UK Legalizes Gay Marriage

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I'm not sure in what manner "natural" is being defined here though, in order to extrapolate to "wrong".
Occurring in nature outside of the human species? In which case it is still "natural", however things like complex language are not.
Occurring without external interference? In which case it is still "natural", but then one would argue things such as clothing and medicine are "unnatural" and should be extrapolated as "wrong".

They should. Clothing covers your natural body and Medicine can be hazardous for you.

They should be extrapolated as wrong, but they aren't.

Similar to Homosexuality.

Originally posted by Sorgo
No, no, no...

Although I don't care if they do it, I think it just isn't right. It IS Unatural.

Over five hundred thousand people think that Homosexuality is wrong. Do that many people think that Heterosexuality is wrong?

500,000 people, eh? Pretty small amount considering there are 6 billion+ in the world.

Neither is "wrong". There is no reason to see it as "wrong". There is no victim, no negative consequence, no logically sound reason to see it as wrong or to oppose it.

there's even more gay people than that

Originally posted by BackFire
500,000 people, eh? Pretty small amount considering there are 6 billion+ in the world.

Neither is "wrong". There is no reason to see it as "wrong". There is no victim, no negative consequence, no logically sound reason to see it as wrong or to oppose it.

Ah, so more than 500 Thou? I thought so.

Well, there is. Because... Well... 500,000+ See it as wrong. And it may just be wrong. It hasn't even been proven to be "Right".

Originally posted by Sorgo
No, no, no...

Although I don't care if they do it, I think it just isn't right. It IS Unatural.

Over five hundred thousand people think that Homosexuality is wrong. Do that many people think that Heterosexuality is wrong?

Seeing as from what I can determine you have no substantial background or training in law, medicine or biology, and likely neither do the majority of those five hundred thousand people you took the time to personally poll, how relevant is their personal opinion to alterations to legal frameworks that have no bearing on them whatsoever?

Well, lets see.

There is no consequence to homosexuality.

There is no inherent negative.

There is no victim, no one is hurt by it.

So, what makes it wrong? "Wrong" means it's bad, what makes it bad?

If 500,000 people see it as wrong, that means 5.9 billion people see it as okay.

You know what? I wanna call for a Poll.... If it's okay and if it hasn't been done before.

500,000+ People, Backfire.

There is no negatives to Homosexuality? Er... I'd rather not get into it....

There is Consequence to everything.

Wrong doesn't make it bad. It makes it unatural, which is what I think it is.

1. Why is something unatural automatically wrong?

2. What makes it unatural when it happens in nature without any tampering?

Homosexuality is no more "wrong" then heterosexuality. There are consequences, yes, but no moreso then heterosexuality.

Originally posted by Sorgo
You know what? I wanna call for a Poll.... If it's okay and if it hasn't been done before.

500,000+ People, Backfire.

There is no negatives to Homosexuality? Er... I'd rather not get into it....

There is Consequence to everything.

Wrong doesn't make it bad. It makes it unatural, which is what I think it is.

Originally posted by Sorgo
I disagree. I don't see same-sex people having the ability to create a Baby. The creation of a life form signifies that Opposite-sex is natural.

So... What makes Homosexuality natural again?

Is it valid to assume that the natural end of marriage is procreation, and that therefore non-procreative gay couples cannot reasonably be allowed to marry? No infertile couples would be allowed to marry.

Originally posted by Sorgo
I stumbled across some interesting sites, Including ones that claimed that Homosexuality was a Disease and a Chemical Imbalance.

Type this into Google:

[B]Homosexuality: a chemical imbalance? [/B]

Is that the best you can do?

Besides, consider it a terrible act against nature. But, from where does the crime come?

Originally posted by debbiejo
China?????????? 😂 Never!

As for the topic, hurrah for the uk! Though I don't think I'm ever gonna marry it's good to know I could in some places...

Originally posted by kmcdude
I could not even put my penis up a girl's ass,let alone a guy 😘

Originally posted by PVS
so you're saying being gay is the equivalent of suicide?

j/k i know what you mean 😛

Originally posted by Snoopbert
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10382347/

Discuss.

Looks like the residents of UK are gonna see alot of same sex couples

No more than we do already.

This being a now legal option isn't going to increase the number of homosexuals, just the amount of homosexuals who can enter a legally binding same-sex partnership.

-AC

I'm curious as to what these negatives Sorgo claims to exist are.

And I wish the US would wake the hell up and legalize gay marriage already.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Santa's Little Helper also looks like he has a lot of stuff dripping from his mouth.

Dubious indeed.

-AC

holly shit that's hilarious

Originally posted by Sorgo
They should. Clothing covers your natural body and Medicine can be hazardous for you.

They should be extrapolated as wrong, but they aren't.

Similar to Homosexuality.

Originally posted by Zarathustra
So I guess we're all like homosexuals, than, for wearing clothes and using medicine and computers. So, while we're at banning same-sex marriages for being unnatural and thus wrong, we should probably get rid of medical treatments, industry, technology and clothing. That's great, because I always wanted to freeze to death during the winter, condemn another hefty percentage of the world to starvation, and otherwise cut our life expectancy down by forty years or so.