BellaOnline Forums News and Politics Civil Rights Liberty and Justice for ALL not just Heterosexuals

Not if marriage is not a civil right to begin with.

Homosexuals have no need of marriage. Homosexual relationships in and of themselves cannot produce children. Therefore since they cannot contribute to the survival of our species they have no need of the state promoting or protecting their relationships. While heterosexual marriages do not always produce children they are at least capable of doing so. Marriage is a contract between two people and the state and in order for the state to spend time and resources promoting and protecting a relationship it must be demonstrated that that relationship is an overall benefit to society. It has nothing to do with love. Government is not in the business of validating love. Homosexual relationships produce no benefit to society so they have no need of marriage.

Here we go again. Rather than waste time with your idiotic notions, why don't you just go away!

I just got here. I'm not going anywhere. I have a right to voice my opinion just like you. You are free to disagree of course. You are also free to leave. This is a public forum and I am a member of the public and am harming no one.

cruze4fun, I will ask you my standard question. If you can adequately answer it I will welcome discussion with you. If not, I will promptly "ignore" you via the handy feature available on this site.

How exactly does marriage between homosexuals affect you?

Nosy, put the idiot on ignore now.....he is TD or Freak all over again.

While I value your input and enjoy reading your posts, and while I most certainly understand your passion for the topic at hand, I do reserve the right to welcome any and all posters to my forum to voice their opinions - dissenting, agreeing, or somewhere in between without being called "idiot" or worse. Thus, please note that further ad hominems by you will be deleted.

If this offends you, please note that I do so unintentionally and without malice.

Thank you for your opinion and please accept my apology for the verbal bashing you received in response to your post. I will do my best to prevent this from happening again.

In the meantime, I am not quite certain that I agree with your reasoning in general, but with the notion that homosexual relationships do not contribute to society at large in particular.

While it is true that many (though not all) homosexual relationships do not result in procreation, the fact of the matter does show that adoption is one of the most vital aspects of contributing to society (as it relates to procreation) that singles, heterosexuals and homosexuals engage in.

Thus, following your logic, these relationships do provide the framework wherein children are reared, thus invalidating your argument. Am I mistaken?

Sylvia, It seems that your title of civil rights advocate does not include civil rights for all.....you allow a basher to be here and impose his hatred on the rest of us, but when he is ignored or called out, we, the bashed are chastised. I leave your forums with no problem. We have all the problems we need without being chastised by a supposed civil rights advocate. You could probably get Texas Dave and JFreak back if you asked nicely. They would fit right in with your philosophy.

I think Sylvia's reprimand to pondlady for her "idiotic notions" comment is a bit harsh. I've seen much worse comments from "christians" such as calling people sinners, telling people they're going to hell, etc., ignored.

If someone posts a comment like "Homosexual relationships produce no benefit to society so they have no need of marriage" they should be prepared for responses, even nasty ones. What this poster should have said is that homosexual relationships produce no benefit to HIM - to which I would respond, SO WHAT.