Posted by burnsy483 on 4/1/2013 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 4/1/2013 9:33:00 AM (view original):
I believe marriage is a term that should mean a union between a man and a woman.

I'm all for equal rights, and homosexuals should have equal rights. That does not mean it needs to be called marriage. Give them the same rights and call it a civil union, give it some other term, but don't call it marriage.

I just don't want the term "marriage" to include anything other than a man and a woman, because I value that term, and I think it loses its value when it includes same-sex unions (or whatever you want to call them - just not marriage).

Why do you feel that way? What do you care what homosexuals do?

This is the question people seem to have trouble answering. Since every time I ask it, I don't get an answer. Homosexuals want to get married. So...let them.

Exactly.  It seems to always boil down to "I recognize that the definition of marriage has changed over the years, and I'm fine with that, as long as it doesn't change enough to allow homosexuals to marry."

What do either of you care about what homosexuals do?

I'll answer why people should care.

The US is becoming very liberal.  Very "if it doesn't hurt you, why do you care?"     Should I care if you smoke pot?  No?  Should I care if you snort coke?  No?  Should I care if you shoot heroin?  No?   After all, you're just hurting yourself, right?

Well, maybe I should care just a little.  First, you're going to become an unproductive citizen.  Second, you're going to have health problems.   Now, with Obamacare, I get to pay for your healthcare.

That said, I don't care who gets married.   But I should because I believe "If it's not hurting you" isn't a good enough reason to not care.

Mike, I get all those things. I get the reasons not to allow people to abuse drugs.

Now explain the reasons why homosexual marriage is bad for society.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/1/2013 7:23:00 PM (view original):
What do either of you care about what homosexuals do?

If they want to get married, and it hurts nobody, then I'd like them to get married.

I don't care enough to know if it's bad for society.  Nor do I care enough to figure out the benefits of allowing it.

I'm simply saying "If it doesn't hurt you, why do you care?" is a **** poor reason to allow something. 

Maybe you can tell me how two homosexuals in Montana getting married will enrich my life?

It doesn't enrich your life. The same way two heterosexuals in Montana getting married wont enrich your life.

You're phrasing it wrong. "If it doesn't hurt you, or anyone else, and just makes people happy, why do you care to ban it?"

A man and a woman in Montana may have a child.  That child may discover a way to keep people alive well into their hundreds.   Any chance two men have a child that might do that?

I'm not banning anything.   The debate is "Why change a law?" not "Why ban gay marriage?"

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/1/2013 7:45:00 PM (view original):
A man and a woman in Montana may have a child.  That child may discover a way to keep people alive well into their hundreds.   Any chance two men have a child that might do that?

Nope.

What does it have to do with gay marriage?

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/1/2013 7:46:00 PM (view original):
I'm not banning anything.   The debate is "Why change a law?" not "Why ban gay marriage?"

We're changing a law that allows for the ban of gay marriage.