Homosexual behaviour widespread in animals according to new study

reply to post by grapesofraft


which is why secular religion is common.

reply to post by Billy t Hill


Nobody is saying gays should not be equally protected or treated as second class citizens. The problem is you shouldnt redifine marriage just because one group decides they have a right.

Marriage is defined as being between 1 man and 1 woman. If they want the equivalent then create something new and call it something different.

reply to post by GeeGee


It is our ability to set up moral laws and codes of conduct. THAT is what separates us from animals. Animals kill, so by your logic, its ok for me to kill also. I mean we are animals too.....right? So if i like your spouse and prove to be stronger than you. Then its ok for me to take them, kill your offspring and substitute my own?

No, I should think not. Man is set high above the animals. Yes, we are made of dirt. Yes, we do share the same planet. But to reduce us down to an animalistic character. Sorry, I don't buy into that train of thought.

Dogs eat there own vomit. Should we?

Just because animals go after same sex partners doesn't mean its ok or natural. Especially for us humans.

id like to mention its not just marriage, but the rights that go along with it that gays are fighting for. this, of course, includes adoption, which should be a hot button issue in this thread. but still, people would vote against anything giving homosexuals these rights.

reply to post by Staringintoinfinity


parenting and sex are two very different things. if me and my sister together bring up a young child, does that make us sexual partners NO
so where do you get off saying it is the same thing.

Get Real People, stop copying what you hear and think for yourself.

This article means Nothing, and is not Proof of Gay behavior in animals!!!

Move On!!!

reply to post by Kevin_X1


Californians already voted gay marriage down. If it is left to a vote there is no way it will pass in the near future.

Originally posted by Kevin_X1
reply to post by grapesofraft

 

which is why secular religion is common.

What do you mean by this... why does secularity have anyting to do with it?

reply to post by Kevin_X1


I do not think gay people should have a right to adopt. Kids need a mother and a father because they each contribute different things to the childs life experience.

There's a guy in Arizona who married his horse who may disagree.

Originally posted by grapesofraft

Originally posted by Kevin_X1
reply to post by grapesofraft

 

which is why secular religion is common.

What do you mean by this... why does secularity have anyting to do with it?

\

i thought that would be ovbiouse? a secular religion is one with many different parts, like a country. and like a country a sect can have its own laws. so, gays could potentially, and may already, have a sect that accepts them. this seems pretty christian to me, although im not much of a christian

reply to post by Billy t Hill


So you are also pro guy-horse marriage?

reply to post by grapesofraft


i would have to say the same thing, coming from the gut. but i am sure two fathers could raise a child fine, just like one father could. probably even a straight child.

reply to post by Kevin_X1


I know there are sects of Christianity that allow for gay couples. The thing is to do that you just have to ignore parts of the Bible, and if you do that then why believe in any of it.

Why would a gay person want to worship a God that is pro-stoning them and pro-killing them? Not that i agree, but it is clearly what the Bible says.

I'm going to agree with grapesoraft on one thing. If marriage is a Christian thing then leave it at that but the social consequences, pensions, partnership rights etc should be equal for all citizens, regardless of sex, religion , race or creed. Otherwise we are just being bigots.

oh sorry i meant sectular, long day

reply to post by grapesofraft


No, I was being facesyious to someone else, but theres no font for sarcasm. Sorry about that.

reply to post by Kevin_X1


I am sure they could raise it, but not optimally. Children were designed to have a father and a mother.

reply to post by grapesofraft


ohh no i do not want to go into religion. there are so many interpretations of the bible, so many versions, and so much that is untrue about the bible. its just a heavily over-edited book, and sects are probably leening more towards classical tradition by becoming more liberal. it is more about kindness, love and mild worship then anything.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Kevin_X1

 

Well if you are for gay marriage you should at least be for some of them. Do they deserve less rights than you do? Can you say they were not born loving the way they do? Do you have any right to tell them who they can love?

Because those are the same questions you are giving to try to justify gay marriage.

Why shouldnt a man be allowed to marry 8 wives, or 2 men and 3 wives, etc?

Does this question really have anything to do with sexual preferences? What do you think, should it be allowed.. desided by religion.. public vote perhaps?

Why shouldnt someone be allowed to marry an animal?

I already stated this on my previous post.. you can't really have a decent answer from a dog to say 'I do' when the priest (or whom ever) asks if you (human) do wish to marry this another human.. can't speak it out, can't write it either.. can't even use sign language very efficiently.. can it?

Why shouldnt a grown man be able to consenually marry his father?

Would the problem be he being his father - or just being a man/gay?

Why shouldnt a 50 year old man be able to marry a 15 year old girl?

Most countries have a law stating that you have to be 16 or 18 .. as in grown up to get married - so nothing to do with sexuality really. As soon as she gets old enough, it's ok by law - no matter how ethically unacceptable some of us feel it to be.

reply to post by Billy t Hill


Thanks Billy. I am all for the whole benefits thing, etc. It is just that Marriage was more of a religious concept so it should have never been put in the hands of government in the first place.