How do supporters of so-called same-sex "marriage" believe this union can be consummated?

  • Thread starter Thread starter livingwordunity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
livingwordunity said:
Relativists reject morality until someone does something to offend them. Then all of a sudden they are talking about morality.

Relativists are hypocrites.
Click to expand...
Good point. I’ll remember that. They also claim the moral high ground. Well, if morality is relative as they say, how can there be a moral high ground? 🤷
 
interestedman said:
I am sure the google would turn up quite a few results if searched about how one would consummate a gay marriage. I wouldn’t suggest doing the search though.
Click to expand...
Thats not consummation. For consummation of a marriage to occur, a penis and vagina are required. Thus why there is no such thing as same sex “marriage.” All marriages need to be consummated.
 
I never realised sexy times was necessary for a legal marriage. Isn’t that a bit superstitious? It’s just a legal ceremony. No amount of sexual intercourse is needed to make it valid.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
No, I mean as long as it’s legally recognised then what’s the problem? 🤷
Click to expand...
Regular,

There is no problem as you say. The US Supreme Court will never change the definition of marriage and it won’t be legally accepted. You are correct there is no problem.
 
livingwordunity said:
The liberal strategy is if reality doesn’t agree with their agenda then redefine reality. They will probably try to redefine “marital intercourse” to fit with their agenda.
Click to expand...
Which apparently means any organ in any orifice…
 
vz71 said:
Marriage is more then a legal contract.
Click to expand...
Nah, mate. :tsktsk: Civil marriage is nothing but a legal contract, surely. 🤷

So, if I marry a woman and we don’t have sex, our marriage isn’t real and therefore we’re not entitled to any of the benefits of marriage?
 
Regular_Atheist said:
…
So, if I marry a woman and we don’t have sex, our marriage isn’t real and therefore we’re not entitled to any of the benefits of marriage?
Click to expand...
I think the law covers unconsummated marriages. Any family lawyers out there?
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Nah, mate. :tsktsk: Civil marriage is nothing but a legal contract, surely. 🤷

So, if I marry a woman and we don’t have sex, our marriage isn’t real and therefore we’re not entitled to any of the benefits of marriage?
Click to expand...
Interesting that we have been discussing marriage and suddenly you have to say ‘civil’ marriage to make a point.

Trying to move the goal posts tends to do this.
 
vz71 said:
Interesting that we have been discussing marriage and suddenly you have to say ‘civil’ marriage to make a point.

Trying to move the goal posts tends to do this.
Click to expand...
I like how you avoided the point I was making, when I’m sure you understand that all gay marriage would be civil marriage. If it wasn’t, then you’d have bigger problems on your hands, such as the fact that you’d have to marry gays together in your churches and what not.
 
vz71 said:
Interesting that we have been discussing marriage and suddenly you have to say ‘civil’ marriage to make a point.

Trying to move the goal posts tends to do this.
Click to expand...
Regular_Atheist said:
I like how you avoided the point I was making
Click to expand...
Having to change the vocabulary already in use to make a point makes an invalid point.
It’s that goal posts thing again.

Marriage is what is being discussed.
Specificly how it would be possible to consumate a ‘same-sex’ marriage.

I answered this earlier. You can’t.
 
vz71 said:
Having to change the vocabulary already in use to make a point makes an invalid point.
It’s that goal posts thing again.

Marriage is what is being discussed.
Specificly how it would be possible to consumate a ‘same-sex’ marriage.

I answered this earlier. You can’t.
Click to expand...
Well, no you can’t, then. But when it comes to a legally recongised relationship, I don’t see why it should matter.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Well, no you can’t, then. But when it comes to a legally recongised relationship, I don’t see why it should matter.
Click to expand...
It would appear the homosexual agenda wants to claim everything.
Including claiming a marriage has been consumated.

It is unfortunate that they do not realize that it has nothing to do with how we define things, but how God does so.
There can never be a same-sex marriage.
There can only be a crude simulation of a marriage.

I do not believe legality has anything to do with it.
 
vz71 said:
It would appear the homosexual agenda wants to claim everything.
Including claiming a marriage has been consumated.

It is unfortunate that they do not realize that it has nothing to do with how we define things, but how God does so.
There can never be a same-sex marriage.
There can only be a crude simulation of a marriage.

I do not believe legality has anything to do with it.
Click to expand...
That’s great. But it’s a purely religious argument, and is therefore useless when used against people like me. The problem with the God argument is that it works only if you believe in God.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
That’s great. But it’s a purely religious argument, and is therefore useless when used against people like me. The problem with the God argument is that it works only if you believe in God.
Click to expand...
Given that law is not concerning itself with consumation, what exactly is your argument?
 
vz71 said:
Given that law is not concerning itself with consumation, what exactly is your argument?
Click to expand...
That this is a lousy argument against gay marriage, and you’ve just stated why.

We already know that you believe God doesn’t accept gay marriage because it’s a sin. Why do you need to bring consumation into it?
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Well, no you can’t, then. But when it comes to a legally recongised relationship, I don’t see why it should matter.
Click to expand...
Marriage is not simply a contract or just any relationship. If it were then there would be no reason to argue for SSM as one would simply make a contract.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top