The facts point out that "love" is rarely a truth in any homosexual relationship.......its all about "PERSONAL PLEASURE". Homosexual couples rarely stay together regardless of the attempts made by all those HATERS who have bent over backwards to allow homosexuals the same rights to "visit their partners in the hospital", "make heart decisions for their partner" and lastly "the right to marry the person they supposedly LOVE......called a CIVIL UNION instead of a traditional marriage."Until we fixed itName one human right that any homosexual is lacking?
The right to marry the person they love
Make heart decisions for their partner
Inheritance
Visit their partner in the hospital
Homosexual couples rarely take advantage of the US legal system.......they just whine.
You are making an argument based upon a STRAWMAN presentation. "...but only IF....gays could marry, they'd be more faithful and or monogamous"? But this logic or rather lack thereof flies in the very face of the homosexual argument concerning marriage. Homosexuals argue that Marriage is not some sacred institution but something that people just do for legal reasons (as per your strawman argument), BECAUSE THEY LOVE EACH OTHER. Then in the next breath you are defining the legal reasons why its hate and discrimination not to allow same sex marriage because of the LEGAL benefits. Again........your very words, with no ambiguity whatsoever.......just demonstrated that LOVE takes a back seat personal benefits.
Again..........homosexuals have the exact same rights as does the heterosexual........they can legally marry, in any state in the UNION.......a person of the opposite gender.
I argue that marriage cannot be considered TRUE for both subjects. 1. Marriage can be an institution that by its very nature help partners be more faithful. (One truth). 2. Marriage as argued by the homosexual proponent, is an institution that is not really sacred and does not mean anything except the garnering of legal benefits......sacred religion has nothing to do with the needs of the homosexual community.
The "Law of the Excluded Middle" applies here. Nothing can take the position of being both true and false at the same instant. Its one of the first laws of logic. Either Marriage is traditional and religiously sacred or about the legalize......it cant be both. Or.......you can't have your cake and it also.
But again REALITY rears its ugly head with the homosexual argument about marriage helping same sex couples. If homosexuals REALLY DESIRED the same kind of commitment as provided in a traditional marriage then common sense would expect them to take advantage of the legal recourse open to the homosexual as relating to relationships which provide much the same benefits as does traditional marriage....................
CIVIL UNIONS, POWER OF ATTORNEY ARGEEMENTS, LEGAL WILLS ..............etc.
The argument you just attempted is based not upon REASON and LOGIC.........but BS emotionalism, because all those benefits you say that are being denied can be HAD with just a few strokes of a lawyers pen. You just want to attack traditional marriage....which is traditionally and religiously defined as a union between a "male" and a "female".
Your problem? The majority of the people in this republic define marriage in a traditional manner, thus the bums rush by the militant special interest groups to the radicalized court system.
Last edited: