Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
it wouldn't apply to me, but the effect it has applies to the society at large because marriage is a a public and social action, it is not merely a private vow
if two homosexuals publically have a wedding and everyone in the crowd is sitting there clapping hands, that is an act of public support for it for example
if two homosexuals publically have a wedding and everyone in the crowd is sitting there clapping hands, that is an act of public support for it for example
it's when someone has people basically control them and lift them into their partner's private parts to make them have sex without them actually doing it themselves
Little hard to explain honestly but the gist of it is that the people aren't actually moving on their own they just have people moving them into eachother to simulate sex
Little hard to explain honestly but the gist of it is that the people aren't actually moving on their own they just have people moving them into eachother to simulate sex
your argument is that gay-marriage being legalized doesn't normalize gay-marriage
King of teeth-pulling during debates goes to you sir.
Post automatically merged:
according to basic biology, the twist here is that in this context heterosexual isnt referring to sexual orientations, just the fact that the human species has two sexes that are involved in sexual reproduction.
if obviously cant refer to sexual orientation though, because humans have various sexual orientations besides heterosexuality
what's the point of your argument?
my point is that it being legal is bad because it normalizes it, whether the state "advocates" for it can be argued. It cannot be argued that something being legal does normalize it though
according to humans being sexually dimorphic
sexual dimorphism entails heterosexuality, necessarily
my point is that it being legal is bad because it normalizes it, whether the state "advocates" for it can be argued. It cannot be argued that something being legal does normalize it though
Post automatically merged:
according to humans being sexually dimorphic
sexual dimorphism entails heterosexuality, necessarily
no, they aren't apart of it
you're trying to find a loophole but it fails because homosexual actions cannot be foreplay because men cannot get pregnant, so any sexual activity between men cannot possibly be ordered towards reproduction and they are just using each other's bodies for pleasure
the effect is that it is normalizes said thing
im not interested in arguing whether the state itself has an opinion, although i would argue it does insofar as the state has a will, but that isn't really necessary for my point
you're trying to find a loophole but it fails because homosexual actions cannot be foreplay because men cannot get pregnant, so any sexual activity between men cannot possibly be ordered towards reproduction and they are just using each other's bodies for pleasure
Post automatically merged:
the effect is that it is normalizes said thing
im not interested in arguing whether the state itself has an opinion, although i would argue it does insofar as the state has a will, but that isn't really necessary for my point
