2) HOW can you even say this when the very part of it we are discussing is gays not being included in marriage... although that is not only a Christian thing... Christian views were the main factor in making this take place. AND PLEASE BE REAL. The anti-poligamy laws are COMPLETELY derived off the mainstream Christian religion... these are not the only examples either. You sir are dishonest.
3) government defines marriage, just because the government did define it doesn't make it separate from discussion. No one has the right to define it or at least define who can and cannot participate in it.
4) something totally new and different. See you are revealing your bias towards the establishment of marriage... this is your cultural concept, of course its new a different is does not follow societal norms like marriage does, it doesn't discriminate like marriage does.
2.) easy because i acknowledge the facts sorry i like facts not opinions and assumptions, im not dishonest about anything and you just might want to check history and who practiced/practices polygamy LMAO
SOrry I have facts you have opinion nothing dishonest about that at all. Let me know when that fact changes.
3.) weird i didnt say any of this, another meaningless left field point. Government has a right to define LEGAL marriage and we are the government along with are rights freedoms and laws.
4.) wrong again it would 100% be something new and different by definition, there is no biased in that, i notice how you ignore facts a lot
DO you have anything at all relevant to the discussion at hand? anything that says we shouldn't grant equal rights to gays?
2) WHAT? I have checked history... tell me what history tells on the banishment of Polygamy? You tell me to look at who practiced polygamy, that is specifically why I said MAINSTREAM Christian religion. You are simply wrong about this America in it's early times was a predominately protestant country and it was modeled that a marriage could only be between one and one women. Polygamy was banned due to outcry of the protestants saying it was a barbaric practice. Okay maybe I was wrong, you arn't dishonest, your are just completely ignorant of the subject, which is okay I'd be glad to teach you.
3) See, I don't think the government has the right to define LEGAL marriage when it excludes two consenting individuals.
4) No, the concept of marriage in this country has been created on who and who cannot participate in it and what kind of benefits and perks is established from it. This establishment is a bias. The government should not be biased on what Legal marriage is, a LEGAL marriage can only be defined(meaning defining what kind of relationship is eligible) by the two or more consenting individuals, otherwise you and the government is being discriminatory.
This is relevant, like I have mentioned before.
Im starting to get the feeling you arn't really fit to debate this with me, because you can't even provide any supposed facts yourself.