Which hits on the fact that men are not the same as women and that children should be raised not by two men or two women but by a man and a woman. Children are nurtured by having both, sexes are not interchangeable or exactly the same.
First, I need evidence for why do they need both sexes. Second, the other option for gay adopted children isn't being adopted by a straight couple, but not getting adopted at all.
And on why limiting race is different than gender is because, again, men and women are different from each other, what I’ve already outlined the purpose of marriage is, and because as you’ve already agreed, one is entirely biological and the other isn’t.
First, what did I agree to here? what is entirely biological and what isn't?
Second, I think you are arguing that race is a meaningless distinction. Sure. Then why not limit marriage between people of different religions?
Except I didn’t define it by religion. I defined it by its structure within pretty much every society that had marriage, they had it between men and women regardless of where they were. That’s because the purpose was nearly entirely the same for everyone, and I think we have done tremendous harm by radically changing what the purpose of marriage is. I see the family as the most important building block of society, and so attacks on that are harmful to it. Ive already explained again and again how I see gay marriage as damaging the social fabric and distinction between men and women as well as the purpose of marriages.
If you want to go to the historical definition of marriage, are you pro-polygamy then? Because historically, marriages have been very 1 man, many wives.
but they aren’t having kids which is the point of a marriage and the value of it to society.
Neither can infertile couples, but I hear no objection to them marrying.
absolutely and utterly false without even the tiniest shred of evidence. Gay pride parades have gotten more extravagant and degenerate, you scroll through Tik Tok and the gay section is supremely degenerate, STDs are still massive throughout the gay community, gays still very often have a multitude of partners at once. This is such bullshit I don’t know how you even can say it.
The opposite is true. You just know jack shit about gay history, and how degenerate the gay world was.
In the 60s before stone wall, thousands of gay men were having sex with anonymous partners every night, constantly switching, in gay 'meccas' like New York.
In the 1970s, long term gay relationships existed, but were usually plagued by cheating.
In the 90s, we had gay couples that actually lasted without cheating.
And now we have full on married families raising kids, with more gays than ever choosing a coupled life rather than multiple partners.
That sounds to me like a win for family values. As for TikTok's gay section being degenerate, no fucking duh. The entirety of Social media promotes shock value, in which is included degeneracy. What doesn't follow is that gays are more degenerate.
yeah, because they value the environment. I don’t see how “but it doesn’t affect you!” Is at all valid. You’re allowed to care about those things that don’t directly impact you.
Sure, you can care about them, but banning them because you don't like them is wrong. Honestly, even the pollution example is a bad analogy, because at least pollution exists. In contrast, gays getting married only positively affects society.
I kind of have though? That the Kinseyian school would suggest that more tolerable societies would have more engage in and thus identity as LGBT and less tolerable would have less?
No, you haven't. The point I have been making in this side conversation to the larger point is that gays exist and are immutably gay at some point a little after birth. Do you agree with this point or not?
As for your attempted point about a Kinseyian school, that doesn't exist. There's Keynesian school of economics, and there's the Kinsey scale, named after Alfred Kinsey.