Gay Marriage: Wrong or right?

[Manco]

Gay marriage? So why not children marriage or human-animal marriages? Where is the limit?

I didn't know children and animals were consenting adults.(because that's where the limit's at)

[Tigrul]

Gay marriage? So why not children marriage or human-animal marriages? Where is the limit?

Gay marriage would be marriage between two ADULT persons, fully able of discern.

Children marriage would be wrong because children haven't reached an age of mental maturity, but you should know that, with consent from the parents, a male above 16 and female above 15 may marry, at least in my country. I don't know the age limits in other countries, but it is allowed in other countries as well, with consent from the parent.

Human-animal marriages happen all the time, seeing as humans are animals... except of course some humans which are plants. Anyway, the reason why human-(non-human)animal marriages aren't happening is because there is also a great difference between humans and non-humans in that non-humans simply don't have any legal powers anywhere in the world, because they lack the superior reason of humans.

So neither of your examples is really similar to gay marriage, and to say that gay marriage is as bad or similarly bad to children marriage is simply exaggerated.

[Orko]

Gay marriage? So why not children marriage or human-animal marriages? Where is the limit?

because it is illgeal for an animal or a child to sign a legal contract.
anyway, it's a stupid arguement because I can say "heterosexual marriage? So why not children marriage or human-animal marriages?"

[Ketchup]

Why would it be wrong? I can't comprehend any argument that is valid...

[Łukomski]

No I am not anti-homosexual nor discriminating anyone. But you all say that there is no reason why gays shouldn't get married. So in the same manner there is no reason why not-adults or even animals shouldn't get married?

[Tigrul]

Lumoski, you have been presented with various reasons why gay marriage is different from children or non-human marriage. Lack of mental maturity in children is really a very strong argument, and so is lack of superior reason in non-human animals.

[Łukomski]

So what is the definition of marriage? Could someone give one? Does it says something about gay marriages? Does it says only about adults?

In fact there are children marriages in some parts of nowadays Asia, and also in medieval it was a common tradition.

because it is illgeal for an animal or a child to sign a legal contract."

Gay marriages are also illegal in some countries...

[NONOPUST]

So what is the definition of marriage? Could someone give one? Does it says something about gay marriages? Does it says only about adults?

In fact there are children marriages in some parts of nowadays Asia, and also in medieval it was a common tradition.



Gay marriages are also illegal in some countries...

(1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage

[Orko]

Gay marriages are also illegal in some countries...

did you bother understanding what I wrote? I said that IT IS ILLEGAL FOR A CGILD OR AN ANIMAL TO SIGN A LEGAL CONTRACT and that's why they can't get married.

[Łukomski]

did you bother understanding what I wrote? I said that IT IS ILLEGAL FOR A CGILD OR AN ANIMAL TO SIGN A LEGAL CONTRACT and that's why they can't get married.

Sorry, I didn't had time to read your post carefully.

(1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage

Better this than nothing... but could you give your source?

[NONOPUST]

Better this than nothing... but could you give your source?

Sorry.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage

[gaius valerius]

So what is the definition of marriage? Could someone give one? Does it says something about gay marriages? Does it says only about adults?

All that matters is that marriage is a secular contract between 2 consenting adults, only viable since it is done for the state. Why do you keep posing that it automatically means that everything goes, animals, kids, etc, these pervert fantasies are refuted step by step, nobody defending gay marriage defends marriage between men and animals or so, and what you seem to ignore is that there is sound reasoning behind this.

In fact there are children marriages in some parts of nowadays Asia, and also in medieval it was a common tradition.

It's called beating around the bush. What ppl did a thousand years ago is not relevant to our current day society, neither are other societies which might be stuck in an outdated world view.

Gay marriages are also illegal in some countries...

It's called backward (ethically).

[Manco]

He's probably seen me naked, I admit I'm a remedy to homosexuality.

[ELITEOFKINGWARMAN8]

It's sickens me. I don't want a gay guy to be "checking" me out. I'm only down with one gender, and that's the ladies .

[Pallantides]

It's sickens me. I don't want a gay guy to be "checking" me out. I'm only down with one gender, and that's the ladies .

What does gay marriage have to do with guys checking you out?

[Time Commander Bob]

If two people consent to it and it does not harm anyone else then yes. I cannot think of how exactly gay marriage would harm anyone else really. And for those who say that marriage is between a man and a woman by definition, why not change the definition?

[Mafioso]

if they want to marry let them they have the freedom no one has the right to oppose that

[Łukomski]

After rethinking everything, few things disturb me.

Marriage of two men/women is illegal in most countries. yes? So we have to change the law to legalise it? Right? While your arguments about adults-only marriages are based on the same law which in most countries says human hetero-only. To legalise gay marriages we have to change that law anyway, that means that to legalise animal-human, child, human-alien, human-whatever marriages we also have to change the law. So how it does conflicts with what I previously said? The same law which in most countries negates homosexual marriages, negates also other "marriages". So while legalising gay marriage I see no reason why someone wouldn't had an idea or want to legalise the other. Also the original definitions (the gay marriages were legal for the first time in 2001, though the phenomenon existed earlier) of marriage is a legal relationship beetwen male and female. So please give me other argument or explain this because it seems paradoxical or hipocritical at least.

Limits are where we want them to be, because most of such limits are made by people. If people would want something, than they would sooner or later get it. People always want more than they get. And I am not against gay marriages, because if they want to have such, then I have nothing against it, but I am afraid of todays fashion on exaggerated liberalism, where people try to legalise everything no matter what (starting from drugs and ending on weapons) because it seems "cool" and "modern".

Peace

[Dayman]

After rethinking everything, few things disturb me.

Marriage of two men/women is illegal in most countries. yes? So we have to change the law to legalise it? Right? While your arguments about adults-only marriages are based on the same law which in most countries says human hetero-only. To legalise gay marriages we have to change that law anyway, that means that to legalise animal-human, child, human-alien, human-whatever marriages we also have to change the law. So how it does conflicts with what I previously said? The same law which in most countries negates homosexual marriages, negates also other "marriages". So while legalising gay marriage I see no reason why someone wouldn't had an idea or want to legalise the other. Also the original definitions (the gay marriages were legal for the first time in 2001, though the phenomenon existed earlier) of marriage is a legal relationship beetwen male and female. So please give me other argument or explain this because it seems paradoxical or hipocritical at least.

Limits are where we want them to be, because most of such limits are made by people. If people would want something, than they would sooner or later get it. People always want more than they get. And I am not against gay marriages, because if they want to have such, then I have nothing against it, but I am afraid of todays fashion on exaggerated liberalism, where people try to legalise everything no matter what (starting from drugs and ending on weapons) because it seems "cool" and "modern".

Peace

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy pocketed with misinformation and a lack of knowledge what liberalism is.

[Łukomski]

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy pocketed with misinformation and a lack of knowledge what liberalism is.

OK... So what can you say me that I don't know about it?