What's so Queer About Gay Marriage?

A talk I gave for the Gay-Straight Alliance at my University. I outline four arguments against gay marriage, and argue why they don't work.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• equal rights
• marriage equality

[Norwification]

@LittleSn00py If it has to do with the coherence (coherence implies internal btw) of Norwegian or any legal system, explain how. If its "disorders" actually result in problems of legal coherence, then give examples. Simply saying bigoted things don't make them valid arguments.

Why don't you like a well structured and polite mannered PM, since you're so passionate about arguing on the subject? That seems suspicious.

[LittleSn00py]

@Norwification I didn't reply because I don't like PM. If you have something to say, say it in the comments.

[LittleSn00py]

@Norwification It has nothing to do with the law of nature, stupid. It has to do with the internal coherence of the entire law system of a country. Giving homosexuals the right to marry is impossible under the Norwegian law, because under it disorders aren't covered under the family and marriage law; but because people are morons they think of it as normal so they accordingly introduced homosexual marriages.

[LittleSn00py]

@ryan84160 If you retards can't show that homosexuality isn't a disorder, that's too bad.

[ryan84160]

@Norwification This guy is a moron,he has no idea what he is talking about. I am pretty sure he is a christian troll.

[ryan84160]

@LittleSn00py "No, it means that flight and eyesight have evolved to fulfill a purpose relative to the bearer of flight and eyesight.What does this even mean to fulfill a purpose relative to yourself ? So one day a velociraptor like creature decided that its purpose in life should be to fly and subsequently it descendants evolved wings over an extremely long period of time? This is absurd.

[ryan84160]

@LittleSn00py The article seems to rely on the fact the Darwin used teleological language. I still seriously doubt that Darwin actually believed that biology had a goal driven purpose. Anyway Darwin's personal beliefs are irrelevant as his theory of natural selection obliterated the idea of goal driven purpose. The only biologists today that would speak of purpose are IDers.

[LittleSn00py]

@ryan84160 ""This would mean that features such as flight and eyesight don't evolve because they allow the organism to survive, but rather they evolved to fill some pre determined goal that flying, and sighted creatures should exist."

No, it means that flight and eyesight have evolved to fulfill a purpose relative to the bearer of flight and eyesight. To fly and to observe.

[LittleSn00py]

@ryan84160 "I very, very seriously doubt you can back up the claim that Darwin believed that evolution was a goal oriented process."

Do you pay attention at what I write? I said google "Darwin teleology". The first search item links leads to an article discussing Darwin's teleological views.

[Norwification]

@LittleSn00py And let me riddle you this:

If marriage were governed by the laws of nature, how could my home country of Norway enable gays to marry?

Is it just that our legislature has divine powers? Or maybe the laws of nature don't apply in Norway?

Or maybe your reasoning is flawed to the bone and there is nothing about marriage that is governed by the laws of nature..

Whadda you think, Snoopy? (Hint: it's not the first 2.)