thordaddy
Posts: 486 Joined: Jan. 2006
|
improvius,
I answer your question and in return get more questions? Why not answer my questions, first?
If you see no intrinsic societal value in traditional marriage then are you not saying that gay "marriage" has NO intrinsic societal value?
If you do see intrinsic societal value in traditional marriage then what is it and how is it exemplified with the addition of gay "marriage?"
Spike,
The result of this poll seem entirely due to one's political beliefs unless you can explain how science would influence one's vote in favor of gay "marriage?" So, we either have a large number of liberal non-scientists voting or a large number of liberal scientists voting? How else to explain the lopsided results that don't mirror the larger general society? Either way, this forum is tainted by politics while it's supposed to represent science.
Caledonian,
Because people have decided that marriage provides financial benefit without the requirement of bearing children seems like no argument for gay "marriage" or the devolution of the ideal of traditional marriage, does it?
Wayward Hammer,
I am not married. I had children out of wedlock. It was not a hard decision at the time because I was an apathetic liberal and cared nothing for marriage. It has been only the passing of time and experience in life that has led me to see the value in traditional marriage. Does that mean I should now marry someone that I lived with for 7 years, but never married...? Perhaps...? But things might be past a point that I have little control over.
Are you upholding traditional marriage by implying an advocacy for gay "marriage" by way of your question?
|