 |
| |
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
What are the benefits of it?
And to be precise, I've ment procreation.
|
Encouraging stable, monogamous relationships for gay couples that aren't considered "second class" relationships is a good thing for society.
quote:
Anyways, gay couples can't have kids. |
Which isn't a requirement of a heterosexual marriage, either. I can't recall being at any wedding ceremony, no matter what the denomination, where having kids was mentioned at all. Indeed, the focus on the ceremony is on the loving bond between the people getting hitched.
Marriage as a government-sanctioned institution makes no mention of a child prerequisite, either. This is just an arbitrary rule thrown up by bigots, since gay couples can and do raise well-adjusted children. The fact that they can't biologically reproduce together is irrelevant, since the same is true for many straight couples.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Heresson
|
 |
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Encouraging stable, monogamous relationships for gay couples that aren't considered "second class" relationships is a good thing for society.
|
how?0
quote:
Which isn't a requirement of a heterosexual marriage, either. I can't recall being at any wedding ceremony, no matter what the denomination, where having kids was mentioned at all. Indeed, the focus on the ceremony is on the loving bond between the people getting hitched.
Marriage as a government-sanctioned institution makes no mention of a child prerequisite, either. This is just an arbitrary rule thrown up by bigots, since gay couples can and do raise well-adjusted children. The fact that they can't biologically reproduce together is irrelevant, since the same is true for many straight couples. |
Again, for those it's an exception, something that can be cured or omitted, for gays it's a rule.
And yes, children is what marriages are for. If it's not mentioned, it's because it's obvious.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
|
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
how? |
Um, by reducing promiscuity and instability? That was self-evident.
quote:
Again, for those it's an exception, something that can be cured or omitted, for gays it's a rule. |
It's great that you just dismiss it as an "exception," but give no rationale as to why it's a tolerable one yet gays aren't. It's just arbitrary bigotry.
As for it being "cured," if you mean by surrogates, that defeats your argument, since that's often how gays have kids.
quote:
And yes, children is what marriages are for. If it's not mentioned, it's because it's obvious. |
Originally, marriages were for property and treaties. Marriages today (theoretically) are about love, first and foremost. Hence no mention of kids in wedding ceremonies. This notion that it's all about kids is unsubstantiated bullshit.
At any rate, science may soon preclude this argument, as dumb as it is. Doctors have developed techniques whereby same-sex couples can have kids that are genetically related to both parents. Of course, I don't see why that matters vis-a-vis the legitimacy or worth of the parents' relationship.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Thorgal
|
|
Tarifa, Cádiz.
Jan 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
That is because Spain probably is the most harmed by the catholic church, since the beginning until yesterday |
Maybe not so much, but in fact in Spain there is a more than justificated resentment against the church for several reasons.
For instance they fully supported Franco´s dictatorship.
Last edited by Thorgal on 24-04-2005 at 04:49
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Thorgal
|
|
Tarifa, Cádiz.
Jan 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
Well, it is easy to see where you come from, Heresson.
I am amazed with some people concept of democracy. Franco raised against a democratic governmet that was not comunist but a coalition of parties, the frente popular. Globaly it was center-left. In any case it is irrelevant if they were comunist or not since they were elected DEMOCRATICALLY (look for this word in a dictionary).
Historically the spanish church supported not only Franco but all the forms of absolutism and was against any form of advance. Of course they were where the money and the power was, against any social change dangerous for his own privileged status. When we refer to a rich person that works very little we say "He lives better than a priest".
For instance, at a more local level, they were always with the rich brutal rural oligarchy, "latifundistas", supporting a form of feudalism even worse than the medieval one. So it was logical to rural people to have a resentiment against the church if they were not rich or stupid.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexander's Horse
|
 |
Panmunjon, hands up!
Jan 1970
time: 15:35
|
|
there is no point reasoning with heresson.
If he really knew anything about Franco, and the suffering of the Spanish because of Franco, he would be ashamed of what he wrote.
Last edited by Alexander's Horse on 24-04-2005 at 16:21
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-04-2005 01:06
. I find that spoils much of the fun.
|