Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California

In other words you were just engaged in poisoning the well. And until somebody seriously makes fertility a requirement for marriage I will continue to view THAT argument as another irrelevant distraction, too.

Where did I say "FERTILITY" was the qualification for marriage? I said the potential to have children. Gays do not have that potential. And if you don't see this as intuitively obviously implied in the history of marriage in all cultures there's something wrong with your head.

quote:

---

Where did I say "FERTILITY" was the qualification for marriage? I said the potential to have children. Gays do not have that potential

---

An infertile individual does not have the potential to have children. By definition.

quote:

---

And if you don't see this as intuitively obviously implied in the history of marriage in all cultures there's something wrong with your head

---

And yet, while producing heirs was a common function of marriage it is already considered far less important in society at large (not to mention the technological developments which allow infertile couples to have children, some of them perfectly applicable to gays and lesbians). Again, the legal recognition of gay marriage is NOT a huge chance in social attitudes - it is a consequence of the changes in social attitudes that have already happened. That is why is is happening, and why it enjoys a good deal of public support.

And, of course, all heterosexual marriages should be forcibly dissolved after menopause.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

I was going to say something, but I don't really need to add anything to that, do I? That turned out to be one of those subjects on which you're not actually an expert, remember?

No, it has nothing to do with menopause because it has nothing to do with fertility. It has to do with the anatomic potential to make babies, which heterosexual couples have irrespective of whether they are fertile or not and homosexuals don't. but of course anything you can do to obscure the point you will do.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I've wavered over whether to try to engage with you, in the face of such bigotry and misinformation - on the one hand, I won't change your views one iota, but there is some value in responding, which I'll mention at the end.First off, let's get things clear - AIDS is not the disease of homosexuality - it is an STI which is capable of being transmitted through a variety of forms of sexual contact, heterosexual and homosexual. It is statistically highly prevalent in the male gay community for a variety of factors, but none of those make it the "disease of homosexuality" - it is an infection which affects all people. (Incidentally, the community amongst whom it is the least prevalent is the lesbian community - does this mean that your God has sent this disease to punish gay men, but is perfectly ok with gay women ?)Secondly, homosexuality is quite clearly not an aberration - it is a sexual preference pure and simple. Some guys like women with large breasts, some women like guys with bald heads, and some guys and women like other guys and women. It's been very clearly shown to be an inherent preference, not a choice - it's part of who someone is. The way the civilized world distinguishes preferences which are sexual aberrations is by reference to what harm it may do to a non-consenting other person. We rightly revile child molestation, rape and other forms of abusive sexuality for the harm it does to other people. But if both (or more than two !) parties are giving informed consent and there's no harm (consented nipple clamps and the like not counting), then the civilized world says good luck guys, go for it !And who are you to say what is and isn't a natural use of the human body ? Our mouths evolved to eat and breath and communicate (or as I know you prefer, were designed for those purposes). Does that mean you want to condemn equally every heterosexual couple who enjoy oral sex ? (And don't get me started on tantric sex - or finished on it for that matter) !Homosexuality harms no one - it's simply part of who some folks are.Now, as to the point of replying (since I know you won't be remotely convinced) - I invite all of the visitors to this site to read Faith's post and to read mine. Then (knowing that Faith is a Christian and I am atheistic), bear in mind Faith's view that she gets into Heaven, and I get condemned to a fiery hell. To translate (and paraphrase) Mylene Farmer "If heaven has a hell, heaven can go screw itself".

Says who? And even if this were true, who says that a child, someone who doesn't have the capacity to consent to ANYTHING let alone being fucked, should not be protected from this? Who says this "orientation" should be, would be, can be sanctioned by our society?You have taken the acceptance of homosexual union by knowing consenting adults and, in good christian style, tried to make something horrible of it by tying it to baby-rapers. That is sick. Christian. Fearmongering.Your hate is showing. It's an aberration to you and your abhorrent intolerant violent version of a god. There is nothing "unnatural" about it. It's been all through this planet, not just we primates, through out all of history. Your hate is showing.You don't like queer? So don't be queer. That's easy. I am not queer everyday and I don't have the need to hate anyone because of it.So straight people don't have STDs? That's good news. Except, considering the source, it's probably wrong.The real disease in this is you and your religion, Faith. Lies, deceit, intolerance, violence and hate. Christian. This species needs to be done with your religion.

Bullshit.

You are a vile human being. Just when I think you couldn't possibly be any more disgusting, you prove me wrong.

Are both parties consenting adults, legally able to even give consent? That should answer your question, then, since pedophilia has nothing to do with gay marriage and is not concerning consenting adults.

Well, since pedophilia includes adult men preying on young girls and adult women preying on young boys, then by Faith's divine reasoning we should also outlaw different-sex marriage.

I for one agree with Faith. The proper societal understanding of marriage is a foundation that was established as far back as the Old Testament and it has been our sinfull nature that has corrupted it over time.I have long been eager to expand our family with more wives similar to some of God's most revered men. At this point in my life, I would SETTLE for a tenth of the number of concubines of Solomon instead. The problem I have is my pesky WIFE and her corrupted "modern" understanding of marriage. She refuses to consider herself as subserviant to me like my other property such as my children.I can no longer get a new wife by getting together with the guys to go murder an entire village of people. Heck, a guy can't even get one by the good ole' technique of rape far enough away for anyone to hear her complaining!All these things are now impossible because of the corrupt way society has changed the way it looks at the things as they were demonstrated by the tradition laid forth in the holy word of God himself.Certainly we are in the last days.

Then you should be welcoming it with open arms. Its all part of God's plan with the rapture.Jesus is going to be pissed when he finds out that you've been delaying his second coming by slowing the attempts to bring down civilization by opposing gay marriage.Seriously, you end times folks are weird. If the end is near and the second coming is on its way, then why are you trying so hard to stop it? Who's side are you really on?