To reiterate, and to perhaps spark further debate:
I would NOT vote to legalize same sex marriages.
This is because I do not believe that the government has any business making any decision in a religious matter, which is in my mind solely what marriages should be about.
My position is that the only remedy to the issue is to separate the legal aspect of marriage from the religious aspect. Let the various religious institutions hash out which of their number will allow gay marriages, and those who do not wish to acknowledge such do not have to.
On the legal side, allow a civil union of some sort for everyone, and if Jerry and others who believe as he can convince enough people, make it exclusive to raising children.
Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
Then we may just have to agree to disagree here. Not a bad discussion at all.Originally Posted by Jerry
If this is true then one of the following must also be true:Originally Posted by Jerry
-'Married' couples without children or 'married' couples who cannot have them are not actually 'married'
-They are, but you do not believe they should be recognized as such
Assuming the latter is true, that simply highlights the inconsistency in believing that only those who have children are entitled.
The 'exceptions' to the rule exhibit the rule's inconsistency and unfairness.Originally Posted by Jerry
They can be written straight out or in the manner I typed. The latter used to appear on the SATs, before the College Board eliminated them.Originally Posted by Jerry
While I disagree with its conclusion, this at least makes your argument consistent, and I respect that.Originally Posted by Jerry
Thank you and likewise. These gay marriage debates are getting rather stale for me as well, I've popped around internet forums for 5 or so years and it is one of those topics that I think of 'retiring' from. Good debate thoughOriginally Posted by Jerry