Gay Marriage

Bs"d1. It's a choice:Actualy, there are a lot of fluctuations in the percent of the population that is gay based on demographics. See here {1}. And it is impossible to tell when "physiological gender" develops, first of all because there is no such thing, brains don't have genotilia, therefore no gender. Next of all, there is no scanner that tells whether you are gay or not, and they can't ask the feus if its gay, so this statisticis kind of impossible. Also, humans aren't sexualy attracted to anyone until puberty.And I have heard your next argument before, the 'what if the world was gay and you were straught,' argument, I will respond to that with another hypothetical. Say there were a man who ran around naked, when he is arrested for public nudity, he says "but what if there were a world where everyone were naked and you prefered to be clothed, but to them that would be being naked to you!" First of all, it's an irrational, unrealistic comparison and could be used to justify anything else, what if you lived in a world where murder was considered OK? Next of all, if you thought that being clothed was being naked and everyone naked was clothed, you would get institutionalised regardless of your thoughts.2. Equality:It turns out that you are entitled to these unalienable rights; life, libery, and the pursuit of property. And you are improperly defining liberty, liberty is the ability to move freely not do whatever you want. Next of all, not acknowladging farse marriage institutions doesn't constitute treating someone lesser. Marriage has always been defined as something very specific; 1 man 1 woman, walking along and deciding otherwise doesn't make it so. And wanting something doesn't entitle you.Here is a perfect comparison, if someone were giving out chocolate, and one person didn't like chocolate and instead wanted a lolypop, he isn't entitled to that. He may be equal teveryone else, but wanting something different than what is provided doesn't entitle you to that n account of wanting it. Just like a man wanting to marry a man doesn't entitle him to that. Marriage allows for a man and woman to marry wanting something else doesn't entitle you.And Gay people are allowed to marry freely also, they just wnt us to acknowladge something not marriage as marriage also. They can go gt themselves someone f the opposite gender and marry them, wanting to marry someone of the same gender doesn't entitle them.3. Separation of Church and state:Thanks for bringing this up, because this is my strongest point against gay marriage. Let me explain, marriage is and always has been a religious institution, never a political institution. Therefore the church should define marriage, and under separation of church and state, the state shouldn't take this institution and goveronmentize it. And you are absolutely right, it is unconstitutional for the Federal Goverent to redefine marriage, a religious institution under separation of church and state. 4. Adoption increase:Gay people can adopt children whether the goveronment acknowladges some farse marriage institutions or not. You don't need to be married to adopt. 5. What is marriage:Marriage has always been defined as 1 man and 1 woman, always, whether in Native American culture, Jewish culture, Egyptan culture, it doesn't matter. Redefining it makes no difference, if there were a big pile of Bull Sh*t and the goveronment passed a law saying that it was an Ice Cream Sunday, it's still a big pile of Bull Sh*t. And yes, there is a huge difference between a straight (correct) marriage, and a gay (farse) marriage, let's start with how one is correct and one is farse, and how one follows the original definition of marriage that has always been the same since marriage was inventedd, and the other follows a false newly invented definition.Like fiat, you can pass all the laws you want, but that pile of Bull Sh*t is still a pile of Bull Sh*t not an Ice Cream Sunday, and that peice of paper is still paper not gold, and that gay marriage is still farse, not a genuine marriage. If paper ever coud be worth gold no legal tender law would be necessary, just like if gay marriage was ever a form of valid marriage no supreme court decision wuld be necessary to have it defined that way.6. Economic Benefit:No, unemployment went down because they only count people who have been unemployed for over 2 years, so the same people could be unemployed still, exept they aren't counted anymore, an additional 5% of the population which has become unemployed is counted instead. I could say that since our economy was better with low unemployment a low national debt and low inflation back in the 1950's when there was no gay marriages, ad this means that gay marriage unemploys people, indebts the nation and debases our currency based on this. And another thing, our economy is getting worse, not better. Conclusion:The gay marriage band wagon isn't a civil rights issue, it's just the goveronment overstepping, trampling over the constitution, and redefining something which properly belongs to the church to further its liberal agendas. All that is is trying to pass a dog off as a horse for the sake of equality. And not acnowladging a farse marriage isn't barring gay people from marriage, they can get up and find someone of the opposite gender if they want, they chose not to do that, but rather try and have the goveronment decree somethhing marriage to appease them, and have something inhereinty contradictory happen. It is inhereintly contradictory for a man to marry a man, if it is a man whom he is marrying, it connot be marrying, since this implies he is marrying a woman. There is no law you can pass making a dog into a horse, just like there is no law you can pass making it possible for a man to be married to a man, all that is happening isthat they are pretending to be married, and the goveronment is forcing everyone to play along. {1}. https://en.wikipedia.org...