The Destruction of Straightness

[this user was banned]

Fact: men that fap to asian port are more likely to be pedophiles

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

by this logic, people unable to bear children should not be allowed to marry. or the elderly.

I addressed this earlier somewhat, and the article I cited addresses this in copious detail (for additional commentary see Yale economist Jennifer Roback Morse's discussions which I believe are available on Youtube.) The infertile couple is the exception to the rule, and together the infertile couple still creates a "family capable" union. Remember, a main contention is that a marriage contains duties that cannot be performed by a member of the opposite sex, and so while a childless couple might not fully realize their abilities, they still possess the proper capacity.

It is this capacity that the state has an interest in promoting.

Additionally, even if all of the above were untrue, the lingering question still exists:

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus

Why is marriage regulated, but friendships are not? Anyone who submits that marriage must be redefined must first answer this. Only then, can the discussion move forward.

[Hasbinbad]

I addressed your lingering question. It is based on a fallacious premise. Address that criticism please.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Anyone who submits that marriage must be redefined must first answer this. Only then, can the discussion move forward.

i'm pretty sure that nobody is asking for marriage to be redefined, anyway (ty hbb for pointing out this little gem).

current definition: a domestic union between loving adults.

new definition: a domestic union between loving adults.

now, i'm pretty sure that's the same definition, but if you've got anything to show me i'm wrong, i'd be happy to show you how you're being a bigot.

[Hasbinbad]

Samoht I don't know who you are but I love your soul for your last line.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The infertile couple is the exception to the rule, and together the infertile couple still creates a "family capable" union.

that seems convenient enough. from now on, when logic interferes with my argument, i'll just refer to it as the exception.

[Eliseus]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i'm pretty sure that nobody is asking for marriage to be redefined, anyway (ty hbb for pointing out this little gem).

current definition: a domestic union between loving adults.

new definition: a domestic union between loving adults.

now, i'm pretty sure that's the same definition, but if you've got anything to show me i'm wrong, i'd be happy to show you how you're being a bigot.

Actually, gays are asking to be redefine, it a current case in the supreme court right now, because the U.S. defines at as man and a woman, therefor homos are not able to get the same federal benefits.

[Eliseus]

At least get some facts right when trying to argue.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Eliseus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, gays are asking to be redefine, it a current case in the supreme court right now, because the U.S. defines at as man and a woman, therefor homos are not able to get the same federal benefits.

actually, i'm pretty sure that marriage was only ever defined as a man and woman with the defense of marriage act.

it was the homophobic republicans in congress that had to change the definition.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Eliseus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At least get some facts right when trying to argue.

right back at ya, buddy