I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
I was asked one non religious valid opinion to oppose gay marriage. The fact that homosexual unions are obviously and biologically different from hetero unions is enough to prevent them from being considered the same union at the legal level. The issue is that there really wasn't a legal definition for marriage until Prop 8 came along and asked the voters to decide what marriage is. However, those people had their rights as voters revoked and their beliefs ruled to be illegal because some judge wanted to ram his beliefs down everyone's throat. This case is being brought to the appeals court, and I hope to the supreme court, where the voters will have their rights re-instated and the constitutionality of state's rights being properly put back in place.As for the rest of your appeal to nature...its a fallacy. Until you add the requirement of procreation to the marriage license, you have no point with that little rant.
Last edited by digsbe; 08-04-10 at 06:13 PM.
Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
Who cares if being gay isn't "natural"? Are they people, Mr. Biologist? Does the 14th amendment not guarantee equality for all "people"? Being handicapped is not natural either, so should we prevent handicapped people from getting married too?
Read my books! http://michaelaventrella.com
It doesn't matter biologically since legally you can't infringe upon the rights of others; which includes the right to contract. There is no restriction on marriage that it be biologically viable. So we can just quit being stupid about that line.
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
Also it doesn't matter if the majority don't agree with it. The majority didn't agree with the civil rights movement, but you wouldn't say that was a bad thing would you? It was stupid to put it up to a vote anyway, it was unconstitutional, and wrong. The fact is that the government has no right to deny gays the right to marry. You have nothing but a religious argument to stand on, and that will get laughed out of court. Procreation isn't a prerequisite for marriage, and gay people can have children anyway. It may be harder but it can happen. Your trying to impose your beliefs on people, not the other way around. You could use the same argument against integration, " well I don't wanna be around black people, so we should keep Jim Crow in tact. They might think we should integrate, but they shouldn't impose their beliefs on me" The opposition to gay marriage hasn't a leg to stand on, and hopefully the courts will recognize that.
If there's a god, damn it she won't mind.
If there's a god, baby she won't mind.
his doj in the central district in 2009 compared gay marriage to pedophilia and incest
Why Does Obama Keep Flip-Flopping on Gay Marriage? - TIME