And the man said: 'This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.' Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.
We noted that the scripture he cites does not support homosexual 'marriage' in any way and poetically alludes to the reproductive potential of marriage; totally opposite of the argument he was attempting to make.
And the insight that marriage is Unitive is not an argument for homosexual 'marriage'.
Any more than arguing that it is a means for man and dog to become 'one body'.
If there was an all knowing benevolent god who shared with mankind the secret of happiness it would be unwise to doubt and question.
Heterosexual relationships frequently and consistently result in children.
But historically the overwhelming majority did.
Maintaining the species is serious business.
Reproduction may not be the primary purpose of marriage for some people but it is the primary reason society has an interest in fostering, nurturing and subsidizing heterosexual marriage.
If the envious and bitter want to adjust social marriage policy to reduce or eliminate the subsidies given married people who do not have children they could advance that proposal.
But trying to pretend their barren pairings are Just As Good as heterosexual marriage is false and poor social policy.
but every parent knows you have to kick the little moochers out of the basement before they'll make anything out of themselves.
Societies that do not maintain a sufficient birth rate
see their pension and social security systems implode.
Another aspect of the problem
is that the rate of babies born may be high enough to sustain the population
but the quality of people produced deteriorates
and the rising generations do not take their place in the economy
but instead add to the burden of society
by taking more social services than they contribute in economic activity.
There is as much evidence that god exists as there is that humans are attracted to people of their own gender.
Is Danny attracted to boys? Who knows.
He has had sex with icky girls, after all.
"Homosexuality" As an innate biological condition? Please cite any testable evidence that such a thing exists...
Those devices measure sexual arousal, not sexual orientation.
Everything you assert about homosexuality applies much more so to religious belief.
ASSUMING that there is no 'god', and CONSIDERING the extensive social bias against religion in many modern 'enlightened' humanist societies, WHY would people actively choose to practice religion?
Is there any possible explanation other than that some people have encountered 'god'?
We cited it to demonstrate arousal is not orientation; that women may be aroused by seeing animals copulate and yet not have an affinity for fucking apes.
And we never said the gay isn't real. We said it is real in the same way that religious conviction is real.
We certainly are open to the concept that a neurological defect could confer deviant sexual desire.
We just don't think society is compelled to subsidize or promote the condition.
Do you have any explanation of the consistent differences observed in the brains of psychopaths?
A 'variation' that renders those afflicted with it incapable of reproducing is a defect.
'Atypical' desires deviate from the typical.
An education should send you fearlessly in search of The Truth, not leave you guarding your words and cowering in fear
of sanction from the Forces of NarrowMinded Bigotry and Intolerance...
Society has a huge interest in seeing enough babies grow up to be contributing functional adults.
Unless you expect termites to pay SS and Medicare taxes and change your diapers when you are in the nursing home.
And childless 'marriages' have no need of subsidy or 'promotion' by society. Childless couples will find pairing up to be in their financial and emotional best interest without the need of social subsidy.
He would tell you that creating enough functional mature contributing (breeding) members is The Prime Directive of any species that plans to survive.
And as long as that wastage is kept to a small percentage the species can overcome it. But, alas, too many homosexuals would spell the end of the race.
That said, in comparing homosexual behavior with heterosexual behavior, both are emphatically NOT neutral. Or equal. Or Just As Good...
Heterosexuality must be practiced in order for the species to continue,
and the race will thrive or suffer to the extent that it 'responsibly' practices Traditional Heterosexual Marriage.
Rates of homosexuality are difficult to measure and you do not know what you claim is true.
Were there ACTUALLY a 'homosexual' state of being those creatures would/could not reproduce.
Of course, we all know that "gay" is just a set of behavior and lifestyle choices.
"NOT reproducing often leads to higher fitness under certain common conditions."
Those conditions being the potential reproducers are defective goods whose genes are best kept out of the gene pool.
Homosexual activists like Danny assert that homosexuality is an innate biological trait, like race, and that for that reason society is compelled to sanction homosexual behaviors and pairings.
However innate biological traits can not be altered.
One does not experiment with a different race, or dabble in a different gender (surgical mutilation notwithstanding....)
One could not be both homosexual and heterosexual,
were 'homosexual' an innate trait (and not just a behavior)
In order to push his line of 'reasoning' Danny ignores the overwhelming reality;
that sexual desires and preferences are fluid and greatly influenced by environment and culture.
Danny once answered a college student who asked if he could "un-out" himself after deciding he was not gay after all "you can tell people but no one has to believe you".
The cynical cold rigid assertion that one can never renounce the gay puts huge pressure on kids, especially males, who may think themselves gay at some point and later decide otherwise.
We're sorry, we don't see how it benefits the species or them when the 'great' do not have children. Could you elaborate?
You confuse culture and race.
So can Danny.
All healthy whole humans are biologically heterosexual.
What they choose to do, or not do, with that is their choice.
Predisposition is not Predetermination.
And people, with appropriate gender role models and family and cultural support, can overcome deviant sexual predispositions to lead normal lives.
If cultural pressures can force Dan to have sex with girls under 'duress' why can't the reverse be true?
Why can't children growing up in a culture that relentlessly promotes and propagandizes homosexuality (as ours does) succumb to peer pressures and experiment with homosexuality even if they are not in the least gay?
Why does Danny get to renounce his heterosexual past but you and Danny are smugly sure the college student questioner must really be at least partially homosexual even if he won't admit it.
Danny's attitude toward homosexuality is the same as the antebellum racists who contended that even one drop of negro blood contaminated the bearer; in Danny's world any homosexual exposure at any age forever condemns the participant to the gay ghetto.
The cultural etc advances you tout are luxuries that are only enjoyed by societies that master the humdrum basics of producing ongoing generations of competent citizens.
And, btw, cultural dalliances with normalizing homosexuality are a hallmark of civilizations in decline.
Did Danny love Terri at some point? Does he now need an outside release every now and then? Has his love waned? Will it last Forever?
no. body. cares.
It is not the job of government to GUARANTEE that anyone can marry/love/fuck the person they *Love!*
Whatever "orientation(s)" someone may profess, it really doesn't matter.
In order to reproduce humans have heterosex.
But what is homosexual "marriage" except "an empty facsimile of so-called "normal lives"
Normal Heterosexual lives, that is.
Evidently you are not in touch with the popular culture that American children are immersed in.
Homosexuality is relentlessly projected and propagandized.
Music. TV. Movies.
But when they try to un-out themselves Danny warns them that "no one has to believe them..."
Why does Danny scorn the idea that someone could identify as homosexual then recant and recognize their heterosexuality.
Has Danny ever acknowledged one case?
You have a depressingly low appreciation for the specialness of human life.
People who have never heard of Socrates, Shakespeare, William Blake, Albert Einstein, Nichiren Daishonin, or Mother Theresa can have rich full lives doing no more than loving and providing for their families.
You may from your smug tower of cultural chauvinism disdainfully see them as no better that protozoa but that is your loss.