quote: I do not believe that marriage is solely for "love."
It is now. Whether you like it or not, marriage is about the love that is shared between two people. Love that they want to prolong well into their old age. I definitely want to get married when I'm older but I don't want children at all. I guess it should be illegal for me too.
quote: Family members "love" each other, too
There are gay couples out there with adopted children and they love each other just as much as any other family would. I really don't see anything wrong with that. Sexual orientation does not determine one's ability to raise a healthy family.
quote:No, it's not. Marriage is for a man ad a woman. It revolves around procreation. Of course there are the few exceptions in which the woman cannot become fertile or the man cannot produce sperm, but the concept stays the same. I do not believe that marriage is solely for "love." Family members "love" each other, too - and I don't believe they should get married either. "Love" is such a generic term.
wonderful. it also served in the old times as something to make peace between lands. and to keep poor people with poor people and the nobles with the nobles.
you've obviously never been in love. love you feel for a family memeber is never the same as something you feel for your partner.
quote:Do you mean "rights" to "gay marriage" or human rights? As I said, I don't believe it is their "right" to get married, just like it's not the mother's "right" to kill her child with an abortion. You don't see me standing up for the "RIGHTS" to an abortion, do you? You know why? - Because that is an artificial right. No way in a just world would that be legal. I do, however, believe that they should be treated with the same human dignity as everyone else (born or unborn). They should be treated with the same respect and same attitude. Now, that is their right - just like it is everyone else's.
polyester is artificial. and so are contact lenses. and in-vitro fertilizations. and birth control. and and nail polish. and paper. and coca-cola. LET'S BAN THEM!!!!!!
"Regardless, I have always, and will always, succeed."
quote: No, it's not. Marriage is for a man ad a woman. It revolves around procreation. Of course there are the few exceptions in which the woman cannot become fertile or the man cannot produce sperm, but the concept stays the same. I do not believe that marriage is solely for "love." Family members "love" each other, too - and I don't believe they should get married either. "Love" is such a generic term.
If you believe marriage revolves around the concept of procreation rather than the concept of love, then I pity your girlfriend (or future girlfriend). Of course "love" is a loosely defined term, but that's no reason to write it off. The basis of marriage is romantic interest, that special kind of love shared by two people who desire each other sexually, emotionally, and spiritually. If you've never experienced this in any form, I pity you.
Basically, Bogey, you're a grade-A hypocrit. You'll stand up for people being mistreated, as long as those people fall within your narrow view of "what's right."
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
" Bogey, why are you against gay marriages? Isn't that unjust? "
No, it's not. Marriage is for a man ad a woman. It revolves around procreation. Of course there are the few exceptions in which the woman cannot become fertile or the man cannot produce sperm, but the concept stays the same. I do not believe that marriage is solely for "love." Family members "love" each other, too - and I don't believe they should get married either. "Love" is such a generic term.
" Why aren't you standing up for THEIR rights? "
Do you mean "rights" to "gay marriage" or human rights? As I said, I don't believe it is their "right" to get married, just like it's not the mother's "right" to kill her child with an abortion. You don't see me standing up for the "RIGHTS" to an abortion, do you? You know why? - Because that is an artificial right. No way in a just world would that be legal. I do, however, believe that they should be treated with the same human dignity as everyone else (born or unborn). They should be treated with the same respect and same attitude. Now, that is their right - just like it is everyone else's.
quote: Don't you realize that the media gives absoutely no knowledge to us about the facts? They twist words, and give their opinion.
So the civilians aren't in danger? They aren't living in fear of being killed by a car bomb? If that's not true, then why the hell we bothering them?
quote: Don’t you know that terrorists kill people in the first place – war or no war?
Yes I do, but our presence is making terrorism worse. Why? Because they don't want to be a democracy. There are probably even civilians that have been brainwashed into thinking democracy is not the right way to live. We can't just go there and tell them how to live their lives and expect them to like it.
I say we should stay out their country and help them help themselves, and spend all that money we're spending on this war on better technology for protecting America.
exactly its impossible to say that saddam hadent heard or bin laden before he attacked and saddam helped them train by letting them in his country like it or not we are the worlds police officers and if we arent who the h3ll is? someone has to play peacekeeper and since the UN dosent do s--t its our job!
quote: A terrorist, he was a dictator. A cruel, harsh one. Yes, but that is different. He did nothing to you. It's like if you were mad at me so you punch Sunset. It makes no sense.
Since when can't someone be both a terrorist and a dictator? Sadam was both. Again, you don't have to wait until something wrong is done to you, in order to stand up for what is just. There is a thing called human decency, in which you stand up for others even though you don't get affected either way. We are helping the Iraqi citizens by getting Sadam out. We are trying to prevent future attacks on America as well. At some point you have to stand up to these terrorists.
A terrorist, he was a dictator. A cruel, harsh one. Yes, but that is different. He did nothing to you. It's like if you were mad at me so you punch Sunset. It makes no sense.
You take care of no one. All you do is alter everything to make everything the way you think it's right, which is strictly a matter of opinion.
"Regardless, I have always, and will always, succeed."
quote: Iraq was not responsible for Sept.11. And if you want to stop terrorism, go to Colombia, Spain for the ETA, and Russia for the black widows. In Iraq, you've done nothing.
First off, you do not know that Sadam was not involved with September 11. But, you do know that he is a terrorist. He was probably one of the worst in the world. Nobody can deny that. Getting him out of power is a good thing. You can't justify not getting Sadam out by saying that we have not gone to Colombia, Russia, Spain, etc. Just because we don't take care of all the world problems, doesn't mean we shouldn't take care of any.
Iraq was not responsible for Sept.11. And if you want to stop terrorism, go to Colombia, Spain for the ETA, and Russia for the black widows. In Iraq, you've done nothing.
And who said they wanted democracy in the first place?
"Regardless, I have always, and will always, succeed."
Topics 
