nojustno on 21 April 2009
| pakidan101 said: See, this is the real problem. It is not the fact that she voiced her opinion that got her into trouble. It is perfectly fine for her to say that her values about marriage should be between a man and a woman, or in her words "opposite marriage." It is also fine that she doesn't want to offend anybody as well. What was not fine was when she said "that is how marriage SHOULD be." See, I'm also against gay people from "marrying." What I am not against is gay people from being together. The problem from her statement was that people can and will infer that she is inflicting HER own opinion on how OTHER people should live their lives. As a Miss America contestant, she needed to give an answer that will please everybody and nobody at the same time, especially in this kind of question. A better answer would have been "I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman (if this is her opinion), but I also believe that gay couples should be allowed together. Religion already forbids gay people from existing in this specific religion, let alone marry, but it also forbids people from being harsh and demeaning towards anybody, including homosexuals. Gay couples 'marrying' demeans the meaning and occasion of marriage as just 'another definition of being together' for other religious, heterosexuals who are going to marry or already married. If there is another religion that is created for gay couples and allows them to marry, then should be allowed to. But otherwise, allowing them to marry while demeaning the sanctimony of other marriages shouldn't be allowed." Oh and technically, homosexuals are a danger to humanity. Not sociologically, but evolutionary-wise. If there are more and more homosexuals, there are less and less new babies made. How will humanity survive then? |
um dude, only like ~5% of the population is gay, not exactly threatening. Seeing how it isnt a choice, I don't see that percentage increasing.
