So, in terms of reproduction, same sex couples are wrong.

Then you can ask; what is the purpose of life?

The answer maybe subject or objective, depending on your perspective.

(February 22, 2011 at 6:20 am)ib.me.ub Wrote: One say subjective, the other says objective.

EvidenceVsFaith Wrote:There is no "wrong" objectively biologically speaking.

How can you be so sure.

In terms of reproduction, same sex couples are wrong, because it just dosen't work like that.

And what does reproduction have to do with marriage?

(February 22, 2011 at 6:49 am)ib.me.ub Wrote: So, in terms of reproduction, same sex couples are wrong.

This is my understanding of the "Go forth and multiply" edict that so many religions puport.

(February 22, 2011 at 6:49 am)ib.me.ub Wrote: Then you can ask; what is the purpose of life?

To 'BE' nothng more. Not at this end of history

(February 22, 2011 at 6:49 am)ib.me.ub Wrote: The answer maybe subject or objective, depending on your perspective.

A subjective answer is the only answer. It really depends on the persons involved in the 'marriage'

badge Wrote:And what does reproduction have to do with marriage?

Well generally, people get married, then they reproduce.

(February 22, 2011 at 7:10 am)ib.me.ub Wrote:

badge Wrote:And what does reproduction have to do with marriage?

Well generally, people get married, then they reproduce.

Sure Ibby...I'll mention that to the thousands of couples on the IVF programme

(February 22, 2011 at 7:10 am)ib.me.ub Wrote:

badge Wrote:And what does reproduction have to do with marriage?

Well generally, people get married, then they reproduce.

And oft times they reproduce without marriage, or marry but don't(or can't) reproduce.

One is not a requirement of or for the other.

(February 22, 2011 at 7:14 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(February 22, 2011 at 7:10 am)ib.me.ub Wrote:

badge Wrote:And what does reproduction have to do with marriage?

Well generally, people get married, then they reproduce.

And oft times they reproduce without marriage, or marry but don't(or can't) reproduce.

One is not a requirement of or for the other.

Yes that is right.

The conversation was about right & wrong, related to same sex couples, which is different form the main thread.

It quite often happens that tangents occur.

Considering that many same-sex couples can reproduce too(using something like anonymous donors)...

(February 22, 2011 at 1:54 am)Aerzia Saerules Arktuos Wrote: I am against marriage. I give alliances cautiously... and single-mating agreements even more discreetly. I cannot see any reason but one for why i would want to deliberately chain my freedom to love, and that one being monumental gains to make it a worthwhile agreement. Such an agreement is often life-binding, and so it really has to be worthwhile of a whole life unless one made it with every intention of breaking it.

Those who marry out of love are fools, for they have now restricted their ability to love. I am therefore against gay marriage: let them be happy

Yes. This is something we have in common. Well said.

KichigNeko Wrote:And when a population gets too high for the local resources to support?? Then what ibby??

Then the unlucky, usually weaker members of the populace, die out.. thus advancing the spiral of death that is evolution!!!! ^_^

Doubtie Wrote:If all is meant by "wrong" objectively biologically speaking is the fact that same sex couple's can't reproduce, so what?

Then theoretically they won't reproduce to carry on those genes... making it really weird that they even exist past the odd one or two here and there.

---

Zen Badger Wrote:And what does reproduction have to do with marriage?

Quite a bit... considering that it is a way to organize the populace along somewhat easy lines. Why are scandinavians such a pain to trace the genealogy of by their names?

Kichi Wrote:Sure Ibby...I'll mention that to the thousands of couples on the IVF programme

The wert? o.0

Zen Badger Wrote:And oft times they reproduce without marriage, or marry but don't(or can't) reproduce.

One is not a requirement of or for the other.

And women have been put aside or slain for "their" barrenness. It's all over history and the wonderful Bible-of-many-men-with-erectile-dysfunction.

The religions pertain to the view that women are for making babies, regardless of how cutely they try to spin their barbarism. The religions also like to think that marriage is their invention... and so one can see this hand in hand working in their minds to prevent homosexual marriage.

Ascendent Wrote:Considering that many same-sex couples can reproduce too(using something like anonymous donors)...

They are reproducing with an unknown person's semen (or stealing the child of a woman)... the religions would have them cast whores and kidnappers.