04-10-2012, 11:42 AM
"Unnatural" for Dick and Midwest Spy does not = "unnatural" for the whole of humanity.
The fact that both of you find an attraction to the same sex as unnatural is fine. It doesn't negate the fact that millions of others find an attraction to the opposite sex as unnatural.
Biology doesn't support your logic, Dick.
See Mary run, see Jane chase Mary.
See Mary and Jane spin the bottle.
The birds and the birds make beautiful music together...
Procreation. That's where I'm sensing the root of your religious objection to gay marriage lies, Dick. Evolution. We will evolve if some portions of the human race choose not to procreate (or are unable to do so), whether those portions are gay or straight.
I respect your right to believe and profess whatever you choose and read it open-mindedly. So far, the "unnatural" argument doesn't hold up; attraction to the same sex is indeed natural to some. The "religious" argument doesn't hold up unless you apply inability to marry to all sins or condemned acts (which the Bible doesn't do with them either). The "procreation and evolution" argument doesn't hold up unless you're willing to go so far as to apply it to straight people without the ability or desire to bear children.
So, any rational reason that gays shouldn't be able to marry?
The fact that both of you find an attraction to the same sex as unnatural is fine. It doesn't negate the fact that millions of others find an attraction to the opposite sex as unnatural.
Biology doesn't support your logic, Dick.
See Mary run, see Jane chase Mary.
See Mary and Jane spin the bottle.
The birds and the birds make beautiful music together...
Procreation. That's where I'm sensing the root of your religious objection to gay marriage lies, Dick. Evolution. We will evolve if some portions of the human race choose not to procreate (or are unable to do so), whether those portions are gay or straight.
I respect your right to believe and profess whatever you choose and read it open-mindedly. So far, the "unnatural" argument doesn't hold up; attraction to the same sex is indeed natural to some. The "religious" argument doesn't hold up unless you apply inability to marry to all sins or condemned acts (which the Bible doesn't do with them either). The "procreation and evolution" argument doesn't hold up unless you're willing to go so far as to apply it to straight people without the ability or desire to bear children.
So, any rational reason that gays shouldn't be able to marry?