NO! Homosexuality IS NOT NORMAL

[Redfish]

Homosexuality does not have to be normal to be acceptable.

Good point. Would you say the same about polygamy, sibling marriage, and parent/child marriage?

Because if you condone same sex marriage using the arguments about equality, fairness, acceptance, etc, then you have no way to argue against any other form of "marriage".

Marriage is a civil institution. Homosexuality is a personal relationship.

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Why? You're entering into a very problematic area of logic.

Monogamy and polygamy are BOTH marriage, so defined for centuries.

Is that how you want your argument to go?

So you are ok with marriage being whatever the people involved want it to be? How do you tell polygamists or siblings that they cannot marry when you justify gay marriage using arguments or equality, fairness, acceptance, and discrimination?

What legal arguments will you bring against polygamy if gay marriage is condoned federally? This is a serious question, if you can't answer seriously, then don't answer.

 

[protectionist]

What in the name of the Gods and Goddesses are you talking about?

I don't recall my saying anything about God or Godesses. Do you ?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Homosexuality does not have to be normal to be acceptable.

Good point. Would you say the same about polygamy, sibling marriage, and parent/child marriage?

Because if you condone same sex marriage using the arguments about equality, fairness, acceptance, etc, then you have no way to argue against any other form of "marriage".

Marriage is a civil institution. Homosexuality is a personal relationship.

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Why? You're entering into a very problematic area of logic.

Monogamy and polygamy are BOTH marriage, so defined for centuries.

Is that how you want your argument to go?

So you are ok with marriage being whatever the people involved want it to be? How do you tell polygamists or siblings that they cannot marry when you justify gay marriage using arguments or equality, fairness, acceptance, and discrimination?

What legal arguments will you bring against polygamy if gay marriage is condoned federally? This is a serious question, if you can't answer seriously, then don't answer.

I want to hear on what grounds you believe polygamy can be rightfully banned by the states.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Opposite sex marriage is monogamy. Same sex marriage is monogamy. Polygamy is not monogamy.

The states that recognize only opposite sex monogamy have committed discrimination against same sex monogamy.

Nothing in that has anything to do with polygamy.

 

[Redfish]

Good point. Would you say the same about polygamy, sibling marriage, and parent/child marriage?

Because if you condone same sex marriage using the arguments about equality, fairness, acceptance, etc, then you have no way to argue against any other form of "marriage".

Marriage is a civil institution. Homosexuality is a personal relationship.

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Why? You're entering into a very problematic area of logic.

Monogamy and polygamy are BOTH marriage, so defined for centuries.

Is that how you want your argument to go?

So you are ok with marriage being whatever the people involved want it to be? How do you tell polygamists or siblings that they cannot marry when you justify gay marriage using arguments or equality, fairness, acceptance, and discrimination?

What legal arguments will you bring against polygamy if gay marriage is condoned federally? This is a serious question, if you can't answer seriously, then don't answer.

I want to hear on what grounds you believe polygamy can be rightfully banned by the states.

very simple, a majority of society sees it as wrong. Its not a legal argument, its what society decides about how its people should live and what is considered right and wrong.

 

[bodecea]

Homosexuality does not have to be normal to be acceptable.

Good point. Would you say the same about polygamy, sibling marriage, and parent/child marriage?

Because if you condone same sex marriage using the arguments about equality, fairness, acceptance, etc, then you have no way to argue against any other form of "marriage".

Marriage is a civil institution. Homosexuality is a personal relationship.

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Why? You're entering into a very problematic area of logic.

Monogamy and polygamy are BOTH marriage, so defined for centuries.

Is that how you want your argument to go?

So you are ok with marriage being whatever the people involved want it to be? How do you tell polygamists or siblings that they cannot marry when you justify gay marriage using arguments or equality, fairness, acceptance, and discrimination?

What legal arguments will you bring against polygamy if gay marriage is condoned federally? This is a serious question, if you can't answer seriously, then don't answer.

Contracts between three parties is a whole new kettle of fish. I wish you good luck in your legal endeavor.

 

[protectionist]

As I said- you are impervious to the facts- and you are abnormal.

Webster's defines Islam as a religion- but you refuse to accept that- instead you refer to an unrelated defintion in Websters
Islam Definition of Islam by Merriam-Webster
Islam
: the religion which teaches that there is only one God and that Muhammad is God's prophet : the religion of Muslims

: the modern nations in which Islam is the main religion

So I guess Websters is contradicting itself. It happens. It's also happening that you are talking OFF TOPIC, when I told you I'd report that, if you tried it again. You're reported, and I don't care if you care.

 

[Redfish]

Opposite sex marriage is monogamy. Same sex marriage is monogamy. Polygamy is not monogamy.

The states that recognize only opposite sex monogamy have committed discrimination against same sex monogamy.

Nothing in that has anything to do with polygamy.

same sex marriage and polygamy are aberrations of the human condition and of the word "marriage".

If a society chooses to recognize aberrations as normal then that society is doomed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Marriage is a civil institution. Homosexuality is a personal relationship.

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Why? You're entering into a very problematic area of logic.

Monogamy and polygamy are BOTH marriage, so defined for centuries.

Is that how you want your argument to go?

So you are ok with marriage being whatever the people involved want it to be? How do you tell polygamists or siblings that they cannot marry when you justify gay marriage using arguments or equality, fairness, acceptance, and discrimination?

What legal arguments will you bring against polygamy if gay marriage is condoned federally? This is a serious question, if you can't answer seriously, then don't answer.

I want to hear on what grounds you believe polygamy can be rightfully banned by the states.

very simple, a majority of society sees it as wrong. Its not a legal argument, its what society decides about how its people should live and what is considered right and wrong.

That's no answer. The Courts are there to protect minorities.

The Mormons argued that polygamy should be legal on 1st Amendment grounds. Religious freedom.

Why were they wrong?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Opposite sex marriage is monogamy. Same sex marriage is monogamy. Polygamy is not monogamy.

The states that recognize only opposite sex monogamy have committed discrimination against same sex monogamy.

Nothing in that has anything to do with polygamy.

same sex marriage and polygamy are aberrations of the human condition and of the word "marriage".

If a society chooses to recognize aberrations as normal then that society is doomed.

No, not really. Polygamy is perfectly normal and was common since the dawn of Man.

 

[protectionist]

You seem to spend a lot of time thinking about how gay men have sex with each other......

Actually I spend very little time on it. 99% of my OPs and posts are on other subjects.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Opposite sex marriage is monogamy. Same sex marriage is monogamy. Polygamy is not monogamy.

The states that recognize only opposite sex monogamy have committed discrimination against same sex monogamy.

Nothing in that has anything to do with polygamy.

same sex marriage and polygamy are aberrations of the human condition and of the word "marriage".

If a society chooses to recognize aberrations as normal then that society is doomed.

Do you think the caveman was strictly monogamous, or do you think the caveman was polygamous based on the strongest males being able to mate with the most females and therefore pass along their strength in their genes?

 

[Redfish]

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Why? You're entering into a very problematic area of logic.

Monogamy and polygamy are BOTH marriage, so defined for centuries.

Is that how you want your argument to go?

So you are ok with marriage being whatever the people involved want it to be? How do you tell polygamists or siblings that they cannot marry when you justify gay marriage using arguments or equality, fairness, acceptance, and discrimination?

What legal arguments will you bring against polygamy if gay marriage is condoned federally? This is a serious question, if you can't answer seriously, then don't answer.

I want to hear on what grounds you believe polygamy can be rightfully banned by the states.

very simple, a majority of society sees it as wrong. Its not a legal argument, its what society decides about how its people should live and what is considered right and wrong.

That's no answer. The Courts are there to protect minorities.

The Mormons argued that polygamy should be legal on 1st Amendment grounds. Religious freedom.

Why were they wrong?

because a majority of society sees polygamy as wrong, its really just that simple.

 

[Redfish]

Opposite sex marriage is monogamy. Same sex marriage is monogamy. Polygamy is not monogamy.

The states that recognize only opposite sex monogamy have committed discrimination against same sex monogamy.

Nothing in that has anything to do with polygamy.

same sex marriage and polygamy are aberrations of the human condition and of the word "marriage".

If a society chooses to recognize aberrations as normal then that society is doomed.

No, not really. Polygamy is perfectly normal and was common since the dawn of Man.

Not in american society, european society, african society, asian society. yes, there were small sects that practiced polygamy in history, predominately muslims, who kill gays just for being gay.

 

[Redfish]

Opposite sex marriage is monogamy. Same sex marriage is monogamy. Polygamy is not monogamy.

The states that recognize only opposite sex monogamy have committed discrimination against same sex monogamy.

Nothing in that has anything to do with polygamy.

same sex marriage and polygamy are aberrations of the human condition and of the word "marriage".

If a society chooses to recognize aberrations as normal then that society is doomed.

Do you think the caveman was strictly monogamous, or do you think the caveman was polygamous based on the strongest males being able to mate with the most females and therefore pass along their strength in their genes?

so are gorillas, whats your point?

 

[protectionist]

Since 2011 the number of people accepting SSM has steadily increased.
View attachment 43215

Your unreferenced chart is refuted by my referenced (Gallup Poll) one >>

And, I might add that none of these charts are close to accurate , nor are the responses and views of the poll participants, The numbers should be far lower (approximately what they were in the early 1970s, before the APA came out with its biased and invalid declaration). Ever since then, people's views have been distorted, based on that bogus information.

 

[Staidhup]

So how did this thread ever get to polygamy or religious beliefs in the first place?
Bottom line, in nature, abnormal sexual attraction to the same sex and behavior is rewarded with the gift of not being propagated. Does it exist, yes, however, as for the human race it is as much a social choice as it is a natural phenomenon. The question that needs to be addressed is do those that chose this life style or have this trait entitled to any special rights above and beyond those of anyone else? Do they have the right to promote their lifestyle on another without these proclivities?

 

[ChrisL]

I don't see how these people can justify interfering with the happiness of others.

If my happiness wire tied to your becoming affiliated with something you know to be wrong, and I listened to you explain to me, in exhaustive detail about all of the reasons why you did not want to be affiliated with whatever it was, and took your profoundly honest profession and I sued you for saying it, through an illicit interpretation of the law, wherein others who agreed with me, followed suit and the result was you losing your job, your home and your good name... . I'm guessin' that you'd feel that my happiness was less important to ya.

I don't know if you're just profoundly naive or fatally stupid... but there is no right to force yourself into institutions for which you're not only 'NOT SUITED', but of which you represent the antithesis.

That's not love, that is destruction... which, FYI: is a presentation of an irrational dislike for something: OKA: HATE.

IF a man and a man or a woman and a woman love one another (regardless of whether or not you can understand it), then what makes you the authority on whether or not they can be married?

I'm not... Nature is the Authority. And Nature defined marriage as it defined human physiology.

Got a problem with it, take it up with Nature.

Now here's the coolest part about that... you think that because Nature doesn't have a court, a police department of a prison, that Nature can't enforce it's laws.

Sadly for you and the rest... Nature never fails to enforce its laws. And you see it everyday where people reject Nature's laws, when they gobble down their anti-depressants, file for bankruptcy, go to prison, shove a pistol in their mouth and blow their brains out. Or sit and cry all day wondering what the hell happened to their life...

There are no exceptions and the rules are not suggestions for an alternative lifestyle. One either recognizes, respects, defends and adheres to the laws of nature and benefits from having done so, OR... one suffers the consequences for having failed to do so.

ROFL. Nature did not make up marriage. Homosexual people are still people, regardless of your opinions.

of course they are, just as bi-polar people are people. Both have a mental disorder. Both appear to be incurable at present.

And do we try to prevent bipolar people from marrying one another?

 

[ChrisL]

ROFL. Nature did not make up marriage.

Nature made up human physiology, from which marriage is a direct extension.

Homosexual people are still people...

Golly... if THAT were relevant to ANYTHING being said here... what a GREAT point it would have been.

Your concessions are duly noted summarily accepted.

Um, no, hate to tell you this, but marriage is a man made construct. Nature did not make marriage. Goodness, that is stupid.

aren't you the one who said that minority rights came from nature and not society?

Marriage is not considered a "natural" right, such as the right to self defense. Rights can be either or.

 

[ChrisL]

Homosexuality does not have to be normal to be acceptable.

Good point. Would you say the same about polygamy, sibling marriage, and parent/child marriage?

Because if you condone same sex marriage using the arguments about equality, fairness, acceptance, etc, then you have no way to argue against any other form of "marriage".

Marriage is a civil institution. Homosexuality is a personal relationship.

Marriage is the legal and religious joining of one man and one woman, A gay union is not a marriage. It is a gay union, nothing more nothing less. But having said that, gay unions of two people should have the same rights as a man/woman marriage. its just not a marriage.

Says who?