Yes for Both
For marriage I don't see any reason as to why to gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married. Being gay isn't really a choice I think. I believe your born attracted to a certain sex, and your ability to marry shouldn't be taken just because your not attracted to the opposite sex.
I say yes to adoption because I don't think it should matter who raises you whether they're a man and woman, or two of either. As long as they're people who are smart and responsible enough to raise a child, I see no problem with it.
For marriage I don't see any reason as to why to gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married. Being gay isn't really a choice I think. I believe your born attracted to a certain sex, and your ability to marry shouldn't be taken just because your not attracted to the opposite sex.
I say yes to adoption because I don't think it should matter who raises you whether they're a man and woman, or two of either. As long as they're people who are smart and responsible enough to raise a child, I see no problem with it.
FUCKING MAGNETS EVERYWHERE IN THIS BITCH
Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
True enough, but what I was getting at was that the primary goal of human partnership is reproduction. Love and devotion are unquantifiable concepts, and I prefer to think of them as null, although I am a member of a very tiny minority in that belief.
If we assume nihilistic values (or rather lack of) to be true, then there are still some big "rational" arguments that stand in the way of the denial of gay marriage. The main thing being is that marriage provides countless benefits - denying marriage due to a completely unrelated matter of sexual orientation is absurd and is against the constitution - all men are treated equally before the law. Homosexuals do not infringe upon the rights of others - yet they are stripped of potential benefits. Contradiction?
Then again, a nihilist would argue that human rights are bullshit and that there should be no such thing as marriage, and that we should breed in accordance to eugenics. But that's beside the point.
Besides, it economically makes sense to allow gay marriage and adaption - less money will be spent on orphans if they get adopted by the gay couples.
Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
Again, you bring up a good point, but there isn't enough research on the subject to tip the scales either way-- I just prefer to play it on the safe side. And one example (especially in elementary school-- I don't even think I knew what a homosexual was until the 6th grade) does not an argument make. I suppose if nobody found out it would work out just fine, but alas, once it got out it would spread like wildfire in middle/high school.
"That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger." -Nietzsche
tl;dr: deprived is spergin'
Originally Posted by Deprived
"That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger." -Nietzsche
What about extreme brain damage?
i have a totally post modern tattoo of a scalene triangle.
<DeadorK> fair maiden<DeadorK> if the cum is going to be in your mouth
<DeadorK> it shall be in mine as well
Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
True enough, but what I was getting at was that the primary goal of human partnership is reproduction. Love and devotion are unquantifiable concepts, and I prefer to think of them as null, although I am a member of a very tiny minority in that belief.
Quantifiable, not quantifiable...why care?...They are REAL in a sense that they effect the individuals and, in turn, society. Suffering is also not quantifiable, but a society functions worse and worse the more of that stuff is present.
If, on the other hand, you care none for society or human suffering, why even bother trying to tip the scales either way?
As long as marriage bears tangible, practical benefits (tax cuts, ability to marry someone from overseas thus granting them citizenship, etc) it should not be denied to any adult citizens.
Last edited by Odlov; Dec 5, 2009 at 11:32 PM.
