And so we arrive at the civil rights argument. Sorry, but your obsession with the same gender is not a civil right. Gay marriage serves no purpose in our society. Marriage between a man and a woman is sanctioned by the government because it bestows great advantages when raising a family. Since homosexual partners cannot naturally have families, there is no need for them to be married. Marriage is a contract. If you want rights with your partner then go to a lawyer and have a contract drawn up that specifies your rights. If you want property rights then put it in your contract. If you want retirement benefits then set up a trust and make sure the beneficiaries are properly defined. I am married and my wife and I did some of these thing anyhow.
First: I was not arguing about civil rights. I was pointing out an historical example to demonstrate that your appeal to common practice fallacy holds no weight.
Second: Gay marriage serves the purpose of providing stable same sex homes that can adopt children and provides the emotional benefits of a legally sanctioned relationship, which means a longer, more meaningful life for both partners. It also provides an incentive for gays to form long term, committed relationships and thus reduce the spread of STDs that result from promiscuity.
Third: There are over thousand various rights that are guaranteed to to married heterosexual couples that no lawyer could guarantee to same sex couples. This includes the right hospital visitation if one partner gets sick.
Well, since words have meanings and you have chosen the words you used it seems reasonable to conclude that your words accuratly reflect your feelings.
You are so right. I guess I should go kill anyone who works on the Sabbath just since the Bible says so. Afterall, there is that one verse in Exodus that says such and since the Bible those words have meanings, it seems accurate to conclude that is what I am suppose to do.
Give me a break. From here on out, I'm not responding to the parts of your replies where you take my words out of context. It's cheap and intellectually dishonest to do so, and you have been badgering me with that kind of simple minded equivocation this entire thread.
True. But how many partners do you have to "test drive" before you find the one to be monogomus with?
For your information, I'm celibate, and will continue to be so until I find someone who I love. Your assumption that I "test drive" people just demonstrates an incredibly prejudiced and ignorant perception of gay people. I would never put my health and the welfare of others on the line by engaging in promiscuous and risky sexual behavior.
I have no less desire for knowledge. I'm an engineer, I love to see how things work. Its just that I know such knowledge does not exist independantly of God.
Based on a book that you subjectively and intuitively choose to believe in.
Out of curiosity, why have you been so hostile and interrogative towards me through this entire thread? All I stated was that I derive my moral propositions from careful observation and study of the world around me and it seems you have dedicated yourself to putting me in the box in a "moral relativist"? Is my position really so threatening to you that you have to put me in a category that you can easily dismiss?
