100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Same sex marriage vs interracial marriage | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
To those who are against same sex marriage, do you feel that interracial marriage should not have been legalized either? If you feel differently about both, why? because others defined race and put people in those categories based upon things they have no control over, not on actions, or preferences, or tastes,,but on BIOLOGICAL HISTORY because the product of too many interracial unions , children, prove that they are no different than intraracial unions,,,,, all that matters is man and woman, they create life, and they are the foundation to be cherished and protected,,, What about a man and woman who marry, yet don't create life? Do you feel differently about that marriage? no , the exceptions dont change the potential of the biological rule life comes from a man and a woman,, it is of great benefit to future offspring to encourage and enforce commitment between heterosexual unions for that reason children have BETTER CHANCES, FEWER OBSTACLES< when they have both parents , when they have both parts of who they are,, a male model and a female model I dont care to list the list of difficultues children from single parent homes , or fatherless homes, or motherless homes face compared to those who had the mother and father as a complete unit,,,, we can ignore it all we want by throwing out the exceptions,, but the bottom lie is there is vested interest in encouraging heterosexual and COMMITTED sexual unions that doesnt exist for homosexual unions,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't consider childless marriages the exception since so many choose not to have children, yet still marry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". That's a personal issue, though. It's no reason for two people of the same sex not to have sex or get married. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". That's a personal issue, though. It's no reason for two people of the same sex not to have sex or get married. I was explaining why a person can be opposed one kind of sexual activity but not be opposed to another kind. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". That's a personal issue, though. It's no reason for two people of the same sex not to have sex or get married. I was explaining why a person can be opposed one kind of sexual activity but not be opposed to another kind. I get why, but it's still a personal issue that doesn't affect others. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". That's a personal issue, though. It's no reason for two people of the same sex not to have sex or get married. I was explaining why a person can be opposed one kind of sexual activity but not be opposed to another kind. I get why, but it's still a personal issue that doesn't affect others. The condoning of sex between two members of the same gender is also a personal issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". That's a personal issue, though. It's no reason for two people of the same sex not to have sex or get married. I was explaining why a person can be opposed one kind of sexual activity but not be opposed to another kind. I get why, but it's still a personal issue that doesn't affect others. The condoning of sex between two members of the same gender is also a personal issue. It's more that it doesn't affect me, so if they want to have sex, why would I try to stop it? I am straight and there are some straight men who disgust me enough that the thought of sex with them makes me sick. Does that mean I think they shouldn't be able to have sex? No. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". some may have a moral issue with drinking from the same water fountain as someone that is of a different race so should there be segregated drinking fountains ================================================= Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. to pass law based on religion is creating a religious based govt. thus prohibiting some from practicing a different belief atheism may permit same sex unions or at least not prohibit them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
seems like apples to oranges to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting legal issues aside, one may have a religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two members of the same gender and, yet, not have any religious reason for being opposed to sexual activity between two people of difference "races". some may have a moral issue with drinking from the same water fountain as someone that is of a different race so should there be segregated drinking fountains ================================================= Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. to pass law based on religion is creating a religious based govt. thus prohibiting some from practicing a different belief atheism may permit same sex unions or at least not prohibit them as dodo puts it,, 'begging the question',, is this notion that disagreeing with homosexual activity has to be based on religion.... religion is an easy scapegoat, but seems to me homosexuals already ahve all t he rights anyone else has in regards to having sex and being committed to each other the only difference is the financial benefit and that could be resolved with a civil union without touching marriage, if you want to protect homosexuals rights to have a partnership so they can enjoy CIVIL rights than you can just as easily create a legally binding partnership that affords all the rights of marriage barring the expectation of consummation but the point is more about forcing the culture to equate homosexual activity with heterosexual, which is quite absurd,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To those who are against same sex marriage, do you feel that interracial marriage should not have been legalized either? If you feel differently about both, why? because others defined race and put people in those categories based upon things they have no control over, not on actions, or preferences, or tastes,,but on BIOLOGICAL HISTORY because the product of too many interracial unions , children, prove that they are no different than intraracial unions,,,,, all that matters is man and woman, they create life, and they are the foundation to be cherished and protected,,, How are they threatened because two men or two women can marry? Tell me how. They'll still have the same right to marry as they do now, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Letting others do the same doesn't mean they're not protected, they always have been and will be. how are you threatened if others are ok with having their home searched or their persons searched at an airport? immediate threat isnt the point,,,,cultural decline, cultural norms, cultural boundaries are,,,, Really? You're gonna try that argument, really? That's so entirely different it's not even funny! In that case I am threatened because I KNOW that if others keep accepting things like you describe above, they will come for me next, they always do I don't care how you wanna argue it, history proves it time and time again if you actually educated yourself. That's how I'm threatened, because once enough people consent to unlawful things it makes everyone else targets to be forced to give in to the same. Your choices in that case VERY MUCH do impact what happens to me because of the precedence it sets, it does not just effect you, it creates a snowball effect to where everyone else is effected as well. To try and compare that to allowing two people to privately marry one another is just ridiculous. It's not the same thing whatsoever. One has a ripple effect on everyone, the other just plainly does not. Last I checked your own marriages or rights to be together aren't gonna be taken away because we allow someone else the same. As for cultural norms and boundaries, quite frankly I don't care about that, just because we've done things one way for a certain period of time doesn't mean we can't be wrong or in need of change. Used to be that the cultural norm was to view blacks as inferior to whites, and the boundary placing the two races separate from each other. Should that not have changed? Tradition and what is actually good for people, don't always go together. When it comes to individual rights against that, the individual should win every time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
same sex and inter racial marriages are cool.why make a big beef over something that don't affect your life?they are both normal and cool
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To those who are against same sex marriage, do you feel that interracial marriage should not have been legalized either? If you feel differently about both, why? because others defined race and put people in those categories based upon things they have no control over, not on actions, or preferences, or tastes,,but on BIOLOGICAL HISTORY because the product of too many interracial unions , children, prove that they are no different than intraracial unions,,,,, all that matters is man and woman, they create life, and they are the foundation to be cherished and protected,,, How are they threatened because two men or two women can marry? Tell me how. They'll still have the same right to marry as they do now, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Letting others do the same doesn't mean they're not protected, they always have been and will be. how are you threatened if others are ok with having their home searched or their persons searched at an airport? immediate threat isnt the point,,,,cultural decline, cultural norms, cultural boundaries are,,,, Really? You're gonna try that argument, really? That's so entirely different it's not even funny! In that case I am threatened because I KNOW that if others keep accepting things like you describe above, they will come for me next, they always do I don't care how you wanna argue it, history proves it time and time again if you actually educated yourself. That's how I'm threatened, because once enough people consent to unlawful things it makes everyone else targets to be forced to give in to the same. Your choices in that case VERY MUCH do impact what happens to me because of the precedence it sets, it does not just effect you, it creates a snowball effect to where everyone else is effected as well. To try and compare that to allowing two people to privately marry one another is just ridiculous. It's not the same thing whatsoever. One has a ripple effect on everyone, the other just plainly does not. Last I checked your own marriages or rights to be together aren't gonna be taken away because we allow someone else the same. As for cultural norms and boundaries, quite frankly I don't care about that, just because we've done things one way for a certain period of time doesn't mean we can't be wrong or in need of change. Used to be that the cultural norm was to view blacks as inferior to whites, and the boundary placing the two races separate from each other. Should that not have changed? Tradition and what is actually good for people, don't always go together. When it comes to individual rights against that, the individual should win every time. EXACTLY THE SAME THOUGHT,, EXACTLY THE SAME LOGIC<, lets review 'That's so entirely different it's not even funny! In that case I am threatened because I KNOW that if others keep accepting things like you describe above, they will come for me next, they always do I don't care how you wanna argue it, history proves it time and time again if you actually educated yourself. That's how I'm threatened, because once enough people consent to unlawful things it makes everyone else targets to be forced to give in to the same. Your choices in that case VERY MUCH do impact what happens to me because of the precedence it sets, it does not just effect you, it creates a snowball effect to where everyone else is effected as well.' I am threatened because I KNOW that if others keep accepting this lifestyle they will come for my kids next and their kids, they always do, I dont care how you wanna argue it , history proves it time and time again if you actually educate YOURSELF. Thats how Im threatened, because once enough people consent to sinful things, it makes everyone else targes to be forced to give in to accepting those sinful things,. The reaction of society and government to our sexual choices VERY MUCH impact what happens to me because of the precedence it sets, it does not just effect you, it creates a SNOWBALL effect to where everyone else is effected as well starting with children, families and communities,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
same sex and inter racial marriages are cool.why make a big beef over something that don't affect your life?they are both normal and cool one is normal and cool,, here is proof ,, something abnormal and cool couldnt create this  ...not so with homosexual relations,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
KiK2me
on
Thu 05/16/13 07:14 PM
|
|
Very cute little princess Ms Harmony !
I say if two people are in love than that is their business ! Without prejudice ... Besides who am i to judge anyone else ? PEACE ! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very cute little princess Ms Harmony ! I say if two people are in love than that is their business ! Without prejudice ... Besides who am i to judge anyone else ? PEACE ! sweet kik I say love is seperate from sex Im not opposed to people loving either but I do find sexual behaviors like adultery, incest, and homosexual sex to be abnormal and deviant,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
good grief come into the 21st century.normal cannot be defined.if 2 people of same sex fall in love,how is that wrong?love doesn't know colour or sexes.it just is.you sound like the old Victorian tempest mob from uk.no offence but at the end of the day live and let live,. we all have views,we all are entitled to live.look around how many hetro relationships are full of vitriol, beatings, murder, divorce, abuse.loads.dont sweep it under the carpet.we are all human and the basic human need is to be loved and wanted.i hate those who bring religion into arguments.religion has nothing to do with who you love.at the end of the day lets be real-jesus wore a long dress and hung around with only guys,.what does that say?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and before the highly religious nuts jump all over me for my ending remark.it was a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
good grief come into the 21st century.normal cannot be defined.if 2 people of same sex fall in love,how is that wrong?love doesn't know colour or sexes.it just is.you sound like the old Victorian tempest mob from uk.no offence but at the end of the day live and let live,. we all have views,we all are entitled to live.look around how many hetro relationships are full of vitriol, beatings, murder, divorce, abuse.loads.dont sweep it under the carpet.we are all human and the basic human need is to be loved and wanted.i hate those who bring religion into arguments.religion has nothing to do with who you love.at the end of the day lets be real-jesus wore a long dress and hung around with only guys,.what does that say? that is one of societies issues, confusing wants with needs we need LOVE, nooone is debating love we dont have to have sex, we want to have sex love knows no boundaries, bue sex sure should,,,,,,because of its potential long term affect socially sex between anyone who is 'in love' has given us all types of stds, all types of unwanted children, struggling single parent homes, etc,, once it comes to sexual behavior,, as our sexual behaviors go, so go our families and communities,,,, |
|
|
|
|
