When the day comes that a human and a goat can communicate their mutual love for each other, then we can have a serious discussion about revising the definition of marriage to include goats.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
When the day comes that a human and a goat can communicate their mutual love for each other, then we can have a serious discussion about revising the definition of marriage to include goats.
Of course he's not gay...
Do you think that a woman who has sex with a man and a woman (as part of a threesome) is gay?
Or do you just think she's enjoying that threesome? I've no doubt there are men who have tried stuff like that within the confines of a MMW threesome and they're not gay... just sexually experimental. If their natural leaning is to have sex with women and they don't wish to enter into romantic relationships with men, they're not actually gay.
You cannot "catch the gay" from kissing someone of the same sex. If so, nearly every woman you know would be a lesbian, I assure you.
Ah ok, so therefore heterosexual relationships that don't produce children don't "make sense". Got it.
Oh man. Come on. We have the POTENTIAL to produce offspring. You know what I meant. You can't argue against it so you make absurd statements. Ugh.
And when goats can enter into contracts, own property, etc.
We will likely reach this milestone with chimpanzees or dolphins first, though to be perfectly honest, most all species do not cross breed in nature.
Well, I just changed the definition to "can be between guy & girl, 2 guys, 2 girl, a bunch of people, or whatever."
And a billion people around the world just accepted that definition.
Now what?
The people have decided to change the definition.
So do gay couples. IVF?
It's illogical. All humans, thanks to medical advances, can reproduce. If they choose to reproduce.
You want the 'why'? It's because back then women were *property* to be bought and sold, not people. Does that somehow make it 'better' that a woman who had been raped was to be put to death unless her rapist paid her father to marry her?
Please, provide the 'context' that somehow makes this particular bit of the bible 'good', or even defensible at all.
So anyone who genetically, medically or psychologically chooses to not have children for whatever reason shouldn't be allowed to get married either?
So a child should be allowed to drive? A murderer freshly released on parole should be allowed to purchase firearms?
It's also good to know you support polygamy.
I have not made any references to religious preference. My point is that this is really NOT about equality. Its about wanting affirmation. The problem is that people are allowed to believe for any reason, including religious, that same sex coupling is morally wrong. Its allowed. Everyone has that right. We don't have the right to force beliefs on someone else. That is where the homosexual movement goes way wrong. What I see are folks who believe it is not right and it is not "marriage" defending that stance. I see the homosexual movement trying to force a new definition on the rest of society. Its the complete opposite of how it is portrayed.
Good point. If Joe was born bisexual and was attracted to both Megan and Dave, he would likely be more attracted to one over the other and therefore it would not be a choice.
Touche'.
Name the negative consequences of marriage in name including adult same-sex unions.
I believe the bible but I wouldn't call it a fact because it is not possible to prove it. I understand logic and reasoning. Your absurd comments about me being s bigot and getting my science from FoxNews reveals your ignorance and inability to reason. I'm not aware of foxnews making taking any position the science of being gay.
Your absurdity is tiring and boring.
People are not necessarily born with a certain orientation nor do they necessarily consciously choose it. Human sex behaviour and gender identification is very complex. The oversimplifying statements in this thread hurt my brain.
I agree with your assessment. I have simply stated they're born that way because to get as complex as you just did would have caused more arguments than oversimplifying it here. As the thread as borne out thus far.
This thread is indeed frustrating.
As I have said over and over. They should be equal and not discriminated upon in any fashion. They should not re-define what marriage is.
Why are you placing conditions and limitations on marriage all of a sudden? I thought that was taboo?
you're being assanine.
Equality doesn't preclude accountable for actions. Neither does my statement
If i murdered someone, I wouldn't wish to be given a gun upon release or granted early unjust parole.
I openly support Polygamy. If a group of people, who are consenting adults, come to a mutually beneficial contract in which they are all happy, productive members of society, and in no way affect, hurt or impact societies well being,
What right do I have to tell them to stop? They aren't hurting me. They aren't hurting anyone. A house with 5 mothers, 2 fathers might very well be a happy home capable of bringing up children to be well adjusted.
It tells me that I'm dealing with people of a certain reasoning ability. Let's leave it at that.
I love how you started off in this thread grandstanding as open minded independent but the more and more you talk the more your prejudices reveal themselves.
- Status