1st and 3rd points are how civilised people disagree
2nd and 4th are logically incoherent
Religious beliefs are (not usually) a phase
Two men/women getting married is simply not the same as heterosexual marriage
I'm not arguing against gay marriage atm
I'm simply saying that the ultimate function of marriage is to procreate naturally in a safe, healthy environment and that cannot be done in a homosexual relationship
To counter my second point one might say that being homosexual is also not usually a phase
But using incorrect logic to counter incorrect logic is hardly the way forward eh?
I agree with your second sentiment- can’t agree with the first. Whatever marriage may have originated as- marriage long ago stopped being about procreation. Many heterosexual people choose not to have kids, many are medically unable to have kids. Marriage is and long has been used as a tool for politics or wealth, taxes, alliances, advantages. Citizenship, other benefits blah blah. So what then is different between a heterosexual marriage where a woman has had a hysterectomy or is post menopausal and a gay marriage?
Um excuse me I’m a Christian and I’m not really against gay people or anything but I dont say that stuff but either way God Made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve just what I believe it’s not my fault just ignore us
Ummm.... God made Adam and Eve.... as a reproductive pair. Because there were only the two- if they wanted to make more they needed a man and woman. But.... most non fundamentalist religions gave up the idea that relationships are only for procreation a long time ago. See.... Adam was fertile. Eve was fertile. Sometimes... god makes people who aren’t fertile. In your view- are a man and woman who can’t have a baby but are together equivalent to a gay couple- since they can’t procreate? God also made of so a penis fits like it was made to in a butt- and god doesn’t roll dice so that can’t be a coincidence can it? Or do you think god either didn’t think of that- or knew we’d do it but still designed us that way because he thought it would be funny? Where do hermaphrodites fit in there? Another question... how do we know Adam and or eve weren’t hermaphrodites? Like.... the Bible doesn’t describe the equipment-
Um actually the butt is made for digestion not sex but like that made me think like what person was like hmm I wanna have sex but with another dude like oh hey look there’s hole right there!
Well- we can say the butt is designed for digestion- but the genitals are designed for peeing too- they feel nice when you do sexy things with them though- and many peoples butts feel nice when they use them for sexy things. Your mouth was made for eating, breathing, maybe vocalizing? But as the opposite end of the tube running from your butt- it is also frequently used in sex. From kissing to various other body touching, to oral stimulation of genitals- mouths get used for sex too. Coincidence? Maybe. But in the all knowing plan of god nothing is ever a coincidence.
Now- interestingly enough- there are numerous theories that Adam was in fact a hermaphrodite or androgynous. In fact- many theories exist and much evidence support that “Adam” isn’t even a singular person but a plural. Even the name “Adam” means “man” but not in a gendered sense- in the sense as “man kind.” Adam is referred to as “it” and “they” in several texts as well. There’s s bunch more- but even if Adam is not a collective term for numerous people- we ant disprove Adam is not a hermaphrodite and there isn’t any hard evidence otherwise. No description of Adam rules out the possibility.
2nd and 4th are logically incoherent
Religious beliefs are (not usually) a phase
Two men/women getting married is simply not the same as heterosexual marriage
I'm not arguing against gay marriage atm
I'm simply saying that the ultimate function of marriage is to procreate naturally in a safe, healthy environment and that cannot be done in a homosexual relationship
But using incorrect logic to counter incorrect logic is hardly the way forward eh?
Biologically, that's what it's about as a species