If gey marriage is allowed how come we aren't allowed to marry brothers and bros

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]Only on the internet can you find people who seriously compare the marriage between two men/women with marrying an animal. Classy.Verge_6

Yes, I know exactly where to find some people who think that. They all happen to live two miles away in the trailer park on the edge of town, however.

I'm sure you can find them IRL too. And why aren't we allowed to compare them? They're both just as natural and productive.

Yes, I know exactly where to find some people who think that. They all happen to live two miles away in the trailer park on the edge of town, however.

Thinking the affection a man or woman can show to another man or woman is just as profound as what an animal can display. Brilliant. My hopes for teh human race have increased ten-fold.

I'm not trying to argue for bestiality or incest here, i'm arguing against gay marriage.

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

fidosim

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

...You just come up with this stuff as you go, don't ya? Scientific studies have found that homosexual tendiencies are inate; being influenced by hormonal tendencies, and, you guessed it, genetics. If they were not in a good 'mental state', then why is it so many homosexual individuals manage to lead very wealthy lives? And if you argue that the fruitlessness of a sam-sex marriage is wrong, then should infertile individuals be allowed to wed? After all, the fertile member of the duo could have a fertile mate isntead. His/her pairing with the infertile other is preventing the human race from continuing.

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

fidosim

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

A consious intelectual lust for someone or something. You cna love an animal, that animal however is not consious or intelectual in comparison, so it cannot be the same "love" back. Sorry if I'm shattering your dreams ofa marrying your dog, but it doesn't love you on any of the levels a human can feel for a human.

And since when was forcing everyone to have a child keeping the human race going anymore? We're over populated, didn't ya hear? By your logic, should all singles be forced into a marriage with other singles? They're not producing anything by being single, are they?

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

Verge_6

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

...You just come up with this stuff as you go, don't ya? Scientific studies have found that homosexual tendiencies are inate; being influenced by hormonal tendencies, and, you guessed it, genetics.

Homosexual tendencies are the result of a mental imbalance. The studies i've heard of suggest that everyone is bisexual to some degree, but the vast majority of people are still driven to copulate with the opposite sex to produce children. Homosexuals don't experience this drive because they are mentally imbalanced.

the result of a mental imbalance. fidosim

It's an imbalance by the same logic that me not liking giant breasted blonde super models is an imbalance. That word is mearly used as a replacment for prefrence in your study.

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

kittykatz5k

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

A consious intelectual lust for someone or something. You cna love an animal, that animal however is not consious or intelectual in comparison, so it cannot be the same "love" back. Sorry if I'm shattering your dreams ofa marrying your dog, but it doesn't love you on any of the levels a human can feel for a human.

And since when was forcing everyone to have a child keeping the human race going anymore? We're over populated, didn't ya hear? By your logic, should all singles be forced into a marriage with other singles? They're not producing anything by being single, are they?

I'm not saying everyone has to have kids, i'm saying that all heterosexuals and bisexuals experience the drive to reproduce, and since homosexuals don't experience that drive with the opposite gender, they are mentally imbalanced.

[QUOTE="fidosim"]the result of a mental imbalance. kittykatz5k

It's an imbalance by the same logic that me not liking giant breasted blonde super models is an imbalance. That word is mearly used as a replacment for prefrence in your study.

All animals experience the drive to reproduce. Just because you don't like fake breasted blondes doesn't mean you don't like women, you just haven't found an appropriate mate yet. Homosexuals, instead of finding an appropriate female, experience no attraction to the opposite sex, even though they need the opposite sex to reproduce.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

fidosim

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

...You just come up with this stuff as you go, don't ya? Scientific studies have found that homosexual tendiencies are inate; being influenced by hormonal tendencies, and, you guessed it, genetics.

Homosexual tendencies are the result of a mental imbalance. The studies i've heard of suggest that everyone is bisexual to some degree, but the vast majority of people are still driven to copulate with the opposite sex to produce children. Homosexuals don't experience this drive because they are mentally imbalanced.

Can I have link to this laughable study? I can find a study that says the world is flat. It has literally been YEARS since the American Psychiatric Association proclaimed that homosexuality was officially NOT a disorder. You can counter with any 'study' you want. I have a hunch that none of them will hold as much weight as the APA.

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]the result of a mental imbalance. fidosim

It's an imbalance by the same logic that me not liking giant breasted blonde super models is an imbalance. That word is mearly used as a replacment for prefrence in your study.

All animals experience the drive to reproduce. Just because you don't like fake breasted blondes doesn't mean you don't like women, you just haven't found an appropriate mate yet. Homosexuals, instead of finding an appropriate female, experience no attraction to the opposite sex, even though they need the opposite sex to reproduce.

I'm not even arguing with you seriously anymore, I'm just doing this cause I'm bored. Just though I'd let you know ;)

Once again you strech science like everyone needs to reproduce. You do realise there's gay sex, right? The urge is for sex, not reproduction.

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

Verge_6

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

...You just come up with this stuff as you go, don't ya? Scientific studies have found that homosexual tendiencies are inate; being influenced by hormonal tendencies, and, you guessed it, genetics.

Homosexual tendencies are the result of a mental imbalance. The studies i've heard of suggest that everyone is bisexual to some degree, but the vast majority of people are still driven to copulate with the opposite sex to produce children. Homosexuals don't experience this drive because they are mentally imbalanced.

Can I have link to this laughable study? I can find a study that says the world is flat. It has literally been YEARS since the American Psychiatric Association proclaimed that homosexuality was officially NOT a disorder. You can provide with any 'study' you want. I have a hunch that none of them will hold as much weight as the APA.

The theory of innate bisexuality was pioneered by Sigmund Freud, one of the greatest ever observers of the human mind and mentality. I believe the American Psychiatric Association is what Jack Thompson always refers to when he claims video games turn all children into ruthless killers. I don't think the study I cited has a problem with holding weight.

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]the result of a mental imbalance. kittykatz5k

It's an imbalance by the same logic that me not liking giant breasted blonde super models is an imbalance. That word is mearly used as a replacment for prefrence in your study.

All animals experience the drive to reproduce. Just because you don't like fake breasted blondes doesn't mean you don't like women, you just haven't found an appropriate mate yet. Homosexuals, instead of finding an appropriate female, experience no attraction to the opposite sex, even though they need the opposite sex to reproduce.

I'm not even arguing with you seriously anymore, I'm just doing this cause I'm bored. Just though I'd let you know ;)

Once again you strech science like everyone needs to reproduce. You do realise there's gay sex, right? The urge is for sex, not reproduction.

:lol: People have sexual urges because they are genetically driven to reproduce. To quote Juno, sex often results in an infant.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

Animals can love too! :cry:

fidosim

No they can't.

And as for the rest of that, it has always had far far more supporters than the "let me marry my sister" foundation, and supporters who generally aren't in a bad mental state.

Two questions:

1. What is your definition of love?

2. How can you consider someone who would rather have sex with someone of the same gender, which produces no child, than with someone of the opposite gender, which would produce a child and keep the species alive, to be in a good mental state? Homosexuals are obviously acting against their genetics.

...You just come up with this stuff as you go, don't ya? Scientific studies have found that homosexual tendiencies are inate; being influenced by hormonal tendencies, and, you guessed it, genetics.

Homosexual tendencies are the result of a mental imbalance. The studies i've heard of suggest that everyone is bisexual to some degree, but the vast majority of people are still driven to copulate with the opposite sex to produce children. Homosexuals don't experience this drive because they are mentally imbalanced.

Can I have link to this laughable study? I can find a study that says the world is flat. It has literally been YEARS since the American Psychiatric Association proclaimed that homosexuality was officially NOT a disorder. You can provide with any 'study' you want. I have a hunch that none of them will hold as much weight as the APA.

The theory of innate bisexuality was pioneered by Sigmund Freud, one of the greatest ever observers of the human mind and mentality. I believe the American Psychiatric Association is what Jack Thompson always refers to when he claims video games turn all children into ruthless killers. I don't think the study I cited has a problem with holding weight.

Jack Thompson doesn't ever pull out anything real from them. He just likes streching words.

The theory of innate bisexuality was pioneered by Sigmund Freud, one of the greatest ever observers of the human mind and mentality. I believe the American Psychiatric Association is what Jack Thompson always refers to when he claims video games turn all children into ruthless killers. I don't think the study I cited has a problem with holding weight.

fidosim

...You...are using FREUD to counter the APA? The man who concocted the Oedipus and Electra Complex? The man who planted notions into his patients' heads? The man who believed that all women suffer from penis envy'? The man whose 'research' (if you could call it that) was based around theories that are over 100 years old today? Wow. I really am speechless.

You clearly want to continue to believe that homosexuality is some sort of disease. Go on right ahead, it's clear nothing will deter from such a mindset.

How come? What if we really love them. Why can't we marry them? Sure it is not right but gay marriage is not right too. Soulkiller225

do you really have to ask this question, or is it one of those satirical questions comparing gay marriage to incest.

Anyway, here is why:

1. It is unhealthy for the child (which is commonly why people get married, to have a child). Babies born out of incest can have all sorts of mental and physical defincencies.

2. Atheist, Jewish, Catholic, Buddhist...I think 99.9999% of the world would agree its a bad thing morally. Compared to gay marriage, I'd say no one would really care about gays marrying if there was incest legislation being passed.

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"][QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="kittykatz5k"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]the result of a mental imbalance. fidosim

It's an imbalance by the same logic that me not liking giant breasted blonde super models is an imbalance. That word is mearly used as a replacment for prefrence in your study.

All animals experience the drive to reproduce. Just because you don't like fake breasted blondes doesn't mean you don't like women, you just haven't found an appropriate mate yet. Homosexuals, instead of finding an appropriate female, experience no attraction to the opposite sex, even though they need the opposite sex to reproduce.

I'm not even arguing with you seriously anymore, I'm just doing this cause I'm bored. Just though I'd let you know ;)

Once again you strech science like everyone needs to reproduce. You do realise there's gay sex, right? The urge is for sex, not reproduction.

:lol: People have sexual urges because they are genetically driven to reproduce. To quote Juno, sex often results in an infant.

Humans sure are different from the rest of animals, aren't they? Or maybe you just like to think animals are on the same levels as humans. No wonder you have that weird want to marry your dog. Urges are insurance to keep a pack of mindless sheep moving, thought is what humans run on.

How come? What if we really love them. Why can't we marry them? Sure it is not right but gay marriage is not right too. Soulkiller225

Because we would end up with a bunch of kids like yourself...

I don't think any of us would love are brothers and sisters that way..IcE-Fu-

You wish...

Wait a sec. :|

"Because it produces mutant kids" is not a reason. So can alcohol, drugs and cigarettes, yet I don't see people complaining about that.

Wait a sec. :|

"Because it produces mutant kids" is not a reason. So can alcohol, drugs and cigarettes, yet I don't see people complaining about that.

NWA_31

Drugs are generally outlawed already, so it's wrong to do them pregnant or not. Smoking is already heavly advised you don't do it while pregnant but won't produce poor genetics, and alchohal is the same deal as cigarettes.

[QUOTE="NWA_31"]

Wait a sec. :|

"Because it produces mutant kids" is not a reason. So can alcohol, drugs and cigarettes, yet I don't see people complaining about that.

kittykatz5k

Drugs are generally outlawed already, so it's wrong to do them pregnant or not. Smoking is already heavly advised you don't do it while pregnant but won't produce poor genetics, and alchohal is the same deal as cigarettes.

I'm talking about both legal and illegal drugs, actually. And "is already heavly advised you don't do it" still doesn't explain why one is illegal and the other isn't.

If two (or more) consenting adults want to marry, no matter who they are. They should be allowed too.swizz-the-gamer

Agreed.

And I wanna see OPs sis ;)

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"][QUOTE="NWA_31"]

Wait a sec. :|

"Because it produces mutant kids" is not a reason. So can alcohol, drugs and cigarettes, yet I don't see people complaining about that.

NWA_31

Drugs are generally outlawed already, so it's wrong to do them pregnant or not. Smoking is already heavly advised you don't do it while pregnant but won't produce poor genetics, and alchohal is the same deal as cigarettes.

I'm talking about both legal and illegal drugs, actually. And "is already heavly advised you don't do it" still doesn't explain why one is illegal and the other isn't.

Because too many people smoke and do alchohol. Also, banning the latter was already tried, and that only served to give organized crime a bigger boost than they could have even dreamed up. The same would undoubtedly happen with cigarettes.

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"][QUOTE="NWA_31"]

Wait a sec. :|

"Because it produces mutant kids" is not a reason. So can alcohol, drugs and cigarettes, yet I don't see people complaining about that.

NWA_31

Drugs are generally outlawed already, so it's wrong to do them pregnant or not. Smoking is already heavly advised you don't do it while pregnant but won't produce poor genetics, and alchohal is the same deal as cigarettes.

I'm talking about both legal and illegal drugs, actually. And "is already heavly advised you don't do it" still doesn't explain why one is illegal and the other isn't.

Legal drugs should tell you if they're harmful or not, and if they are, it's your damn fault for not reading labels, as doctors sure as hell won't suggest you use them. There would be no way to enforce a law against alcohal and cigarette use while pregnant, all we can do is give you the giant warning labels and hope you're smart neough to not do it.

Three-legged children.

I said borhers with brother and sisters with sisters. Soulkiller225

so...gay incest?