By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - France legalizes gay marriage despite angry protests

 

Do you want gay marriage in your country?

Yes, It would just be fair 241 58.78%
 
No, get the gay out of my country 102 24.88%
 
meh, I don't really care 66 16.10%
 
Total:409
Torillian on 24 April 2013
thorin13 said:
i personally dont beleive they should have the same marriage as straight couples, not for religious reasons just that it simply violates the laws of nature, if it were meant to be so then gay couples would be able to procreate A sexually wich they cannot, allowing them to have the same marriage type implies they are the same when they clearly are not and most aknowledge that fact but thats just my opinion,

Seems like a silly distinction to make since so many marriages as they are now are not done for the purpose of procreating.  If this were the country's stance then to be fair about its use we would have to ban all people who can't procreate for one reason or another or even those that just don't want to procreate from getting married.   



...

Around the Network
thorin13 on 24 April 2013
Torillian said:
thorin13 said:
i personally dont beleive they should have the same marriage as straight couples, not for religious reasons just that it simply violates the laws of nature, if it were meant to be so then gay couples would be able to procreate A sexually wich they cannot, allowing them to have the same marriage type implies they are the same when they clearly are not and most aknowledge that fact but thats just my opinion,

Seems like a silly distinction to make since so many marriages as they are now are not done for the purpose of procreating.  If this were the country's stance then to be fair about its use we would have to ban all people who can't procreate for one reason or another or even those that just don't want to procreate from getting married.   

im not stating that gay people should not have some form of marriage, im stating that they should have one that is different to that of the traditional marriage of a male and female, people always like to jump to conclusions and asume hatred, let me dispell thoughs thought emediatly i do not hate anyone im just stating that the union of marriage between male and female represents two opposites coming together as one and is special for those who belive in this, i feel it should remain so and gay couples form there own variation of marriage thats all, we are different hell every is different anyone who belives otherwise is a lier, 



Torillian on 24 April 2013
thorin13 said:
Torillian said:
thorin13 said:
i personally dont beleive they should have the same marriage as straight couples, not for religious reasons just that it simply violates the laws of nature, if it were meant to be so then gay couples would be able to procreate A sexually wich they cannot, allowing them to have the same marriage type implies they are the same when they clearly are not and most aknowledge that fact but thats just my opinion,

Seems like a silly distinction to make since so many marriages as they are now are not done for the purpose of procreating.  If this were the country's stance then to be fair about its use we would have to ban all people who can't procreate for one reason or another or even those that just don't want to procreate from getting married.   

im not stating that gay people should not have some form of marriage, im stating that they should have one that is different to that of the traditional marriage of a male and female, people always like to jump to conclusions and asume hatred, let me dispell thoughs thought emediatly i do not hate anyone im just stating that the union of marriage between male and female represents two opposites coming together as one and is special for those who belive in this, i feel it should remain so and gay couples form there own variation of marriage thats all, we are different hell every is different anyone who belives otherwise is a lier, 

But we've already tried "separate but equal" in other similar scnarios and it didn't work out for the best.  

Just because this is different from what's been thought of as the standard for marriage doesn't mean that it should get a new name.  If you allow a man and woman who can't reproduce but love each other all the same to get married then there's really no logical reason to not allow gay couples the same right.  



...

JEMC on 24 April 2013
thorin13 said:
i personally dont beleive they should have the same marriage as straight couples, not for religious reasons just that it simply violates the laws of nature, if it were meant to be so then gay couples would be able to procreate A sexually wich they cannot, allowing them to have the same marriage type implies they are the same when they clearly are not and most aknowledge that fact but thats just my opinion,

Which are exactly those "laws of nature"? Because the human species is not the only species where homosexuality is present.

And you are confusing the goal of a species as a whole, that is to survive (and having progeny is esential for that), with what individuals can or must do. Just because a couple can't or don't want to have children doesn't mean that their union should be ranked as "B class".



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

aikohualda on 24 April 2013
Faxanadu said:
OT: surprised France is that late to the party. I assumed since France was a developed, enlightened first world country, that equal rights for gays were the accepted social standard.


i sure hope it is US



 

Around the Network
thorin13 on 24 April 2013
Torillian said:
thorin13 said:
Torillian said:
thorin13 said:
i personally dont beleive they should have the same marriage as straight couples, not for religious reasons just that it simply violates the laws of nature, if it were meant to be so then gay couples would be able to procreate A sexually wich they cannot, allowing them to have the same marriage type implies they are the same when they clearly are not and most aknowledge that fact but thats just my opinion,

Seems like a silly distinction to make since so many marriages as they are now are not done for the purpose of procreating.  If this were the country's stance then to be fair about its use we would have to ban all people who can't procreate for one reason or another or even those that just don't want to procreate from getting married.   

im not stating that gay people should not have some form of marriage, im stating that they should have one that is different to that of the traditional marriage of a male and female, people always like to jump to conclusions and asume hatred, let me dispell thoughs thought emediatly i do not hate anyone im just stating that the union of marriage between male and female represents two opposites coming together as one and is special for those who belive in this, i feel it should remain so and gay couples form there own variation of marriage thats all, we are different hell every is different anyone who belives otherwise is a lier, 

But we've already tried "separate but equal" in other similar scnarios and it didn't work out for the best.  

Just because this is different from what's been thought of as the standard for marriage doesn't mean that it should get a new name.  If you allow a man and woman who can't reproduce but love each other all the same to get married then there's really no logical reason to not allow gay couples the same right.  


thats your opinion and thats fine i dont hate, but i feel there should be a distintion between the two, there is something spcecial having two opposites coming together as one and i feel that it would be a shame for it to no longer be so, but i feel this is the way it is going now, my homeland will be next im sure, but i do not hate not ever, people should be free to make their own choices. i will miss the meaning of marriage as i knew it anyway.



dsgrue3 on 24 April 2013
thorin13 said:

thats your opinion and thats fine i dont hate, but i feel there should be a distintion between the two, there is something spcecial having two opposites coming together as one and i feel that it would be a shame for it to no longer be so, but i feel this is the way it is going now, my homeland will be next im sure, but i do not hate not ever, people should be free to make their own choices. i will miss the meaning of marriage as i knew it anyway.

The mere fact that you think homosexual marriage diminishes the term reflects your bigotry. You apparently cannot come to terms with your own bullshit. 



aikohualda on 24 April 2013
thorin13 said:
i personally dont beleive they should have the same marriage as straight couples, not for religious reasons just that it simply violates the laws of nature, if it were meant to be so then gay couples would be able to procreate A sexually wich they cannot, allowing them to have the same marriage type implies they are the same when they clearly are not and most aknowledge that fact but thats just my opinion,

SO!

you

are

saying

old

people (who wont be able to conceive child)

should

also

be

not

allowed

to

get

married??????

and everybody should get tested if they are able to produce baby????

sure!!!!! lets test women and men if they are still capable of being pregnant or making women pregnant... LOL

 

oh and if they didnt give any baby.... let's charge them since marriage = baby... right????

the argument is sooo flawed....



 

thorin13 on 24 April 2013
dsgrue3 said:
thorin13 said:

thats your opinion and thats fine i dont hate, but i feel there should be a distintion between the two, there is something spcecial having two opposites coming together as one and i feel that it would be a shame for it to no longer be so, but i feel this is the way it is going now, my homeland will be next im sure, but i do not hate not ever, people should be free to make their own choices. i will miss the meaning of marriage as i knew it anyway.

The mere fact that you think homosexual marriage diminishes the term reflects your bigotry. You apparently cannot come to terms with your own bullshit. 


no need for foul language i have my opinion you dont like that then fair enough, if feel that marriage represents the binding of opposites as male and female coming together as one, is that so evil you have to spout your hatred at me, hate away.



dsgrue3 on 24 April 2013
thorin13 said:
dsgrue3 said:
thorin13 said:

thats your opinion and thats fine i dont hate, but i feel there should be a distintion between the two, there is something spcecial having two opposites coming together as one and i feel that it would be a shame for it to no longer be so, but i feel this is the way it is going now, my homeland will be next im sure, but i do not hate not ever, people should be free to make their own choices. i will miss the meaning of marriage as i knew it anyway.

The mere fact that you think homosexual marriage diminishes the term reflects your bigotry. You apparently cannot come to terms with your own bullshit. 


no need for foul language i have my opinion you dont like that then fair enough, if feel that marriage represents the binding of opposites as male and female coming together as one, is that so evil you have to spout your hatred at me, hate away.

I am not sure if English is your first language or not, but I wasn't remotely hateful toward you. I called you on your bullshit, which you failed to address by the way. Being direct with someone isn't hateful, it's honest.