Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 4:59 PM
Anom: Yes, in my opinion, in a way, homosexual marriages are flawed heterosexual marriages at best. But just as I would not move for the forced dissolution of a flawed heterosexual marriage or prevent one because the odds were against it, I won’t stand in the way of same sex marriage. As for benefits, I think same sex marriages will encourage home ownership, a greater desire to live a constructive life, monogamy, a greater desire to save or prepare for the future and just about all the other sociological benefits other than procreation. But no matter, none of what has been posted here takes away from the original question of how same-sex marriages devaluate heterosexual marriages.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 4:20 PM
Anom: Sure, that makes sense, but you don’t lose your tax break or inheritance if we have same sex marriages. And along the other line, I always advocate for the optimum, but it so rarely happen in society, that we can’t play percentages. Flawed heterosexual marriages are common. Divorce is acceptable and poor to bad parenting happens in all walks of life. If we were to strive for the benefits you list, heterosexual marriage would become one of select restriction.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 3:22 PM
Texas: Once again, I’ll go along with that.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 3:22 PM
anominus: Really? What on earth do you “buy” with your marriage? How does your analogy apply?
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 2:32 PM
King, in what way have I lied? Why don’t you take your time and formulate a response? It is harder than just name calling, but I think it’s better in the long run.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 2:30 PM
I'll go along with that.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 2:27 PM
DCM: no, that doesn’t work unless you are saying that gay marriage will make you love your wife less or not honor your wedding vows. The only one who can devaluate your marriage is you or your spouse. Furthermore, an increase of genuine $20 bills can also devaluate currency as a whole. Are you saying that more marriages of any kind will affect traditional marriage? You really have to clutch at straws to oppose homosexuality. Why can’t you oppose it on simple religious grounds? I would never find fault with that.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 2:17 PM
Stan: That doesn’t address the issue in the least? If I’m so out of my league, why can’t you address the issue at hand? For example, your statistics don’t represent the lesbian population. Once again, you are focusing on anal sex. Was it your years working for the CA dept of Public Health and being been forced to collect samples from way too many disgusting places that have left you obsessed like some type of PTSD?
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 2:13 PM
Patriot: No, not all of them. Do you think that Lesbians are having anal sex? Moreover, if one’s problem with homosexuality is based on that single act, then any opposition to homosexuality would disappear with the cessation of that act.
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 1:21 PM
Kirk: Only if your sense of meaning was so shallowly based in the first place. We have been constantly redefining marriage since its inception. But how can the activities of others affect the esteem you hold for your own marriage?
In response to:

The Salem Sandwich Trials

DEmike Wrote: Jul 31, 2012 1:16 PM
It always amazes me how in any discussion of homosexuality, some folks harp on anal sex. I’m not sure if it is a narrow view, limited understanding or obsession.
Previous 21 - 30 Next