that causes more stress

I agree. PMs can cause great stress here when one posts in the Politics forum.

Ah I see. But all the same, I think if gay unions ever becomes widely legalized, cries for rights to polygamous unions will not be far behind.

Read what I wrote again, you didn't get it. I am not confused, you just don't get it. Take a real Zoology class in animal behavior, not an Ag class.

Homosexual male penguin couples and Black Swan couples have been documented to find surrogate females to impregnate, and once she lays the egg, both males take turns sitting on it, then once hatched, raising it. Homosexual male dolphin relationships have also been documented, with adoptions of offspring from deceased mothers in the pod.

You keep saying that homosexual relationships are unnatural, which they are not, since they occur in nature all the time.

Hold up, now we are bringing penguin in the damn equation.

How the hell does a dolphin have sex with another dolphin, I want to see video of this ****.

And she wont see this cause she has me on ignore, but that is her own loss.

Ahh, sister, let it go.....

There is not much you can do to convince me, and I cannot do much to convince you.

For the third time I think we will have to agree that we disagree.

I just can't believe that in the face of scientific factual evidence, you would choose to remain ignorant and be happy about it.

I never agreed to disagree, you are wrong, plain and simple.

Even scientific facts can be debated.


Well, let me say this - I've agreed to disagree. Now you are free to continue this line of discussion by yourself....

Well-this matter has now crossed the great divide.
From the Left Coast to the Right Coast:
"NY state agencies to recognize gay marriages

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York state has instructed government agencies to recognize same-sex marriages conducted out of state or abroad, renewing debate on an issue that was used to rally conservatives in the last U.S. general election.
The directive could impact everything from health insurance to public housing and organ donation. It was welcomed by the New York Civil Liberties Union, which posted a copy on its Web site and said it was "a milestone in the fight for fairness."
In the memo dated May 14 but not publicized at the time, Gov. David Paterson's legal counsel, David Nocenti, said state agencies that do not recognize gay marriages could be subject to liability.
The directive follows a New York appeals court ruling in February that valid same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries must be recognized in New York........."
http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...37445820080529

Will be very interesting to see just how this plays out.

You are taking facts and skewing them to fit your argument and are highlighting an exception.......not a definitive conclusion that homosexuality isn't unnatural.

Sex between a male and a female species to further their population is one of the most inherently natural actions on this planet. Two homosexual penguins........Christ that's making me laugh.....having to rely on a surrogate mother to bear them a child is not more natural than the alternative. Also, the evidence behind this is anecdotal, at best. See.....I can read scientific information too!!!!

There are plenty of studies out there that have concluded that even calling this type of behavior in animals "homosexual" is controversial at best, and perhaps, a poor choice of words? Why? Because they are animals and the factors that lie behind their sexuality aren't understood well by all. There have also been studies showing several other motivating factors behind animals engaging in this type of behavior. None of them involve things like homo-dolphins seeking out studly-dudly male dolphins to frolic around in the ocean. They do involve things like clan/pack/pride dominance.

Sort of like incest in nature? Or like eating your young? Or like being born with two heads?

Definitely eating the young is quite similar to husbandry.

I've given you a (limited) concession on incest, why keep bringing up stupid strawmen when you could simply fight the battle on, y'know, logical terms?

Well that's natural for those animals, the argument is that since animals sometimes eat their young, then if humans wanted to as well, that would be natural. It certainly is not, so you cannot compare animal husbandry to support your argument that its natural.

Since when is "it certainly is not" a good rebuttal? So, if you are going to say something, explain yourself, instead of JUST telling people what they can and can not compare this to that to. This is the defense of a six year old, and I am not being sarcastic, this is a way a child would rebuttal.

Here is my opinion on the issue of Gay marriage:

We are a country of free thought and free religion, or at least that is the principles of our country. The idea of this country is that we are all FREE, until the point in which we cause harm each other or ourselves. This is why people fought for the women's right to vote, the freedom of african americans, and then the equal treatment of african Americans etc.

SO, the question here is: allowing two men or women to marry, does this harm others or cause people to harm themselves?

Harming themselves:
I am going to assume that the general thought is that gay marriage is harming the two parties because they are committing themselves to a sin legally, in support by the country. However, this sin is not a law, and therefor the country has no right in saying that the act of homosexuality can be stopped, such as gambling. Also, since this is not a legal act, there is no authority in saying that a marriage would be doing these two harm.

Harming others:
I am going to assume (again) that the general thought is a moral issue. Allowing gay marriage devalues other marriages that our between a man and a woman. It also showcases that homosexuality is acceptable to impressionable youth. As of right now, homosexuals can live together, and be 'out' in the public as much as heterosexuals couples, and there right to do so is protected by anti-discrimination laws. Their partnerships are still showcased, and therefor already make the similar impression to youth that a marriage would make. In the same regards to marriage, through the same logic, a homosexual couple devalues relationships, as a it would if they were married. So, the devaluing is already present, allowing marriage does not progress the devaluing, if you see it as devaluing.

SPIRITUALLY SPEAKING: Outlawing gay marriage only outlaws the country or states recognition of gay marriage. Gay marriage happen in the ceremony sense through spiritual terms. There are Protestant sect that recognize gay couples, and even with sects that do not, my old baptist preacher conducted a gay ceremony. Even if they weren't recognized by the state, they still had the spiritual ceremony (now whether God accepts the union is an unnecessary debate as it is a matter of opinion, but the ceremony did happen in a house of worship by a practicing preacher)

CONSTITUTIONAL SPEAKING: anti-gay marriage is essentially saying that these people do not have the right to do what everyone else is doing. AND there right is NOT denied because they committed a crime (i.e. did anything wrong in the eyes of the country as a legal system). So, I full heartedly believe that gays have a right to be married. I do not necessarily agree with homosexuality, or the moral standards, but I think it is their right to do so as much it is a heterosexuals for the reason that they are committing NO crime.

WHAT IS NATURAL: I think love is natural. I have seen people fight their homosexuality, and they have become very depressed (I have also seen heterosexuals think they are homosexual, but then realize they are not). I do not think life should be lived where you are fighting or denying something in your heart, because it will be a sad or bitter life. The best thing and most natural thing is our feelings, and I just think that if a man truly loves another man then that IS natural. This part I understand is COMPLETELY opinion, and is a weak part of my statement, it is really just a matter of what I feel is right, so do not jump on my case for this part of my statement.