The Republic of Heaven

For or against?

And please state reasons. Don't just throw in 'because it's not in the bible...'

Who on earth on here is going to start quoting the bible (except Alec if he's being ironic)?

Anyway, against the word 'marraige' because that's a religious contract between a man, a woman and god but for civil partnerships and equal rights and all that for obvious reasons.

There is no logical reason to be against it.

Who on earth on here is going to start quoting the bible (except Alec if he's being ironic)?

Bollocks, beat me to it.

im for it. I know some people that are gay and you know being gay isnt really a choice. Your born that way, it just genetics that got screwed up. The wrong mind in the wrong body, thats all. So if they find someone that they can be happy with for the rest of there lives then i dont see a problem.

Taroh wrote:i'm for it. I know some people that are gay and you know being gay isnt really a choice. You're born that way, it just genetics that got screwed up. The wrong mind in the wrong body, thats all. So if they find someone that they can be happy with for the rest of their lives then i dont see a problem.

*starts beating Taroh with a spiked baseball bat*

*is not impressed*

its just my oppinion on the topic, you have the rite to your own views

Taroh wrote:its just my oppinion on the topic, you have the right to your own views

If there's something wrong and screwed up about it then surely they should be taken in for tests and hormone injections and floggings in order to make them right.

Besides, it's not genetic. It's chemical.

again, theres just different opinions on the topic, idk i personally find no problem with it

Taroh wrote:its just my oppinion on the topic, you have the rite to your own views

And the right to your own language too, apparently

I think it's reasonable to say that homosexuality is an anomaly from an evolutionary perspective, but that has no bearing on right or wrong: to claim that it's a genetic error would imply that there was some correct fixed genetic code that we're supposed to have, which is ridiculous since it changes with every generation.

im not saying that there is a right and wrong genetic code to humans, im just saying that in most cases being gay isnt a choice, you dont choose to be the way you are. Im just saying that because most people think that you can just stop being gay, but you cant, you cant change who you are and you shouldnt have to. You should be exepted for the way you are and the person you are.

we've got same-sex marriage over here already! w00t!

Bloody debauched Canuckistanis. Why Katrina didn't wipe you fiends out as well, I don't know.

hermit wrote:

Taroh wrote:i'm for it. I know some people that are gay and you know being gay isnt really a choice. You're born that way, it just genetics that got screwed up. The wrong mind in the wrong body, thats all. So if they find someone that they can be happy with for the rest of their lives then i dont see a problem.

*starts beating Taroh with a spiked baseball bat*

*is not impressed*

So have you asked bubby the Yiddish word for a kosher soul in a gentile body?

Besides, it's not genetic. It's chemical

To say it were solely "chemistry" would imply that inter-sex babies (boys whose penises were burnt off in botched circumcisions, say) could be raised as a girl and develop female desires. Which ain't true.

If there's something wrong and screwed up about it then surely they should be taken in for tests and hormone injections and floggings in order to make them right.

Don't you be giving the merkins ideas...

Anyway, homosexuality is I suppose a "fault" but its remarkably prevalent one, which suggests um...something.

Well yeah whatever, let gays marry, doesnt bother me, I have more important things to care about.

Oh and:

But to say it's a fault implies that we have a 'correct design.'

Well, I suppose from a biological point of view, a homosexual couple would be unable to reproduce, so these individuals wouldn't be 'successful' - they wouldn't pass their genes on. That doesn't really matter so much now though. I don't have a problem with gay marriage. What do you think of gay couples adopting kids?

jessia wrote:we've got same-sex marriage over here already! w00t!

We have same sex civil partnerships coming into law in December.

Melancholy Man wrote:So have you asked bubby the Yiddish word for a kosher soul in a gentile body?

Not yet, no. All in good time.

To say it were solely "chemistry" would imply that inter-sex babies (boys whose penises were burnt off in botched circumcisions, say) could be raised as a girl and develop female desires. Which ain't true.

How does that work?

Anyway, I think it's more than just chemicals. I used to think attraction was all about the pheromones, but I think it's more than just that.

And Krebbe, that's an excellent point.

Jez, I got no problem with gay couples adopting kids. I reckon the most important thing that parents need to be is supportive, caring, loving and stable. I couldn't care less if they're both male or both female.

Evolution is also just something that happens and not in my opinion, something that is supposed to happen. If technology arose to allow gay couples to reproduce on their own, then I wouldn't consider it anymore 'unnatural' than how any other living thing reproduces. I don't consider humans capable of acting outside of nature: all our decisions and desires are dictated by it.

Evolution is also just something that happens and not in my opinion, something that is supposed to happen. If technology arose to allow gay couples to reproduce on their own, then I wouldn't consider it anymore 'unnatural' than how any other living thing reproduces. I don't consider humans capable of acting outside of nature: all our decisions and desires are dictated by it.

Natural selection favours those with advantageous qualities. Evolution would have nothing but positive changes. Things such as six fingers, webbed appendages and possibly homosexuality are mutations. It may be true that we don't have a 'correct' design, but there are rules for the changing gene. It wouldn't spontaneously change so that we would end up with no appendages, or no working method of procreation. If it doesn't work to our advantage, then I would consider it a fault or flaw.


Suppose if I were to say that allowing gay marriage may open the door to legalized incest, or bestial marriage?

Suppose if I were to say that allowing gay marriage may open the door to legalized incest, or bestial marriage?

Why would you be saying that?