I agree with you that a system based on assumptions is a terrible system. We currently have many laws that make assumptions. For instance, drinking laws. The law assumes that you were a child the day before your birthday, and an adult the day after. The law assumes that you suddenly become responsible enough to drink alcohol responsibly, within 24 hours. Marriage licensing laws assume that the married persons are going to have children. How are gay people going to have children?
"Attatching responsibility to ones sexuality is a stupid idea". Are you actually suggesting that everyone should act sexually irresponsibly? That would mean that pedophilia, rape, incest, and polygamy would all be allowed. Not to mention, the rampant spread of STD's and unwanted pregnancies. Heck, we can just use coat hangers for abortions and if you're against abortion, there's always a dumpster nearby.
There are more straight people that get into trouble than gay people. That's because gay people are a small percentage of the population. You need to use a per capita basis when analyzing statistics. You are correct that some straight people should not be allowed to marry, like brothers and sisters.
1st paragraph, I can (mostly) agree with. Though gays can adopt, just like anyone else can. And straight couples don't always have children either. So it does work both ways. Another thing, you yorself said that you don't agree with laws that make assumptions either, and I now don't understand your first post at all, because you seem to contradict what you just said with your own arguement.
Second paragraph is nonsense, utter nonsense. Where did I even HINT that people SHOULD act irresponsibly? What does rape have to do with whether someone is attracted to the same sex, or pedophilia, polygamy, or incest? Where did I ever mention abortion either? That statement was completely off the subject as well, and is just a blatant attempt at making me look bad. Please, quit pulling completely irrelevant things out of your ass, and actually present an arguement for me to analyze if your going to write me a paragraph, or some sort of valid statement. The only thing I said in that sentence you quoted was that assuming someone will act irresponsibly because they're gay, straight, or bi, is stupid. Nothing more. That whole paragraph might as well just not have been there, seeing as it helps your arguement none, and looks to be just an attempt at a smear job on me using things that have no correlation to the topic at hand.
Last paragraph, alright I'll think using your logic again, on a percentage basis, with another example. A good portion of people in prisons are black. Should we assume that since someone is black, they will commit more crimes than someone else, and limit the population's rights for that?
Do you think gay people should have the right to marry?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I agree with you that a system based on assumptions is a terrible system. We currently have many laws that make assumptions. For instance, drinking laws. The law assumes that you were a child the day before your birthday, and an adult the day after. The law assumes that you suddenly become responsible enough to drink alcohol responsibly, within 24 hours. Marriage licensing laws assume that the married persons are going to have children. How are gay people going to have children?
"Attatching responsibility to ones sexuality is a stupid idea". Are you actually suggesting that everyone should act sexually irresponsibly? That would mean that pedophilia, rape, incest, and polygamy would all be allowed. Not to mention, the rampant spread of STD's and unwanted pregnancies. Heck, we can just use coat hangers for abortions and if you're against abortion, there's always a dumpster nearby.
There are more straight people that get into trouble than gay people. That's because gay people are a small percentage of the population. You need to use a per capita basis when analyzing statistics. You are correct that some straight people should not be allowed to marry, like brothers and sisters.
--
Glass
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
1st paragraph, I can (mostly) agree with. Though gays can adopt, just like anyone else can. And straight couples don't always have children either. So it does work both ways. Another thing, you yorself said that you don't agree with laws that make assumptions either, and I now don't understand your first post at all, because you seem to contradict what you just said with your own arguement.
Second paragraph is nonsense, utter nonsense. Where did I even HINT that people SHOULD act irresponsibly? What does rape have to do with whether someone is attracted to the same sex, or pedophilia, polygamy, or incest? Where did I ever mention abortion either? That statement was completely off the subject as well, and is just a blatant attempt at making me look bad. Please, quit pulling completely irrelevant things out of your ass, and actually present an arguement for me to analyze if your going to write me a paragraph, or some sort of valid statement. The only thing I said in that sentence you quoted was that assuming someone will act irresponsibly because they're gay, straight, or bi, is stupid. Nothing more. That whole paragraph might as well just not have been there, seeing as it helps your arguement none, and looks to be just an attempt at a smear job on me using things that have no correlation to the topic at hand.
Last paragraph, alright I'll think using your logic again, on a percentage basis, with another example. A good portion of people in prisons are black. Should we assume that since someone is black, they will commit more crimes than someone else, and limit the population's rights for that?