Gay people's opinion should not be taken into account in the marriage debate

This:

 

Please elaborate, if you even have the mental capacity to grasp the argument.

 

like I said, nobody is asking for special rights.

procreation is completely irrelevant. that tired argument has been beaten to death.

 

irrelevant, since the ability or intention to procreate is not a requirment of marriage.

tired argument long ago refuted. this is a paternity law, not a marriage law. if daddy isn't daddy, he has no responsibility.

nor does it apply to millions of heterosexual couples, because they can't produce children. which is what makes your argument idiotic.

 

yes it does

 

of course you can. but they aren't fundamentally different. they are similarly situated to heterosexual couples who can procreate, and IDENTICALLY situated to heterosexual couples who can't.

this is why your argument is self defeating.

 

why do you continue with this obvious and easily provable lie? there is no gay test for same sex couples to marry, just like there is no straight test for opposite sex couples to marry. this is why platonic opposite sex couples can and do marry all the time.

already proven lie.

 

except your arguments have been losing in court.

 

and here in the real world, courts have been tossing out laws banning same sex marriage.

 

I think that is because his views are 'unjust' overall.

 

no!! Its dem activist judges derp derp

 

"TROLL" topics like this survive when "BRAINY"topics die. Stop feeding the trolls.

 

How would I know how the Supreme Court will decide? They are completely unpredictable. Cant any more take the text of the Constitution and court cases of the past, to know what direction they might go next.

 

Might want to learn a little precedent before saying any recent SCOTUS decisions were unpredictable.

 

Even more courts have upheld laws limiting marriage to opposite sex couples as constitutional. Thats why I can cite a dozen court cases to support my views and you havent cited even one to support yours.

 

Don't worry, God would never allow homosexuals, otherwise known as SEXUAL DEVIANTS AND PERVERTS, to marry in a HOUSE OF GOD. The religion of liberalism, wanting to marry these FREAKS, cannot call any building they have a "church" in any sense of the meaning. Liberals are anti-moral, animalistic types of beings, not even worthy of the title of "human".

 

String a few words together and make a relevant point if you can.

 

You're asking for me to be more specific when your best response has been "that's a silly argument"? And you've yet to respond to my request to elaborate?

Maybe you need to grasp a few concepts before you're mature enough for discourse. First and foremost, look-up tit-for-tat.

Seriously. Sit down kid. The grown-ups are talking.

 

Amen to that!!

 

You have your opinions based upon emotion. I have mine based upon court precedent

 

I have already demonstrated to you how the Minnesota opinion acknowledges that the state imposes no requirement for heterosexual couples to prove capacity to procreate. Here's some help.

However, the court notes that if such a requirement were imposed, it would not be inconsistent with the Fourteenth Amendment.

But while we're citing State Supreme Court cases from states that have been unequivocally anti-gay as if these decisions implied that marriage is excluded to couples capable of producing, why don't we look at states that have had the opposite opinion in more recent cases.

Supreme Court of California

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/gay_marriage051508.pdf

 

Of course; and most REASONABLE people can relate to the above.

 

Thread is past its 50 pages and is now closed.