Same sex marriage

[genkaus]

Is it? I mean, if the scientists can combine two eggs to produce a daughter mouse, it'd seem that same-sex unions can be procreative in principle.

The question of reproductivity is irrelevant in this day and age.

There are too many fucking people as it is!!!!

We don't need any more

If two people want to spend the rest of their lifes together as a married couple regardless of their race, gender or car preference then it is no-ones fucking business but theirs.

Gay marriage is not going to destroy society.

It is not going to end the world.

It will not lead to people marrying their pets.

It will mean an equal go for LGBT people, which all they ever fucking wanted in the first place.

And if you can't cope with that, then fuck off back to the 14th century.

Because the 21st doesn't need your bigoted bullshit.

---

BTW Genkaus, this rant isn't directed at you.

Nice save.

---

Basically you are saying our present criteria is wrong but have nothing better to offer.

OK so we're in agreement now.

Are you admitting that we use criteria even though there may be exceptions? That's what it sounds like to me, which is what I've been saying from the start!

What about the part you missed? The whole point originally was this issue. You were saying that exceptions invalidate the general rule, I was saying that the rule is still applicable, you seem to be admitting that it is still applicable even though exceptions exist.

What you have been saying from the start is that exceptions don't prove that the criteria is wrong. Invalidating the rule means proving that the rule is wrong. The incorrect rule is applicable if and only if the correct one is not available. In case of marriage, the correct one is applicable and in fact applied and yet you continue to use the outdated and wrong one. Your rule has both been invalidated and discarded.