Originally Posted by bu villain
Just wanted to respond to this because this is such a common argument:
First of all, homosexuality is found in nature. Therefor, by definition, homosexuality is natural. It is pointless to argue about because it doesn't matter anyways. We don't make laws based on what is natural (e.g., killing).
Now that's out of the way. Lets make explicit why homosexuality is distinctly different from the other situations often brought up:
Homosexuality - Two consenting adults
Pedophilia - A child is not considered able to give consent due to the lack or maturity/brain development
Incest - A child of an incestual couple is at a much higher risk for birth defects due to the lack of gene mixing.
Beastiality - Similar to a child, we cannot determine consent and can't even say they have the brain development to understand such a notion.
Geoff also talks about anatomy/reproduction. Certainly we don't prevent infertile people or people who don't want kids at all from getting married so we can not say marriage is about reproduction. Heterosexual couples do lots of things with their anatomy that will never produce a baby, so I don't understand why anatomy matters.
If you want to have a good argument about why we shouldn't allow gay marriage, you need more convincing arguments.
Reply With Quote