6 Arguments Against Gay Marriage that Don't Work

Well, just so you know, there is another argument going around which is rather good, i.e. for the homophobes. Its the same old "Not Natural" argument but with a twist. If homosexuality is natural, then if we were to put all lesbian couples on a deserted island and all gays on another, and leave the straight ones on a third island, we should find that all these islands still be populated for generations to come. After all nature will always find a way for the survival of all species, I mean fish used to walk on land but evolved and are now able to live underwater!) So if in fact homosexuality is natural, the gays and lesbians in their respective island should be able to reproduce and continue for generations to come. Otherwise, then the argument that homosexuality is natural should be put to rest forever. As for comparing to animals as a frame of reference to all things natural, well some animals eats their young, some kills their partner after a sexual intercourse, most animals k

Homophobes --- get over yourselves. You are probably from the same strain of assholes that thought slavery should be legal and protested the day they let black kids into "white schools". Many homosexual acts happen in nature: plants, animals, germs, etc. So, it's not a very "weak" argument to say "it's natural if it happens in nature". Society is trying to move forward by establishing equality, and those who are resisting are setting us back. What is unnatural about two people who love each other? Do you have a good answer to that? If homosexuality is wrong because men are not supposed to have sex with men, and same for women, would it make it ok for two men to don't have sex w/ each other to get married? Gay bashers talk about how "The Bible" says it's wrong --- well, I'm not sure if YOUR Bible says this, too, but mine says "Love they neighbor".Maybe it's just me, but that act feels more Godly than judging and hating someone for something that has absolutely no affect on your life

Adam Kolasinski's secular case against gay marriage full of holes. He's an economist but fails to analyze the effects from a scientific perspective. The first clue is that he refers to a SINGLE purpose for marriage. If he were thinking, rather than believing, he'd realize that the state has an interest in encouraging the diversification of risk in civil partnerships or gay marriage. People who look after one another are less likely to become wards of the state. Kolasinski is no secularist; he's a right wing Catholic, and he's abusing his scientific discipline to service his own personal biases.

Yes, you do see straight people rejoicing their rights. It's called FOX. And if being gay isn't natural, why does it happen in nature?

Why do you have to pick on fat people, Phil? :( Signed, Chubby in Missouri...

It is not that I dislike gays. They can be great people and hating them for the fact that they are gay is racist. You might as well hate blacks and Jews too. It is just the fact that it isn't naturally right. And the fact that they are celebrating their views as gays isn't right! Gay Pride being an example is one. You don't see straight people celebrating their sexual activities. It's your call I guess.

p.s. how many people alive today have talked with god? p.s.s. and dont reffer to the bible its a miss translated over used crusty old book

hey im gay and i think all you homophobes suck...... there is nothing worng with being gay and speaking of that what about the seperation of the church and state? for all you fools out there i means the church cant mess with the govenment so why do they think gay is bad. because they all are brainwashed by religion

almost everyone who commented this article is a stupid homophobe and should shut their mouths. do you have a penis? cut it off and eat it. like sean sullivan. he sucks =]

Marriage is a privlage for ONE man and ONE woman and thats the way it needs to stay

Before ridiculing the arguments against gay marriage, perhaps you need to research the issue a little more extensively. Now, from a gov't perspective, there is nothing to be gained from a union between two gays and it doesn't make sense for a gov't to grant the rights. Please, google "The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage" by Adam Kolasinski before reaching the conclusion that there is nothing at stake with gay marriage.

Awe, you never even touched the "slippery slope"!

Love is love.

It's natural because it happens in nature? LOL, weak argument. Men and women are designed for one another, mechanically, they are designed to fit one another. Homosexuality is not natural because men can't have sex with men in a natural way!

care bears rule