28 Comments on “A strong argument Against gay marriage.”

  1. So, he says, in principle a man and a woman can procreate, and therefore the fertility of the people dont matter.

    By that logic I could say: in principle human beings can procreate, and therefore the sexes of the people dont matter.

    He is arbitrarally deciding to draw the "principle" of the matter at biological sex. Then he says that anything more specific than his principle, (like fertility) is irrelevant.
    His explanation for why we should be deciding based on the principles of things is weak (like seriously who cares what the people who invented marriage had in mind at the time) and he gives no explanation for why sex should be the "principle" of the institution.

  2. Marriage never began wholly as a government construct. It originated from religious background and, as so, became defined as the connection and union between a man and a woman because, as many have noticed, that combination lends itself uniquely to the survival of the human species. To hold this definition in law under a government founded on religious freedom and personal free will is dismissive of those founding principles.

  3. that's appeal to the definition fallacy.
    Besides he's redefining marriage to make this case, that's a no true scotsman fallacy
    i can't believe many people buying into this weak ass argument.

  4. I don't really care about the arugment but why does the other keep interrupting him? that's really retarded

    and this shit is like a decade ago, why tf is youtube recommending me this

  5. The truth will always remain relevant no matter what circumstances it faces. So to all the dislikes for what he's saying. The truth hurts doesn't it? You idiots wouldn't be here to dislike if it wasn't for a man and a woman creating you. Society is so fucked

  6. Best argument for this dude I’ve heard But by his reasoning by definition a woman post meta pause cannot reproduce in the same way a gay couple cannot reproduce. Same for a man with a vesecemy. That’s like cutting off all of the apple except the stem and saying it’s an apple. Also uses a false premise that reproduction is only purpose of marriage. In the US, marriage affects loans, money, hospitals visitation and other legal rights. Those should be afford to any people that chose to wish so. Government should not have any role in marriage.

  7. No not really. The purpose of marriage has been changing since it was created. For example, the purpose of marriage in the context of royals would be vastly different to say a marriage in the context of everyday people.
    There are no constants in life and if you believe in the Bible, even death isn’t constant; the prophet Elijah was brought to heaven on a chariot of fiery horses and Enoch never died.

  8. ?????????️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠?️‍?⃠

  9. There are no strong arguments against gay marriage, only ignorance and fear.
    Not too long ago blacks were seen as genetically inferior, and interracial marriage was illegal. So calm yourself.

  10. What if the woman or man is infertile or the couple simply want to adopt instead? People don't say "I want to procreate with you" when reciting their vows. There are many arguments against this.

Comments are closed.