(April 13, 2014 at 12:50 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:(June 11, 1970 at 1:40 pm)FlyingNarwhal Wrote: And again another golden rule of society was "fags can't get married" because if they do society would fail, and your rule is no different.
...and again, I'll point out that your point is a red herring. Same gender relationships do serve a biological role as well. Even in the animal kingdom, we observe same gender couples that adopt orphaned offspring of their heterosexual counterparts. In human civilizations, the prohibition on same gender relationships (contrasted with "women and children first") is far from universal, though in modern times the Islamo-Christian influence may make it seem so.
Personally I have always disliked stretching into the animal kingdom when it comes to defining human morality. Because yes there are homosexual animals, but hamsters eat their babies. If I had a baby and ate it, and then used the fact that some animals eat their babies to justify my position, it wouldn't hold up. There are plenty of reasons I will support gay rights, but using the animal kingdom is a poor reason. Because I could also point to the many species of animals that don't follow "women and children first" if we are going to broaden the discussion to the entirety of the animal kingdom.
Besides, the concept of "women and children first" is relatively new as well, its not as old and universal as you think.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first
That's what I mean when I say that your whole point that "women and children first" is necessary for society, is as baseless as not letting gay people getting married. Your just saying its a universally accepted law that is necessary for the continued survival of civilization, but its not.
