madhatter85
Transhumanist
I have answered all of your questions. And i would expect you to refrain from name-calling as it is not only against forum rules, but shows how petty people are willing to be when they can't win the debate.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Marriage and sexuality
- Thread starter Kerr
- Start date
McBell
Admiral Obvious
and here I thought you wee supposed to be better than that...
So much for your morality.
Interesting how you completely avoid the point.
Though not the least bit surprising, given your blatant lack of honesty thus far in this thread.
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
It wasnt my question...
It was the person you're ignoring
You may not be a bigot, but you know, I am far from alone in thinking you are, which frankly judging by your posts, it is the easiest conclusion.... oh an the ignoring of one of the forums most vocal lesbians, does not help your case.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
in all honesty, I have not seen anything presented by him that supports his case.....
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
the only thing you have "proven"
is that you are unwilling to listen to others....
You have not really proven homsexuality is not fundamental to our survival at all.
I have provided cold hard scientific studies that counter your assertion. Thus showing your "proof" is as water tight as a leaking bucket, dear Liza...
What you are afraid to admit is that when it comes to these issues there is no definative answer....
- we simply don't know for certain what makes homosexuals homosexuals,
- we dont know for certain what horrors may be unleashed by allowing other homosapiens to marry other homosapiens,
- we may think it is sound logic that same sex couples have no worth when it comes to reproduction and keeping the populace abundant. However it is very clear that it takes more than a set of genitals to raise a child.
- Science is still concluding and discovering that homosexuals may indeed effect the genetics of others in a beneficial way that actually may increase fertility, you could argue with world wide fertility dwindling (sprematazoas are dying, due to modern life)if the science is correct, homosexuality actually will help the human race
- You seem to think that we need more babies to keep the GDP high and have more breeding workers, that produce labor and ideas and contribute to the economy. However America is actually an aging nation. Breeders really don't count. What matters is immigrants. Without immigrants America would be an aging populace..much liek Japan. Homosexuality then has nothing to add to this topic, as this is a topic about old white people versus Mexicans and other immigrants...
Venatoris
Active Member
You still haven't answered my vasectomy question. I have asked you several times now but no response as of yet.
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
Anti-thesisofreason
Explorer
I seriously doubt that allowing the relatively few homosexuals to marry will have an adverse effect on the 6 Billion, and quickly growing, world population. If anything we could use a little reproductive restraint in this world.
Anti-thesisofreason
Explorer
The only thing homosexuals "suffer" from are ignorant comments and discrimination from ignorant people.
Perfect Circle
Just Browsing
@Madhatter,
1. Marriage is not DEFINED as being fundamental to our very survival, it is simply DESCRIBED as such in a court decision.
2. You seem to want to overlook the part of the decision that clearly states that is is a RIGHT. You are not talking to children, so when you switch the word RIGHT out with PRIVILEGE, you're not fooling anyone.
3. You have failed to provide an answer to the question of a married man who gets a visectomy.
4. You have failed to provide an answer to the question of a heterosexual fertile individual who chooses to marry a heterosexual sterile individual. (and before you fire back with that "behavioral" non-sense, please understand that a heterosexual, fertile individual is making a CHOICE to marry someone who cannot have children.)
5. Why hasn't anyone, even a religious person... even another LDS member... come to the defense of your argument with secular reasoning?
You need to simply understand that you have lost the debate. I'm sure that 95% of forum members would agree with that assertion.
1. Marriage is not DEFINED as being fundamental to our very survival, it is simply DESCRIBED as such in a court decision.
2. You seem to want to overlook the part of the decision that clearly states that is is a RIGHT. You are not talking to children, so when you switch the word RIGHT out with PRIVILEGE, you're not fooling anyone.
3. You have failed to provide an answer to the question of a married man who gets a visectomy.
4. You have failed to provide an answer to the question of a heterosexual fertile individual who chooses to marry a heterosexual sterile individual. (and before you fire back with that "behavioral" non-sense, please understand that a heterosexual, fertile individual is making a CHOICE to marry someone who cannot have children.)
5. Why hasn't anyone, even a religious person... even another LDS member... come to the defense of your argument with secular reasoning?
You need to simply understand that you have lost the debate. I'm sure that 95% of forum members would agree with that assertion.
madhatter85
Transhumanist
I put her on ignore a long time ago (more than a year) because of a separate issue.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Interesting that madhatter hasn't presented a single piece of evidence, yet believes he's proven something.
Venatoris
Active Member
Madhatter, Have I insulted you in some way? Why won't you answer my question?
blackout
Violet.
I brought up a couple things similar to your line of question
and was passed by as well.
Perfect Circle
Just Browsing
Maybe he's got the thread on ignore...
madhatter85
Transhumanist
Depends on if it was medically necessary. my own personal views is that this procedure is much like Abortion. I believe abortion should not be made illegal, however in order to legally perform it there must be a medical reason to do it.
I know what you are going to bring up next, and that is about birth control. and they have their place in the medical field, however, many people use it when medically unnecessary.
So to answer your question, All forms of birth control, abortion, vasectomy and historectomy should only be performed when a medical condition necessitates it. (except in cases of rape, the person's choice to abort the pregnancy should be available to them).
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
That's not the question. The question is whether a man who has had a vasectomy should be allowed to marry. Yes or no?
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
maybe we need to have our tubes examined before the marriage vows are said...just in case
madhatter85
Transhumanist
this has dregged on long enough.
The reason I brought this up was to show you that we are not required, as a society, to provide benefits for same sex couples because they do not function in the same capacity as the nuclear family. That capacity being fundamental to our very existence and survival which is why the benefits for marriage was put in place to begin with.
The reason I brought this up was to show you that we are not required, as a society, to provide benefits for same sex couples because they do not function in the same capacity as the nuclear family. That capacity being fundamental to our very existence and survival which is why the benefits for marriage was put in place to begin with.