About Me

Name: vladseventysix
Email: vladseventysix@yahoo.com
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Airtight! The real reason there has never been same gender marriage.

A man and a woman physically mating with each other, in physical reality, are not an example of physically matingless opposite gender relations, in physical reality. Therefore, there are two completely separate and distinct opposite gender physical realations that exist in physical reality. One is the default position of physically matingless opposite gender relations, in physical reality, the other is the profoundly different and infinitely superior man and a woman physically mating with each other, in physical reality. Profoundly different and infinitely superior, in physical reality, because they are indeed and in fact the perpetuation of the human species, in physical reality, and yes that counts, in physical reality. However, there is only one same gender physical relations that exist, in physical reality, and that is physically matingless same gender relations, in physical reality, and all this is basic physical reality human beings can do absolutely nothing about. So, am I to conclude the human species has never done anything to acknowledge and differentiate these two completely separate and distinct opposite gender physical relations that exist in physical reality? Despite its imperfections if not the Institution of Marriage, than what? Might this analysis be the root cause of irrational homophobia? And if this analysis is correct then what are the consequences of same gender marriage and why should those consequences be reevaluated? 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

2

A man and a woman physically mating with each other in physical reality are just one example of human physical relations that exist in physical reality. Will same sex marriage advocates please explain why it is absolutely impossible for human beings to use the Institution of Marriage to acknowledge a man and a woman holding hands in physical reality which can also be construed as the physical union of a man and a woman in physical reality and has absolutely nothing to do with the perpetuation of the human species in physical reality?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage.

The institution of marriage can acknowledge all marriages as physically mating regardless of accuracy, or, the institution of marriage can acknowledge all marriages as physically mating less regardless of accuracy. It's either all one way, or, all the other way regardless of accuracy. To include two people of the same gender in the institution of marriage would acknowledge all marriages as physically mating less because that is the default position of all human relations and this is the so called equality of same sex marriage. Physical reality is not neutral and neither is the institution of marriage. For example: can same sex marriage advocates please explain how it is possible that human beings can construct an institution of union that can acknowledge human subjective relations that exist in human subjective reality, but, that it is absolutely impossible for human beings to construct an institution of union that can acknowledge human physical relations that exist in physical reality? Same sex marriage advocates say they want to expand the institution of marriage to include two people of the same gender. However what same sex marriage advocates really want is to use the institution of marriage to force human beings to radically alter the way they perceive basic physical reality, by claiming that the institution of marriage has absolutely nothing to do with physical reality. The three es's of political correctness - slick, subtle, and sneaky. And it's playing with fire.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »