Way to go canada!

[Greatsilverwyrm]

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

[Astralinre]

 

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

[Lionheart_0]

Oh oh oh! *puts up hand*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I just thought of a reason why this can help benifit us slightly. Well the couple couldnt have a kid right? So if they wanted one, they could adopt! That way they help out kids in need.

[expertgamer]

wow, there's all this religious debate, some bad, some good, whatever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

there was research into the issue of sexual immorality and it's definition in the Bible, here's the shocker:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

masturbation is just as wrong as homosexual intercourse. referring to men, because lesbianism is not exactly intercourse.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the reason for this is, when looking at why certain things were looked down upon or forbidden, was that within these acts a man wastes his seed. you are not to do this, doing so is offensive and immoral.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

so i honestly think homosexual people can be together, but if they want to stray away from that type of sin, no intercourse. they can still love eachother, but no intercourse, i don't remember anything forbidding love, it's the waste of seed that is the issue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i can't find the website, i googled it and tried to do re search what i originally think i searched, but can't find it.

[Greatsilverwyrm]

 

 

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Allowing it isn't neccesarily encouraging it, it's just allowing it. It's not like there's going to be an ad-campaign "Guys, marry other guys! It's FUN!!"...

[Eric2203]

 

 

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You answered your own question: see what I put in bold in your quote. Before, they didn't have equal rights. Now they do (in these countries). Why do you consider that allowing it ? Maybe it's removing what was prohibited. What you said yourself goes both ways. As to your previous post in this thread, that's narrow-minded. We've already established there's more to a homosexual relationship than kids, so don't base your judgement on that only. Would help if you read the other posts first.

[mk]

Im g-a-y, im have no intentions of marrying in a religious ceremony.

 

 

 

The main reason for supporting g-a-y marriage being introduced is that most laws concerning financial aid, medical aid, next of kin (once a partner has died) and guardianship of children is dictated by marital status.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In other words, if your not actually **married**, be it in a church or a registry office, you dont get any of these things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The medical aid is the big one tho. If a couple arent legally married, one partner cannot get government support if they have to leave their job to support the other partner. They have no legal visitation rights to those partners in restrictive care (immediate family only) and will not recieve any inheritance from their partner should they die without writing a will. All of these things are taken for granted by the majority, but denied to those who cannot be married.

[insane]

 

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wasn't talking about marriage sorry :P I should've explained better, I was going off on a small tangent, that for people to believe in evolution, it's kind of hard to believe in homosexuality as a good thing from an evolutionary standpoint.

[Eric2203]

 

 

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wasn't talking about marriage sorry :P I should've explained better, I was going off on a small tangent, that for people to believe in evolution, it's kind of hard to believe in homosexuality as a good thing from an evolutionary standpoint.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd venture to say that even the most fervent supporters of homosexuality realize there's no part in evolution for that. ;) That's not an argument you'll hear from them.

[mk]

i dont feel that the world relies on me to further the human race.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

do you?

[mk]

 

 

 

 

 

What about evolution? Wouldn't homosexuality contradict evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sure, some animals may be "homosexual"... but in the long run, wouldn't it certainly destroy a species?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the entire species becomes homosexual, sure, but just because * marriage is allowed doesn't mean every human being is going to become homosexual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it certainly isn't benefitting the species which violates evolutionary Laws (or theories).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, but it's not hurting us, so, why prohibiting it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Allowing it isn't neccesarily encouraging it, it's just allowing it. It's not like there's going to be an ad-campaign "Guys, marry other guys! It's FUN!!"...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lol lol.. there should be an advert of that :D id star in it!

[How2PK]

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my book helping a community to feel more accepted isn't useless.

[mk]

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hrm. u can see homosexuality as useless in a purey procreative perspective. but if you choose to do so, where does runescape, drinking, nightclubs, dope, hobbies, art, music etc etc fit in?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

if you made all useless but fun persuits illegal, life would be 'purposful' but extremely boring *yawns widely*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[after thought: posting that message didnt help further the spead of my genes, should forums be delegallised as useless?]

[Astralinre]

 

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my book helping a community to feel more accepted isn't useless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But what if it's helping them to accept something that's harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it's not hurting us or helping us, then it should neither be prohibited or encouraged. It doesn't do any good to outlaw something that's harmless or to promote something that's useless. So, if people want to practice homosexuality, let them, but don't encourage it by changing the law to make them feel more accepted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hrm. u can see homosexuality as useless in a purey procreative perspective. but if you choose to do so, where does runescape, drinking, nightclubs, dope, hobbies, art, music etc etc fit in?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

if you made all useless but fun persuits illegal, life would be 'purposful' but extremely boring *yawns widely*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[after thought: posting that message didnt help further the spead of my genes, should forums be delegallised as useless?]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After thinking a bit, I don't agree with GSW that it's harmless. If someone is practicing only homosexuality, then that behaviour prevents him from engaging in normal sexual activity that could produce offspring. If it's preventing something that's beneficial (propagating that species), then it's harmful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those examples you listed don't prevent beneficial behavious unless taken to the extreme, and some are beneficial in and of themselves. If you play Runescape all the time, it keeps you from engaging in physically and socially healthy behaviour. Night clubs help people meet each other, and the dancing is healthy. Alchohol, in reasonable amounts, can also be healthy. Dope? Well, I'd have to say that's harmful too. As for art and music, they tend to enrich the mind. I guess this paragraph was a bit irrelevant though.

[Greatsilverwyrm]

After thinking a bit, I don't agree with GSW that it's harmless. If someone is practicing only homosexuality, then that behaviour prevents him from engaging in normal sexual activity that could produce offspring. If it's preventing something that's beneficial (propagating that species), then it's harmful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

True, but if they aren't allowed to marry, odds are they either won't marry. Or, they'll marry a member of the opposite sex but their heart won't be in it, which means probably a bad marriage, probably divorce, bad environment for any possible children. There's also the whole idea that homosexuality is hereditary..

[How2PK]

 

In my book helping a community to feel more accepted isn't useless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But what if it's helping them to accept something that's harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, not everybody thinks it is harmfull, so they should be givin a choice. I'm sure the people that consider it harmfull won't do it, and the people that don't think like you, probably do it if they want to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[edit]Had a wrong quote tag[/edit]

[Lionheart_0]

There's also the whole idea that homosexuality is hereditary..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Erm that means that people are born with it right? Well if thats what you mean, its correct. People are born with a sexual prefrence. I dotn have any hard proof but thats what the public health nurse (im assuming she has more experience in this kind of stuff then any other person on these forums) at my school said. Most kids in my class were shocked, cause they thought people just dicided to be like that, but it wasnt so. I answered my question though, How homosexuals are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or perhaps... i should ask an expert. MK, have you alwasy had these kind of feelings?

[Astralinre]

 

There's also the whole idea that homosexuality is hereditary..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Erm that means that people are born with it right? Well if thats what you mean, its correct. People are born with a sexual prefrence. I dotn have any hard proof but thats what the public health nurse (im assuming she has more experience in this kind of stuff then any other person on these forums) at my school said. Most kids in my class were shocked, cause they thought people just dicided to be like that, but it wasnt so. I answered my question though, How homosexuals are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or perhaps... i should ask an expert. MK, have you alwasy had these kind of feelings?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.whyprophets.com/prophets/gay_gene.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I haven't done much research into the trustworthiness of this site, but the author seems to know what he's talking about, and he makes some good points. I reckon I might as well throw this out there, just so people have a little more information to think about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the 1980s, the term "sexual orientation" became more common that "sexual preference." It became normal to look on homosexuality in terms of "being gay" rather than "being ordinary and doing gay things." It became fashionable to look at homosexuality as a biological issue instead of a psychological issue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my opinion, this illustrates how science is the slave of belief.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The reason for the shift was not because something new was discovered, or because psychology had run out of ideas, but because people had come to see prejudice against homosexuals as a bad thing. There are stories of cruel and horrific things being done to gay men to "cure" them, and everyone has seen examples of gay men being treated with hatred. People just got tired of being nasty to gay men. Besides, heterosexual norms had become so free and easy that homosexuality no longer seemed particularly bad. So it is now fashionable to just say "God made him that way" and then look for the necessary evidence.

[Greatsilverwyrm]

 

There's also the whole idea that homosexuality is hereditary..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Erm that means that people are born with it right? Well if thats what you mean, its correct. People are born with a sexual prefrence. I dotn have any hard proof but thats what the public health nurse (im assuming she has more experience in this kind of stuff then any other person on these forums) at my school said. Most kids in my class were shocked, cause they thought people just dicided to be like that, but it wasnt so. I answered my question though, How homosexuals are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or perhaps... i should ask an expert. MK, have you alwasy had these kind of feelings?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And thusly, we've stumbled into one of the oldest debates.. nature vs. nurture..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not proven that homosexuality is hereditary, or at least I haven't seen any studies on it or anything. But it's possible. It's also possible that you're born with other biological things that determine your sexual preference. It's equally as likely though, I think that you aren't born with any sexual preference, and you develop it or learn it or whatever..

[Eric2203]

After thinking a bit, I don't agree with GSW that it's harmless. If someone is practicing only homosexuality, then that behaviour prevents him from engaging in normal sexual activity that could produce offspring. If it's preventing something that's beneficial (propagating that species), then it's harmful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those examples you listed don't prevent beneficial behavious unless taken to the extreme, and some are beneficial in and of themselves. If you play Runescape all the time, it keeps you from engaging in physically and socially healthy behaviour. Night clubs help people meet each other, and the dancing is healthy. Alchohol, in reasonable amounts, can also be healthy. Dope? Well, I'd have to say that's harmful too. As for art and music, they tend to enrich the mind. I guess this paragraph was a bit irrelevant though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So what, you're only gonna have sex to have kids ? Like I'm gonna believe that ! Some heterosexuals do not want kids, yet have sexual relationships. Is that harmful too ? You're narrow-minded again. The whole planet isn't gonna turn homosexual just because some are. Evolution is in no danger whatsoever and last time I checked, the Earth's population was still growing very fast. Don't exaggerate.

[Pyro]

In my opinion, this is a very simple matter. There can be only one answer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let's get some obvious things out of the way first...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- There is no reason to believe that Gay marriages will increase the amount of homosexuals.

 

 

 

- Because of the above, the spreading of STD's will not be affected.

 

 

 

- Neither will there be any lesser amount of children born.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So the law doesn't have any effect and is pointless? Yeah, I guess. After all, the homosexuals do have the same rights as us, they can marry others of the other gender aswell! Because of this, we should ban Christianity and close all churches. This would not mean they have less rights than any other of us, because they could visit the place of worship for another religion as much as they want just like we can!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An idiotic conclusion? Yes, I agree.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gay marriages will have ONE, I repeat, ONE, effect. It will make people happy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, they are not asking you to support their way of life. They aren't asking you to go to their weddings. In fact, they aren't asking you for anything else than equal rights.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

People will have whatever relationships with other adults that they wish, and there is nothing you can do about that. You can keep on convincing yourself that you need to vote against equal rights for homosexuals because it is unnatural, but you're not really fooling anyone else than yourself. You're voting for your prejudices and your arrogance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are many of you who have religious reasons to want to avoid homosexuality like the plague. That's cool, I doubt anyone will hate you over that. If you feel that your church should not host gay weddings, that's totally okay. But does it end there?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some of you seem to think it is your God-given duty to judge others. Something is a Sin? So what, let that be between God and the sinners themselves, it's none of your concern. Your beliefs are your concern, those of others are not. I'm telling you, they don't want your opinion on their sins, they want equal rights. I respect people who live their lives based on religion, because I know that can be tough. I do however have no respect whatsoever for those who enforce those religious beliefs on others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My conclusion is therefore that the only negative aspect of homosexual marriages is that it will be a mild annoyance to many people, whom it does not really concern at all. The positive aspect is that it means equal rights, and makes a lot of people happy. And yes, I think that matters quite a lot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is no doubt in my mind that the world would be a better place if people stopped judging others. There is no doubt in my mind that the world would be a better place if people cared more about the wellbeing of other people than about the regulations they live by. There is no doubt in my mind that the world would be a better place without prejudices and hate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is quite possible that there are those of you who have legit reasons for wanting to vote against this type of marriage. It is also possible that many of you still feel you are entitled to vote against your fellow man for the sole sake of forcing others to live by your moral code. If the latter applies to you, it is my opinion that you do not deserve the priviledge of living in a modern enlightened democracy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You know what? Banning Stem cell reasearch, that I can understand. I can't agree, but I can understand. Banning abortion? I understand the reasoning, even while I do not agree. But homosexual marriages?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whether homosexual marriages are introduced or not will not affect me, nor anyone I know. Yet I care enough about the rights of others to type this post. Can you say the same?

[Lionheart_0]

:shock: :shock: ^Pyro you just owned everyone here, lol :lol:

[gehjl]

 

 

 

There is no doubt in my mind that the world would be a better place if people stopped judging others. There is no doubt in my mind that the world would be a better place if people cared more about the wellbeing of other people than about the regulations they live by. There is no doubt in my mind that the world would be a better place without prejudices and hate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very nicely stated Pyro. I agree whole heartedly with this post. This is the way that Christians are supposed to act, but sadly, we all don't. And I apologize if it somehwere seemed like in my post that i hated homosexuals or anything, yes I believe it's wrong, but as a Christian, I must love them like Christ would.

[Greatsilverwyrm]

If you truly beleived that, gehjl, you wouldn't be so against gay marriage...

[Astralinre]

If you truly beleived that, gehjl, you wouldn't be so against * marriage...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry, but not necessarily. If someone believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, it doesn't matter how much he accepts and loves other people, he would still believe * marriage is wrong. Loving sinners (which I believe all people are) and condoning their sins are two different things entirely.