from intrusive governments. Citizens rights indeed, like the right to marry whoever you want? Sounds like something worth taking up arms to me. Thankfully the LGBT community is passive so you've got nothing to worry about. (till 2012 when the Supreme Court legalizes it.)

 

 

I'm gonna ignore the rest of your post because you are a fellow mossberg owner. Glocks are perfect as well.

We aren't guaranteed a right to marry whoever we want. That is why people can't marry trees or dogs. That's why were in this mess in the first place.

dangit I'm trying to upload a pic of my glock and it isn't working. Oh well. Back to drinking a beer.

 

OMG, Brilliant! Dogs and trees can't vote, either, so I guess gays shouldn't be able to do that, either.

 

You're smart.

[summitchaserCJB]

Now you're talking! But really, marriage is different from those actions IMO. But obviously people have fundamental differences of opinion on this and all issues.

[denalidave]

Still undecided on the whole gay marriage thang, but it sure seems like we have much bigger problems our gubment could be wasting it's time and our money on...

 

Yeah, civil rights are not very important, are they?. I can't believe the government is "wasting" so much time on this issue.

 

Any other issues you're on the fence about? Have you come to terms with that whole "civil rights" debacle from the 60's, or does that still sting, too?

No, that is not what I meant. I believe we should all have the same civil rights, including gays. However, I'm not convinced marriage is the best compromise. Why not do civil unions that offer the same benefits (more/less)? This could keep the right wing nuts happy (a bit anyway) and also give the libs the rights they want/deserve. As I stated, I'm am undecided on the marriage factor, but not for reasons of straight get this, gays don't. It is not as black and white, from my perspective... There has to be some compromises on both sides (IMO). Seems boths sides almost always have an all or nothing attitude, especially the right wing.

 

 

OH! I get it now. Separate, but equal.

 

Wait, didn't we try that already?

 

By that logic, we should also make inter-racial couples have "civil unions." And when women vote, we shouldn't call it "voting."

 

That way we can at least keep the rightwing nutjobs happy.

 

 

Whatever Rob. I think is is a fair compromise to let the religious fanatics keep their sacred marriage. After all, isn't marriage a religious institution in the first place? Then again, I could care less if Billy Bob wants to marry Johnny Joe. Whatever. Yeah, seems like we do have much more pressing issues in our society that our beloved gubment could be spending it's time on. Like I said, I'm not convinced either way, but some compromises need to be made to keep the peace...