Of course no one can argue with a factual statement (Such as 2 + 2 = 4), as it's easy to prove it's validity. That's not circular logic, as we can prove the statement to be true without it needing to rely on itself to support its central premise. Your statement, however, most certainly does rely on itself to support it's central premise. You have no reason to call me a bigot other than the fact that I don't agree with gay marriage and, in your mind, the fact that I don't agree with gay marriage instantly makes me a bigot. If you don't see what's wrong with your assertion, then it's useless trying to point it out.
I oppose gay marriage, but that doesn't mean I have something against gays. To say as much is nothing more than a baseless generalization of all people who oppose gay marriage.
I thought religion was supposed to be discluded from this subject? Whether people are married in a church or not is irrelevant, as the whole world isn't Christian. Simply because a marriage doesn't occur in a church, doesn't mean that it's not sacred. I hate to burst your bubble, but very few of my ancestors were ever married in a church (As Christianity hadn't yet reached them)-- That doesn't make their marriage ceremony any less sacred than those who were married in a church. Anyway, if marriage weren't a sacred institution, then you wouldn't need a liscense to be able to perform them; You could pick someone off of the street, have them perform a marriage ceremony and then have the marriage be recognized by the government.
Anyway, you state that the existance of divorce proves that marriage is no longer sacred? If that is the stance you take, then marriage would have never been sacred. For as long as marriage has existed, there has always been a way to divorce your spouse and/or annul the marriage (At least, this is the case in the majority of cultures). Simply because all marriages don't work out, doesn't mean marriage isn't sacred. If that were the case, then very few things-- If any-- Would ever be considered sacred. We measure whether something is sacred or not by social attitude, not by the success/fail rate of the act itself.
Anyway, I really would like my question from earlier answered, as I am wondering what the answer is:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
Are homosexuals trying to be married on the basis on "Love" or on the basis of "Reaping the legal benefits of marriage"? If it's the first option, then marriage shouldn't be an issue. If it's the second option, then that would undercut the entire premise of gay marriage (It seems that many people who favor gay marriage love to use the phrase, "If two people love one another, why shouldn't they be allowed to marry?").
|