mrstickball said:
Legal benefits between consenting homosexuals is fine. One of the arguments is that gay culture isn't interested in monogamy. For example:
The last study has also shown than "all couples with a relationship lasting more than 5 years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships."...Do you realize how damning that is for benefits/acklowledgement for recognizing rights for a group of people that really aren't interested in monogamy? I'm not trying to demonize homosexuals. But those are in fact, actual statistics about the community. With a culture that's not interested in marriage....Why should it be awarded that? How about every homosexual bath house is closed in America, in return for gay marriage? Would that be acceptable to the gay community? |
Most straight men would gladly do that if their wives would let them. This is a horrible generalization, but the stereotypical traditional way of looking at it is all men are whores who want sex all the time, and women want security more than sex. If 2 men get together, they have sex all the time. If a man and a woman get together, they start out having crazy sex all the time, but then slow down as the woman's libido slows down. If 2 lesbians get together, this effect is greater, and lesbians end up barely having sex. I know that's horribly generalizing and insulting to gays, lesbians, straight men, and straight women, but that's the way many people think about this.
Also, it's not illegal to have multiple partners, so that shouldn't affect gay marriage.
And even if some gays don't care about marriage, that shouldn't affect the law in any way. There are gays that do want to get married. There are just as many straight people who never get married, or have multiple partners, and they don't ruin it for the rest of us, so the promiscuous gay community shouldn't ruin it for the gays that want to be married.
