Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Ace]

Repopulate from what?  The imaginary asteroid that is on a crash course to earth 1000 years from now that is going to wipe out every heterosexual and somehow let all the gays live?

No just by the simple lake of people having kids. There many issue as to why they don't have any. But it is a major issue.

[Ace]

Please tell me that I am reading this argument wrong. But are you saying Anima's argument of population decreas is not occurring but that the population is increasing, your argument?

If so, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT POPULATION DECLINE IS HAPPING NOW!!! It is an issue now! IT IS A FACT!!!
I have provided information on this already!!!

You are raving. The US population has risen steadily by 2-3 million year on year since after the Second World War. Stop talking shit.
http://www.multpl.com/united-states-population/table

Do not know what raving is but ok.
Really, really.? . . The United States is not the fucking world!! Stop being the one sided American please it is deeply dislike thought the world. Please.

Also what is contesting the U.S. Population is the steady level of immigration coming into the country.

[Aristocatt]

Europe is not the world either. You just ignored the point that I gave you, and then brought the same point up when someone else disagreed with you.

[Ace]

A

You are raving. The US population has risen steadily by 2-3 million year on year since after the Second World War. Stop talking shit.
http://www.multpl.com/united-states-population/table

Do not know what raving is but ok.
Really, really.? . .  The United States is not the fucking world!! Stop being  the one sided American please it is deeply dislike thought the world. Please.

Also what is making the U.S. Population the same is the steady level of immigration coming into the country. Count you American born citizens only

[Ace]

Europe is not the world either.  You just ignored the point that I gave you, and then brought the same point up when someone else disagreed with you.

True it is not that is why the issue is also in Latin America , parts of Africa and the Middle East, (more so because of the wars in the areas). Even Asia, Japan right now is trying to address the issue.

Yes I did read the imaginary rock in space and did reply to your statement

[Redbeard The Pink]

It is a wasted rhetorical method that only works on those foolish enough to subscribe to sola scriptura (which I do not). After all the bible does not say you cannot eat people, skin them alive, or have sex with dead bodies... So have at it? The bible further states

Not to mention you (and everyone who makes reference to this quote) are severely misinterpreting it meaning. The quote is taken in terms of the moral standing of the actor and not in regards to the morality of the action. As is commonly said in the Church, "Condemn the Sin not the Sinner". As such while I may say murder is immoral and unethical such that it should be denigrated and legislated against I may not say the murder is a bad person. So the same may be said with any immoral action; the goal of which is to eliminate the improper conduct, not to eliminate the conductor.

Furthermore if I am to subscribe to the bible argument (which I generally do not and am only discussing because you bring it up.)

"If there is a man who lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed incest, their bloodguiltiness is upon them. 13If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death." - Leviticus 20:12-13

So kill the gay and the incestuous but lesbians are cool?

Like I said I have put for a logical argument in regards to biology. Which has not been rebutted. I further await an argument in their favor that is not a fallacy. Which I have yet to hear. So how about we keep religion out of it and stick to the argument at hand or a logical counter argument?

Have I really brought up the Bible that many times in this thread? I've mostly been highlighting the fact that your whole argument about fallacies is itself rooted in fallacies.

You claim that this victory will lead to victories for people with arguably worse predilections concerning sex and marriage (slippery slope). When called out, you incite special pleading.

You claim that the pro-marriage arguments are appealing to novelty when, in fact, widespread legal pressure against homsexuals is FAAAR more novel than homosexuality itself. Prior to the Christianization of Rome, laws against homosexuality weren't that common in civilized cultures. All evidence indicates that there has been some level of homosexuality throughout most if not all historical human cultures, and for the most part bigotry against it has been pretty limited except for the last 1,000 years or so.

You claim that homosexuality is useless and/or harmful from a biological perspective. First off, evidence indicates that homosexual behavior is ubiquitous throughout nature in various species. When it does occur, it's rare enough to be harmless to species' likelihood to survive and thrive; it is essentially a non-factor in the overall health and well-being of a species.

Furthermore, that argument assumes that the only usefulness an organism poses to its species is to procreate. By that standard, homosexuality is no more or less useless than any other physical or mental abnormalities that preclude a person from reproducing. Procreation isn't the only way for a human to be useful to the survival of other humans, and it's certainly not the only way a human can contribute to civilised society. That whole chunk of your argument is a wash.

There you go. Your whole argument refuted with no bible stuff. Honestly, without "because my holy book says so," the anti-marriage arguments lose what little water they held to begin with. There is no logically sound reason to withhold equal marriage rights from homosexuals.

[Ace]

Yes it is a large world issue. And I also hate to tell you that Europe alone has not ever gotten back to its population since the Black Death. Just about 3 or 4 months ago it was stated that the Jews population is almost achieved their numbers before the Holocaust. Both India and China are starting to have an disproportion of the male to female ratio were they are liking numbers in girls.

Those numbers can only grow be hetero fucking. Sorry.

[Aristocatt]

The World population was estimated to be around 450 million when the black death hit.

Not including Russia, the population of the 8 most populated European countries is greater now than the estimated world population then.

[Ace]

Yes many nations have a declining population.  More nations however have a growing population.  My argument rests on a time series that is well within the scope of the expected population decline some 50+ years from now.

You are confusing the issues that some countries are having with an issue that the world is having.

Also the time series is largely irrelevant.  Since the exponential growth caused by all those heterosexuals could have already fucked us.

Rather than using extinction due to population as an argument for why a particular group of people is wrong, why don't we move on from it and find a real argument against the homosexuals.  Or, you know, in absence of one just accept that they are human beings deserving of the same rights as heterosexuals.

Umm you do know that heterosexuals have always been and are the majority of the population world wide? Are you saying that because of their numbers we need to do away with most or all heterosexuals to sustain us now?
(hmm is that not denying their right to live also?)

[Aristocatt]

Ace, you have successfully misunderstood my entire argument.

My argument is that this idea of homosexuals being bad because they could cause extinction is dumb. I am using the basis of extinction from sexual orientation to show that every sexual orientation has the potential to destroy humanity.