Are you in favor of Bill 183???

July 23, 2010 8:50pm CST
Frequently, the argument against recognizing same gender unions is that same gender unions cannot be marriages because they cannot lead to reproduction. If this were true, then couple who choose not to have children or physically cannot have children be in "real" marriage. These are situations propagation in which there can be no propagation of children, therefore these must be unnatural union. I find this reason to be faulty and offensive. How about you guys??? Do you have something in mind that you can share???
1 response
@jak2010 (1550)
• Papua New Guinea
24 Jul 10
This is an excellent topic you brought. I am taken back when you said it is offensive, marriage of different gender generate human spicies and that is how human psicies are kept alive. And this is primary function of marriage. Whatever else is secondary. We should not call it marriage, but something else. We do not see this in this in animals and only in human beings,which is why we call it unnatural.