Gay Marriage

Hello, 1) I would like to go back on your comment about marriage's nature. You quoted, "But the second purpose seems to fall about when you imagine these scenarios. What if the couple have kids before marriage? What if you're infertile? What if you get married at an older age? What if you simply don't want children? Are these people not allowed to marry sense they can't have children naturally together?" I apologize, I wasn't clear when I talked about procreation in marriage. Procreation applies not just to create children but applies to the upbringing of children as well. Let's assume for the debate's purpose that we were all created at the beginning. In order to keep evolving, we must keep delivering offspring. In a world where gay marriage is legal, let's just pretend a lot of everyone is homosexual. What happens when same sexes marry? There will come a time where there is no more offspring. Bad. 2) The definition of marriage From the article (1). "Society does not just want acceptance for same sex marriage, they want to redefine marriage. Should it not seem odd that the definition of the institution of marriage, as being between a man and woman, for the past 6000 years is being thrown out for something less than what is natural and stable? The agenda of same sex marriage proponents is to redefine marriage altogether which undermines the most stable form of marriage as being between one man and one woman." Redefining marriage gives way for new definitions of marriage to exist in the future. I like how the author of article 3 states this, "...suppose I were to come along and say: 'My uncle and I [or my aunt and I, or my sister and I, or my mother and I, or my father and I, or my friend and I] live together. We are devoted to each other, but we don"t engage in mutual sexual conduct. We want to get married in order to get the legal benefits of marriage that affect property rights, taxes, insurance and the like.' (Article 3) It might come quite negative at first, but eventually the government might allow a law that newly defines marriage as any type of bond that benefits both partners legal stuff, insurance, and etc. Later, one could marry their father or mother. Once this law is passed, what might happen to society's view on polygamy? Later on, marriage might be defined as a union between three or MORE people. The last point the author made, "Proponents of same-sex marriages want to un-link marriage from reproduction and have the laws legalize their friendship because it is a friendship, not because it is procreative. But once the state legalizes one kind of friendship, it cannot stop at that; it will have to legalize any and all friendships for which legalization is sought." ^ this also contradicts what you said about marriage and procreation. 3) Homosexuality does not offer the stability of a traditional family (1) Children need the stability of a traditional family. Research has been proven that children develop healthier when growing up with a Father and a Mother. Contradicting your research on homosexual behavior as natural, according to the American Physiological Association, "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation." Important: Other research shows that children raised by homosexual families are seven times more likely to be homosexual (2). This proves that homosexuality might also be because of influences and the environment one grows up in. Next point: You asked just because something may be morally wrong to some people, does that automatically make it bad? Well, that's a good question. I guess it would have to depend on what moral it is. Say for instance. one thinks it was morally right for Hitler to kill the Jews. First of all, that's just absurd. Second of all, that should be morally wrong for everyone (except maybe Hitler and the people at that time). You can't agree that what Hitler did was right. I mean it wasn't. Anyways, I do agree with you partially on that, it depends on more of what that moral is. 2) Why is actually being gay okay but not the "gay acts"? Again, as I said about children being influenced by homosexuality acts. Homosexual acts serve as bad examples to children. I look forward to your next argument, my friend. Cited Sources: 1) http://unsettledchristianity.com... 2) http://www.wnd.com... 3) http://americamagazine.org...