• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Indiana won't recognize same-sex marriages

Your honor I rest my case.:2wave:

You rest your case on what? That procreation isn't a requirement for marriage? If so, then you HAVE NO CASE! Nuff said.

Procreation is NOT a requirement for marriage, therefore the fact two gay people cannot have children without outside help is IRRELEVANT! What don't you get about your IRRELEVANT comment?

You might as well be arguing that since someone doesn't like vanilla ice cream that they can't be married.
 
If our whole population was gay in short order we would cease to exist........

And banning SSM wouldn't solve that problem ANYWAY because whether SSM is legal or NOT, they are STILL GAY! You are the king of irrelevant comments about SSM.
 
If our whole population was gay in short order we would cease to exist........

That's a fun alternate universe to think about but can we stay in this one? Gay marriage is not going to reduce global population.
 
If our whole population was gay in short order we would cease to exist........

Since gay people do not 'produce' gay children generally....but straight people do (at least in higher percentages), maybe we should make marriage for straight people illegal?
 
Because with a few exceptions marriage was established for a man and woman who could.

And as we have established, gay people can, so I will wait anxiously for your endorsement of SSM...
 
But you've already admitted that it's ok for people who can't procreate to marry each other. And you're admitting it again in this post, those "exceptions."

If you know anything about Navy Pride....you know that his positions always have numerous asterisks involved.
 
No, this shows that your argument is broken and as of now you can think of no way to repair it.

And your non-answer demonstrates continued lack of understanding of the topic at hand. Would you like to take another go at it, or shall I continue to point out that you don't know what you are talking about?
 
They will...just give it time.

Nationwide, same sex marriage recognition is inevitable.

Just like slavery and no voting for women and a bunch of other ridiculous notions eventually fell by the way side...this will as well.

Guaranteed.
 
If our whole population was gay in short order we would cease to exist........

Not true. This is proven by the very fact that gay people now have children they raise without adopting children that were "created" by opposite sex couples, either that they couldn't or wouldn't take care of. We have technology, including IVF, surrogacy, egg donation, and sperm donation. But on top of this, gay people still know where babies come from. It is not impossible for them to have sex with someone of the opposite sex and get that person pregnant. Heck, opposite sex couples have even been known to do this.
 
Back
Top Bottom