Congrats Ireland! First country to recognize Same Sex Marriage by Pop Vote!

[hsrob]

padib said:

I'm not particularly happy about this because I believe that homosexuality is wrong.

The good side I see is that people understand the needs of others in society. But we all have needs, some good and some not so good, imho. So the world needs to be careful about some of these legalizations going forward. Being progressive has its good sides, and its bad sides.

hsrob said:

Frank, Frank, Frank.......

The capacity to have children is not a requisite for heterosexual marriage so suggesting it should be for homosexual marriage is a blatant double standard. The incidence of homosexuality is strikingly similar across all cultures which is a strong argument for it being part of human nature. Something does not have to be the majority attribute in order to be part of human nature. Furthermore, what marriage has to do with nature, when it's a relatively modern construct, is beyond me.

Hygiene and safety have no part in this discussion, homosexuals don't to my knowledge have a plan to destroy the human race (of which they are a part) and the 'principles' which brought around the origins of the universe had little 'thought' for humans, let alone gender orientation.

You really need to think long and hard about this train wreck of a post, particularly before calling others out for nonsense. Your position has everything to do with your prejudice, pure and simple, and nothing to do with nature or human nature, which you evidently have little understanding of.

Don't judge him, because I don't think you are perfectly right either.

A heterosexual couple, in general, has the potential for children to form a family in the model father, mother, children. Though some couples can't have children, they are a minority. In the case of homosexual couples, without external aid (the aid of technology or some form of adoption or surrogate parent), there is no potential for that family model father, father, children or mother, mother, children.

Therefore naturally speaking he is mostly right in that aspect.

I don't take exception with his position as much as the manner in which he stated it and for that, I do judge him.

Even excluding same sex families, 'that family model' is only one model that can result in the upbringing of perfectly happy, well adjusted children. Single mothers, single fathers, grandparents, aunts, uncles, foster parents, adoptive parents, there are many flavours.

Denying same sex couples, the right to marry and have family is anti-family (my initial point) because it's denying this right to approximately 1/20 people in the world, due to an innate attribute. There are many in the world who have the capacity to and are automatically afforded the right to family when they are neither capable of nor suitable for fulfilling the role.