Public Education

Who is stopping the institution of traditional heterosexual marriages?

Nobody. I'm talkinga bout trashing the INSITUTION of marriage, not marriages themselves. The MEANING of marriage to soceity.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You claimed homosexuality wasn't natural because it doesn't produce children. I give you an example of just that, and now you start moving the goalposts. Who says sexual activity needs to produce children to be natural? So, every sex act that doesn't produce children is unnatural? Nice to know. Quit dodging. You believe god made these lesbian lizards, not me. To me they pose no problem, to your homo hating god they do. He says homosexuality is a sin, turns around and makes lesbian lizards... very logical. I absolutely care about the truth, which is why I pointed out you were wrong when you said homosexuality is unnatural because it doesn't produce any children. And it is. I'm not being uncivil, I'm calling it as I see it. I call you a bigot, because you slearly have something against gays. That's bigotry.

A binding legal contract between two persons? What's changed about that?

I have nothing against gays. That's typical leftist stupidity. Got to trash people, can't deal with ideas.You can't tell the difference between a principle and a personal agenda. You really can't. You're clueless.I'm against destroying society by changing the meaning of time-honored institutions, I am not against gays, they can do as they like short of changing the meaning of marriage for all of us.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Ad hominem a lot?

Yeah, when people call me a bigot I will call you what you are and drop the politeness.

And yet you want to deny them the same rights as others. Apparently you do ad hominem a lot. Of course I can. I have principles. Gays being able to marry is one of them. And as I told you, my country is doing just fine, nothing was destroyed, we're still functioning perfectly fine.

As a libertarian I have a unique position on marriage, based on my respect for the Constitution. I believe that all people seeking legal recognition of marriage should have civil unions, homosexual and heterosexual alike. The reason for this is because I think "marriage" is largely a religious institution, and believe that your beliefs (even if I disagree with them) should be respected. In the spirit of separation of church and state, marriages should be defined as people wanting to consecrate and sanctify their marriage under God should be able to do that. I think, however, it should have no legal authority whatsoever.For a legal recognition of their union, this must be done through the courts and that should be open to all consenting adults. Because honestly, why can't free people in a free society do what they wish? How does two guys being in a union (call it marriage or by any other name) affect you or society in general? How is that being forced on society?

---

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston

Meaning Faith's religious view of marriage. Anyone that does not have the same religious view as Faith are destroying society. It is not bigoted to judge and condemn anyone with a different religious, moral or life view than Faith, but to accuse Faith of bigotry is vile. The word bigot has the same force as nigger.Did I get that right Faith?By the way can you describe what you think the institution of marriage entails? What is it you mean by this?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

So, you know my standpoint on everything then? You must do, becuase how else could you know on what side of the spectrum I stand. Also, that is completely irrelevant. Argue the points, not the person, please. When I see someone who wants to deny people rights they do want to grant to other people, based on some arbitrary thing, I call them bigots. Apparent;y, that makes me leftist. I don;t care, the point stands.

marriage is as old as humanity. it was not invented by religion.People can do what they wish if it doesn't involve changing the basic institutions of society just to suit their own narrow subjective ideas.Oh brother. Why do I bother. Trash the whole miserable mess, it's just about done anyway.Beam me up, Lord, please. Soon.

YOU ARE THE ONE ARGUING THE PERSON, NOT THE POINTS. STOP CALLING PEOPLE BIGOTS, YOU BIGOT>Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Translation: You don't tolerate my intolreance! Well yes, you're right, I don't. So we're both bigots (according to you), now what? Got anything to counter the points? I suggest you take a break, I really don't like seeing people this riled up. Take a break, relax, come back tomorrow (or later, if that is neccessary), and perhaps we can continue this conversation then.

The only intolerant one here is you.