Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity

Ringo notes: ...and no one has brought up surrogate partners, for either sexes.

None of that requires marriage, in fact it makes even more of a travesty out of the whole thing. Oh golly gosh we HAVE to get married now! Give me a break!

Since you claim to be so rational perhaps you can explain why the law for a modern society should ignore the nature of marriage in that society ? Why it should instead use some other idea - and how we can rationally decide which ideas ?And I’m going to bet that your reasons come down to everybody just agreeing with your opinion - as usual.

quote:

---

None of that requires marriage, in fact it makes even more of a travesty out of the whole thing. Oh golly gosh we HAVE to get married now! Give me a break!

---

So now marriage has nothing to do with raising children ? That’s a shift in your position.

So we need a charade of marriage to validate a charade of parenthood by a charade of man and wife enacted by a gay couple? And PC also requires us to put on a pretense of seriousness about all this pretense too.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

So we need a charade of marriage to validate a charade of parenthood by a charade of man and wife enacted by a gay couple? And we're supposed to be very serious about all this pretense too

---

If marriage is meant to be about providing a stable home for children - if that is an important function of it - then why shouldn’t gay couples with children be allowed to get married ?And please spare us the bigotry. If nothing else it destroys your assertion that you are the one being rational.

Making children treat a pretense as a reality is a horrible thing to do to them. If you really intend to provide a stable home for them, don't lye to them, don't pretend to a marriage that is just a charade meant to give you an excuse to pretend you are something you aren't, don't pretend you are man and wife when you're just two men or two women. Two "uncles" or two "aunts" can do a perfectly good job of raising children when necessary. The problem with gays adopting children to raise them as if they were their own is that it's just another charade. And the children learn to pretend they believe it. This is not good for their emotional health. But society today seems committed to all this pretense and is willing to enforce it with lots of PC namecalling. Maybe the next generation or two will be willing to blow the cover on all this deception.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Making children treat a pretense as a reality is a horrible thing to do to them

---

It’s not a pretence.

quote:

---

If you really intend to provide a stable home for them, don't lye to them, don't pretend to a marriage that is just a charade meant to give you an excuse to pretend you are something you aren't,

---

Can you just let go of the bigotry ?

quote:

---

Two "uncles" or two "aunts" can do a perfectly good job of raising children when necessary

---

So an actual pretence is better than the reality - to you.That’s really “rational”. Gay couples should pretend rather than admire the real situation because you call the real situation a “pretence”

quote:

---

Maybe the next generation or two will be willing to blow the cover on all this deception.

---

There is no deception.

Often single aunts and uncles HAVE had the job of raising children and I didn't mean for the specific titles to be set in concrete. My mistake but your manipulation as usual. Any excuse to accuse me of something, anything. Never a moment's benefit of the doubt from the izquierdo.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Often single aunts and uncles HAVE had the job of raising children and I didn't mean for the specific titles to be set in concrete.

---

Come off it. You even used scare quotes to show that “aunts” and “uncles” was a pretence.

quote:

---

My mistake but your manipulation as usual

---

There is no manipulation in pointing out the obvious inconsistency in your position.

quote:

---

Never a moment's benefit of the doubt from the izquierdo.

---

And why would someone with your record of dishonesty and false accusations deserve the benefit of the doubt ?Not that that matters. If you are going to accuse others of “destroying rationality” you invite scrutiny of your own position - and criticism if obvious irrationality is observed. And benefit of the doubt doesn’t come into it when there is clear smoking-gun proof.So no, there was no room for benefit if the doubt even if you deserved it.

Remember that you had made the ridiculous statement that a "stable marriage" was good for children as if a gay couple pretending to be a normal married couple could by getting "married" provide that kind of stability. That is an outrageous absurdity of a pretense, compared to which being aunts or uncles is far preferable IMO. I think it far better to be "aunts" and "uncles," or whatever title you prefer, rather than a gay couple pretending to be man and wife raising children as if they really were a family. It wouldn't help to be "honestly" gay either IMO. Just be two men or two women friends or uncles or aunts.The whole gay marriage thing is a complete farce, all for the purpose of playing to false pretenses. The whole LGBT thing is the same farce as a matter of fact. People wanting and pretending to be what they aren't to satisfy some weird need that came from who knows where. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The need is to be treated equally by society, when who you are and how you live your life hurts no one else and limits no one else’s rights. That’s hardly weird, Faith.

quote:

---

Remember that you had made the ridiculous statement that a "stable marriage" was good for children...

---

More accurately that marriage helps promote a stable environment for bringing up children. A widely held view, and hardly ridiculous.

quote:

---

...as if a gay couple pretending to be a normal married couple could by getting "married" provide that kind of stability.

---

Isn’t the stability supposed to be provided by the legal framework ? Which would apply equally.

quote:

---

That is an outrageous absurdity of a pretense, compared to which being aunts or uncles is far preferable IMO. I think it far better to be "aunts" and "uncles," or whatever title you prefer, rather than a gay couple pretending to be man and wife raising children as if they really were a family. It wouldn't help to be "honestly" gay either IMO. Just be two men or two women friends or uncles or aunts.

---

So again the only pretence is what you want. Sorry, but I really don’t see the relevance of shoving gays back into the closet.

quote:

---

The whole gay marriage thing is a complete farce, all for the purpose of playing to false pretenses. The whole LGBT thing is the same farce as a matter of fact. People wanting and pretending to be what they aren't to satisfy some weird need that came from who knows where

---

So we should give up on ideas of fairness and justice and go back to a society of bigotry and oppression because that’s the only thing you find sensible. Yuck.Mindless bigotry is not at all rational.

What part of basing a marriage on love do you think is a charade?You seem to be avoiding this point - that marriage is based on love.
Regardless of whether the pair getting married are straight or gay - the marriage is equally based on love.If you can't identify a part of love that is "a charade" then your entire argument falls to pieces and is rightfully ignored.

None of my gay married friends are in a charade marriage. They all appear to be very loving relationships. I do know at least 3 non-gay couples that are in charade marriages. There is no love or even respect in those marriages.Edited by Theodoric, : Weird did not post full textEdited by Theodoric, : No reason given.