@AntiChrist67
“They can continue fighting for it, but at the end of the day it’s a fight against their own biology.”
What is that supposed to mean? Care to elaborate?
“People fight over this issue with out even really thinking about what marriage is”
100% agreed!
For what it’s worth, in the province of Quebec, Canada, even the majority of heterosexual couples doesn’t get married and chooses to live together in common law unions instead.
Besides, gays fighting for the right to marry is a lot like men fighting for the right to bear children: They can continue fighting for it, but at the end of the day it’s a fight against their own biology.
Personally, I don’t think it matters much with adopted children. After all, these are not the real parents anyway, so who cares if they are married or not?
If the alternative means being locked up in an orphanage or living on the street even adoptions by a single person may be acceptable and justifiable as long as the child can be taken care of (as was the case with Madonna when she adopted her second African boy).
I agree with you 100% on both of your points: reserve the term “marriage” for man/woman unions who are biologically capable of creating their own offspring but provide an alternative for gays with equal legal rights.
If religion doesn’t own marriage (which I agree it doesn’t), are you claiming that atheism does?
Are you claiming that homosexualism owns marriage, or perhaps that YOU own marraighe, simply because you hate everything that the male/female dynamic stands for and means to life itself (whether you believe in God or not)?
And do you still think you humans were created by monkeys?
(And by the way, our business from before is FAR from finished.)
It would be nice, though, to have a purely legal, non-religious type of ‘marriage’ though, and vice versa. They should be separate. My mother divorced my dad because of legal reasons, but they, being Christian, would still like a marriage under god. There is a difference between the two, and I think it’s silly for it all to be crumpled up under the Christian marriage. Plus, if you want to change something, you need to take into account what everyone is feeling. Otherwise, nothing will get done.
Dude, I told you where to look, and what search terms to use. It would be no different if I told you what page from what book. Google- history of marriage, and sacred marriage. There isn’t enough room for a dissertation here.
I find it interesting that when it comes to marriage, it is an “institution ordained by god.” But when it comes to divorce, it is strictly a legal dissolution handled in the courts.
@FEEDTHEHATE
Why, you’re not a “hater” at all (as your profile claims you are).
Your comment here implies is that you are, however
1. *Afraid* of what you do not understand, and
2. a reactionary *bully* in your response to such fears, and
3. a *coward* for bullying online
“Hater” is a word that you possibly use to feel empowered, but in reality something you hide behind when you just cannot figure things out. Sucks being you.
Oh, I’m sorry I guess I avoided your question. Errr well yeah thats about right though. Thats not to say that I’m blinded to all the good in the world or that I haven’t felt the warm kindest of others,but that isn’t catagorised under love. There are just good people in the world as well as bad, whom either believe there are rewards for their good deeds or do them due to a sense of duty.
Man, it must take yolu a while to respond to all these.
So if I want a civil union and want to call it “snargh”, it is a marriage? Marriage is nothing more than a religious term used to describe a civil union. You are fighting a war on semantics. Give up. There is no way to win or lose.
Well, if you aren’t clear on what, to you, would constitute disproof, I really don’t know what you were expecting to see here, or were disappointed by the absence of.
Because I’m sick of seeing religious people assert ownership of marriage itself without anyone calling them out on how ridiculous and baseless such a claim is.
@AntiChrist67
“They can continue fighting for it, but at the end of the day it’s a fight against their own biology.”
What is that supposed to mean? Care to elaborate?
@AntiChrist67
How exactly is fighting for the right to marry a “fight against their own biology”?
You can’t be serious.
@VictoryCough
“People fight over this issue with out even really thinking about what marriage is”
100% agreed!
For what it’s worth, in the province of Quebec, Canada, even the majority of heterosexual couples doesn’t get married and chooses to live together in common law unions instead.
Besides, gays fighting for the right to marry is a lot like men fighting for the right to bear children: They can continue fighting for it, but at the end of the day it’s a fight against their own biology.
Thanks for the pointless complaining, so sorry I failed to satisfy your completely unknown expectations.
You haev so much fail in this vid that I’m not even going to point out any of it. You’re slipping and I’m glad.
OH ITS
‘IT” AGAIN. Where did marriage come from??if not GOD.where did it originate,o you negative misfit.monotone is so paise
Personally, I don’t think it matters much with adopted children. After all, these are not the real parents anyway, so who cares if they are married or not?
If the alternative means being locked up in an orphanage or living on the street even adoptions by a single person may be acceptable and justifiable as long as the child can be taken care of (as was the case with Madonna when she adopted her second African boy).
I agree with you 100% on both of your points: reserve the term “marriage” for man/woman unions who are biologically capable of creating their own offspring but provide an alternative for gays with equal legal rights.
“are you claiming that atheism does?”
No, it’s not like anyone’s required to have a non-religious marriage, either. But religion isn’t automatically attached to marriage itself.
“Are you claiming that homosexualism owns marriage”
No. What is “homosexualism”?
“or perhaps that YOU own marraighe”
No.
“And do you still think you humans were created by monkeys?”
This is a blatant misrepresentation of the realities of evolution.
If two heterosexuals marry and adopt a child, should they not be married?
Some questions at hand, ZJ.
If religion doesn’t own marriage (which I agree it doesn’t), are you claiming that atheism does?
Are you claiming that homosexualism owns marriage, or perhaps that YOU own marraighe, simply because you hate everything that the male/female dynamic stands for and means to life itself (whether you believe in God or not)?
And do you still think you humans were created by monkeys?
(And by the way, our business from before is FAR from finished.)
–The Final Justice
It would be nice, though, to have a purely legal, non-religious type of ‘marriage’ though, and vice versa. They should be separate. My mother divorced my dad because of legal reasons, but they, being Christian, would still like a marriage under god. There is a difference between the two, and I think it’s silly for it all to be crumpled up under the Christian marriage. Plus, if you want to change something, you need to take into account what everyone is feeling. Otherwise, nothing will get done.
I think “marriage” is for raising your own biological child on your own way for sure, therefor should be kept for 1 man and 1 woman.
Gay and other forms of marriage should be called otherwise, but – especially for gays – with the same rights.
evolution is real
prove it
go look it up.
no, prove it.
Dude, I told you where to look, and what search terms to use. It would be no different if I told you what page from what book. Google- history of marriage, and sacred marriage. There isn’t enough room for a dissertation here.
I find it interesting that when it comes to marriage, it is an “institution ordained by god.” But when it comes to divorce, it is strictly a legal dissolution handled in the courts.
why do you always read from a cue card?
@FEEDTHEHATE
Why, you’re not a “hater” at all (as your profile claims you are).
Your comment here implies is that you are, however
1. *Afraid* of what you do not understand, and
2. a reactionary *bully* in your response to such fears, and
3. a *coward* for bullying online
“Hater” is a word that you possibly use to feel empowered, but in reality something you hide behind when you just cannot figure things out. Sucks being you.
Oh, I’m sorry I guess I avoided your question. Errr well yeah thats about right though. Thats not to say that I’m blinded to all the good in the world or that I haven’t felt the warm kindest of others,but that isn’t catagorised under love. There are just good people in the world as well as bad, whom either believe there are rewards for their good deeds or do them due to a sense of duty.
Man, it must take yolu a while to respond to all these.
So if I want a civil union and want to call it “snargh”, it is a marriage? Marriage is nothing more than a religious term used to describe a civil union. You are fighting a war on semantics. Give up. There is no way to win or lose.
Well, if you aren’t clear on what, to you, would constitute disproof, I really don’t know what you were expecting to see here, or were disappointed by the absence of.
It isnt up to us to give you a criteria for disproofing a topic that you said it wasnt up to you to disprove.
I’m still waiting for someone to explain exactly which criteria they believe must be fulfilled to constitute a “disproof” of this.
But you just said that it wasn’t up to you to disprove this….
Because I’m sick of seeing religious people assert ownership of marriage itself without anyone calling them out on how ridiculous and baseless such a claim is.
Why did you make this video then if it isn’t up to you to disprove this?