One thing I find encouraging on here!

[Statler Waldorf]

Did you see the word "consensual"?

I did.

That throws out rape and bestiality.

Nope, the consensual/non-consensual distinction was arbitrary and therefore meaningless. Not only that, but child rape cases are often consensual.

Most paedophilic "relationships" are not consensual either, and those that are tend to be between an adult and someone slightly underage, which in a purely biological sense is fine.

Biology does not deal with morality.

Incest is viewed as wrong for different reasons than the other 3.

Why is incest wrong? Because God said so?

Usually, gay men who marry women are either in actuality bisexual or marrying so that these women can become "beards" that make them seem normal. Many men also think they're straight and marry women because they think that's the "normal" thing to do, only to realize that they are actually gay and cannot love their wives.

Are there straight people who think they are gay? How do you know whether someone is gay but thinks they are straight, or straight and thinks they are straight, or straight but thinks they are gay? What’s the difference between “being gay” and incorrectly “thinking you are gay”? What a mess!

BTW, nobody has ever really said that gays suffered exactly the same discrimination that black people suffered, only that they suffered discrimination period for the same reasons.

The same reasons? Gays were brought here from their home continent because they were viewed as sub-human and more closely related to apes? You cannot be serious.

Also, nobody said that there wasn't an LGBT community- only that it isn't homogenous and that it doesn't have an "agenda" other than promoting equal rights.

Well we’re only talking about the “LG” right now, and yes their agenda is to destroy marriage. They’ll even concede that. They already had equal rights under the law, that’s not what any of this is about.

Also if you don't believe that LGBT have been murdered in hate crimes fueled by their sexual orientation, then you've been living under a rock and I suggest you read about Matthew Shepard for instance.

Straight people never get murdered? It’s interesting that people always claim these “hate crimes” happen all the time but the only example they ever come up with is Matthew Shepard even though nobody knows the reason why he was murdered.

You probably have been living under said rock if you think that peoples' natural sexual activity that harms no one is "wrong" because an ancient book of Bronze Age mythology, and so I suggest using this new technology called Google to find the legal arguments for same sex marriage.

[Emphasis added by SW]

…“because an ancient book of Bronze Age mythology” what? This is not even a complete sentence, that’s funny.

Of course, if you want, I can attempt to explain it, but be warned, it may contain too much logic.

You talk quite the game! Please do, I am excited for all of the amazing logic! Of course if your ability to formulate a logical argument is anything like your inability to form a complete sentence I have the feeling I am being setup for disappointment.

It's what he does.

Reduce others’ arguments to absurdity? Guilty.

Sometimes I think he's only here to make atheists look better.

By pointing out why their arguments are fallacious? I could see that helping them out in the long run yes.

His bark is generally worse than his bite.

I try to avoid doing either.

And he often raises some good points too. Just not in this thread. You could even end up liking him in a sadomasochistic sort of way.

You’re just blowing smoke now, I understand that it is easier than actually trying to refute any of my arguments, but it just is intellectually unfulfilling.

What does straight mean?

Don't recall anyone saying you couldn't judge people for whatever you want. I actually said nobody cares about what you deem to be morally good/bad in consensual sexual relationships. I mean, you don't apparently care what others think about it (despite continually posting about it), so why apply one rule for you and another for others?

There’s that word again, “consensual”, why do you draw the line there? Why is your arbitrary line any more reasonable than mine?

Do you think gay sex (eg, say, a man sucking off the shaft of another man) is an equivalent to rape?

Morally? No, but it is certainly quite significant.

Why are two women loving each other and wanting to express their love in a physical, sexual format different to that of a man and a woman?

We’re talking about sexual acts, not love, and it violates the created ordinance.

Not for being straight, they're not.

How do you know that?

I sense you must be quite old, because you argue like my grandfather: "People who don't wear seatbelts never die in car crashes? People who don't smoke a pack a day never get cancer?" He asked this kind of retarded question all the time.

Nope, I am young, but perhaps wise beyond my years.

wtf not sure if trolling

Anti-gay Detective: So, tell me. . . do you like pretty girls?
Gay dude: No, not that much.
Anti-gay Detective: Aha! So you like ugly girls. I just KNEW you weren't gay!

I really hope you're a poe, because you're not just wrong, you seem to be answering comments in the most maximally ridiculous way that you can find.

No, I am reducing your arguments to absurdity. I’ll explain it to you; it is where you take a person’s argument and demonstrate that it leads to conclusions that are absurd (such as rape and pedophilia being permissible). Fidel has no more logical reason to believe that rape is morally wrong than I do for believing homosexuality is. Any attempted distinction is purely arbitrary and therefore meaningless (as we have seen).

I like how people on this forum are supportive.

As long as you agree with them. Free thinkers that all think just alike. As we have clearly seen, nobody on here has a rational reason for supporting same-sex marriage, it’s just the cool thing to do right now; I get it. I prefer rationality though.