Remember when conservatives said gay "marriage" was a slippery slope

Birth rates for one. Show me a population with a large number of homosexuals that thrived.

 

Show me a population with a large number of homosexuals. This is before we take into account that homosexuals will breed to have children, either through natural or artificial means, even if it is not with one they are sexually attracted to. Having a sexual attraction to one sex does not automatically mean a repulsion to sex with the other.

 

Well, there must be a good reason there are no populations with a large number of homosexuals. Perhaps it's not possible, it collapses first.

 

The only thing spreading is the courage to no longer hide. Polys, homosexuals, and transgenders have always been among us. Fear has just kept most of them in hiding since others would literally kill them. That fear is vanishing as we gain support outside our own communities.

As to pronouns, are you verifying their genitals and/or DNA when you presume a given pronoun? Otherwise, why would you not take their word for it?

 

Provide a real-world example...

 

I can't provide something that doesn't exist.

 

Or homosexuality simply does not appear in great numbers. The greatest number of homosexuals are born from heterosexuals. The vast majority of offspring from those homosexuals who do breed end up being heterosexual. The survival of the species argument has always been a red herring at best and a strawman at worse. The lack of breeding from homosexuals will not affect the survival chances of humans.

 

I believe the request is to show an example of a population with a large number of homosexuals that collapsed due to inability to breed. We have plenty of populations/civilizations/societies that have collapsed for various reasons and can point to them as examples of this or that.

 

It was fine when it was taking a natural course. However, pushing it onto the young and forcing society to accept it as something to celebrate will lead to larger numbers and the radicals will keep pushing further to reduce morals to accept other behaviors which have been taboo.

 

Work filters stopped me from going to a couple interesting links, but I found this in the Clinton library no less.

Ten Signs of a Culture’s End
http://www.clintonmemoriallibrary.com/social-change/ten-signs-of-a-cultures-end/

 

Expanding the pool cheapens the experience. It's a simple concept. If everyone has a Rolls Royce, is having a Rolls Royce a big deal?

 

Male-female relationships are different and superior. They should be treated as such.

 

I don't believe men marrying 12 or 14 year old girls has been the standard throughout American history.

 

Kinda my point...

 

No, you didn't. Even InfoWars isn't as loaded with obvious trolling bullshit as your link...

Actual Clinton Library link: https://www.clintonlibrary.gov/

 

And yet again, your belief is shown to be utter BS:

https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/child-marriage-common-in-the-past-persists-today/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_marriage_in_the_United_States

http://theconversation.com/child-marriage-is-still-legal-in-the-us-88846

http://apps.frontline.org/child-marriage-by-the-numbers/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rides-new-jersey-chris-christie-a7830266.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...me-parts-of-the-us-as-lawmakers-a6921246.html

 

Isolated cases. That’s not the norm. I don’t want to make it the norm. Do you?

 

Yeah, it was too late to change my post to say this is certainly not the official Clinton library.

 

Superior is a subjective value, and an opinion.

As to male female relationships being different, we can also say that interracial relationships are different, and superior for that matter. The later is still opinion, and there is nothing to show that different is better or worse, also a subjective value.

 

Those cases are as about as frequent as being left handed, and the frequency was greater in the past than today, thankfully (this is thankfully frequency has dropped off). But the point remains. If you want to claim traditional as good, that would include such things as marriage as young as, going by a case in the last decade, 10 years of age.

 

It's still taking its natural course. Whether morals are being reduced or not is subjective and something being taboo in the past does not automatically mean it should remain such. Your arguments were also the same ones used against interracial marriage. If we want to talk about the slippery slope of marriage and such, then there is your beginning.

 

If you really love Rolls Royce, then it is.
You would honestly love your partner less because 1000 people got married instead of 100? And you want to blame gay people for that? WTF, dude. Really.

 

The differences between a man and a woman are exponentially greater than the differences between a white man and a black man.

Male female relationships are superior to all others because of the differences. Both sexes have a different set of strengths and weaknesses. They compliment each other.

 

I’m 57 years old. I’ve been around the block a few times. The youngest person I’ve known to be married is my uncle. He was 17 when he married his 18 year old girlfriend. They’ve now been happily married for 59 years.

I’ve never seen or heard of a “child marriage”. Girls getting married at 10, 12, or 14 has never been as common in the U.S. as people being left handed. Maybe it happens in Islamic countries, but not here.

 

I’m happily divorced. I just don’t think marriage has the same value as the definition widens. When we get into marriages involving two men and one woman, or three men and a donkey, the term “marriage” will become a joke.