Apparently, there are people who believe this
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (35)
sorted by:
I really don't care if two consenting adults want to commit to spending the rest of their lives with each other. However, before I support the government being involved, I want to know why they are involved with marriage in the first place.
If the motivation is to incentivize having a family, then no, same-sex marriage should not be recognized, at least not with the tax benefits. For next-of-kin stuff? I'm fine with that.
I also lean towards agreeing with the argument that they shouldn't call it marriage. Churches also shouldn't be forced to hold ceremonies that go against their religious beliefs.
Yeah, gay sex is fucking disgusting, but so is pineapple on pizza. I don't care if you do it, just don't do it in front of me.
Famous last words right before you get pedophile rights movements
I'm not arguing for social acceptance, just governmental neutrality. Why would you trust the government to appropriately decide who you're allowed to marry?
Government should only involve itself to protect people/property and mediate aggrievances. They should not be the arbiters of social policy. You are arguing to give the government power in interpersonal relationships. I just cannot agree with that.
We didn't have public display for support of pedophiles prior to this.
It was a slippery slope to allow gay marriage and nobody voted for it (in fact, it was voted AGAINST even in states like California). Society hasn't been the same since then.
We used to have that government, but that was a long time ago.
We lost it because we were sold lies about culture not having an impact on on our day-to-day lives. It turns out, the type of people who were molded by that counter-culture don't care about limiting government and despise everything about America.
And our Constitution wasn't designed for half of the people who currently occupy America
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams
That's fine, that's what forums are about.
I was looking for a debate, so no worries, just stating my views in hopes that someone would challenge them.
I'd argue that we did. NAMBLA has been around since the 70's. Explicit support for overt pedophilia is still not accepted by anyone but pedophiles and ignorant, brainwashed cultists. I agree that they have been emboldened by the LGBTQ+ pride bullshit, but the positive to it is that they are now out in the open.
Support for pedophilia is not actually growing, but what is growing is the cult-like mentality to blindly support anything that the right is opposed to. Gay marriage does not contribute to the tribalism, which is the true main cause of the emboldening of the pedophiles, but the debate over it does.
I don't like slippery slope arguments. The line can be drawn wherever we choose to draw it. Gay civil unions are fine, raping children is not, and it is that simple. The line should be drawn where it makes the most sense, not some arbitrary number of steps back from where it should be to avoid the "slippery slope".