Marriage is used by governments to help protect it's investments within society and to promote prosperity.

You get the legal title of marriage along with Tax cuts and the like because you can produce a family for the good of the country. A gay couple is useless to the country, because they cannot procreate.

How many handles have you, pussy?

This is my only one on this site dude. Care to debate?

Does marriage have any legal and/or financial benifets for a couple ?

__________________
I respect your right to have your own opinion,but I do not necessarily respect your opinion.

In the country of the United States of america it certainly does. I have nothing wrong with a homosexual couple wanting to have a relationship, but it is their constant nagging at the heels of society to accept them more. It really is rediculous, they don't want marriage because they have a right to it, they want same sex marriage to help develop homosexuality as a norm.

I am registered as a democrat but this is one of the many things I despise my party for doing.

marriage is beneficial for a number of reason besides procreation- married couples tend to follow laws more and conform with society. typically when two people get together and feel a responcibitly (and possbile emotional connection) for one another they tend to make better life choices.

and gay people can have kids. granted they need sperm banks or surrogates. they could also be our answer to all the kids in foster care.

and infertile people marry. we also don't dissolve marriages of people who wish to never have kids.
a little inconsistant, hmm?

__________________
Psych Majors are JUNG and HORNEY

Freedom is SEXY

"and gay people can have kids. granted they need sperm banks or surrogates. they could also be our answer to all the kids in foster care."
They cannot offer the family life that a Man and woman can, which is what our government needs and wants. You are right about it helping them make better choices, but a large reason of why (Personal opinion coming on, dunno much about gay research I will look into it if this goes further) homosexuals are the way they are rather than the norm of heterosexual is because the are non-conformists at heart. Mind you some come to it from traumatic events or instances in their childhood, or teen years. Some just want to be gay. But the truth being, why should we amend what is known to be good for our country, for something that may be catastrophic for it. All because some of our citizens feel that they arn't being given abnormal rights.

The traditional family life is the reason for having Male-female relationships. To say that we should allow foster kids, children already stricken with a terrible event of being alone in the world without parrents, to fall in the hands of unstable and insecure people is wrong. The one thing we know, regardless of whether religion or science is involved, the natural order of mating is Male-female. We only hurt our contries growth by promoting homosexuality, we need native born americans.

But ultimately, we cannot allow same sex marriages for these reasons:

*They themselves cannot procreate
*They have a selfish need to force their view of their sexuality upon others. (Otherwise, why should they want to get 'Married') Why not call it 'United' or 'Together'.
*Harmful for any children they may inheirit The Homosexual Orientation of Parents Harms Their Children (Read the references, therein lies the truth)

If we allow a man and a man to marry, or a woman and a woman to marry, where do we draw the line. What if a man wants to marry his dog next? What if a man was to marry his daughter? What if a man wants to marry a 14 year old? Moral decline drops low when we allow these types of occurances. You can't please everyone.


Let homosexuals be homosexuals, and let them be proud or whatever, but for fucksake, do we not hold them accountable for forcing Americans to try to accept them? They are attacking our constitution, it isn't just about them. Make a tear in the constitution, and it will rip much larger.

gay people have multiple methods of generating offspring from adoption to in vitro-fertilization to surrogate motherhood. These children would be just as eligible for the draft, an equally potential participator in our economy, and an equal economic burden on their parents.

Except homosexuality has been prevalent in man since some of our earliest history. It has also been normalized in many societies, including the Greeks. Its prevalent in animals as well, case and point the bonobo chimp as people like to bring up. They constantly have gay sex to preserve the peace.
Nothing about a homosexual child makes him any less "native" to America, especially seeing as few inhabitants of this country are truly native. Also there is no direct statistical correlation between homosexuality and insecurity that can't be explained by homophobic trauma.

You're half right. I wouldn't say it was for one reason over another but instead the two reasons combined. But the reasons are sound. Homosexuals are very frequent targets of violence and rape (by "heterosexuals") as well as being outcasted from traditional parts of society. Many are even unable to practice their religion with others. Why shouldn't they want to make themselves seem normal? It would literally save their lives. Otherwise, they will continue to live in fear in most parts of the United States.

tax cuts, plus legal rights to the other's property, power of attorney and other things

Well, the greeks did very well didn't they? Lol. Homosexuality is a weakness not a strength. Even the greeks were aware of this. It wasn't thought of as a 'good' by philosophers of that time, socrates for example. He taught against mere lust.

This about how the world would view a homosexual nation. Think about the state in which our army would be in, if it had a predominant homosexual population.