What are some non-religious arguments against gay marriage?

poop on penis = gross
that's my goto one at least

there aren't any. literally none.

>what’s wrong with fags
They like dick and shove dicks in their poop hole

It's fucking disgusting.

pic related is breddy goot

It's a cargo cult based on a romantic conception of marriage but without any regard of the intricacies like reproduction & family.

They're fucking annoying.

>homosexuality is a disability
not an argument against homo marriage
>homosexuality is just a fetish
not an argument against homo marriage
>homosexuality is like friends getting married
not an argument against homo marriage
>homosexuality only involves anal sex
not even true and not an argument against homo marriage regardless
>no children
not an argument against homo marriage
>no children again
3rd time he tried this argument and 3rd time it failed.

discord gg/khbcN7

add a .

Attached: Pic.jpg (957x1024, 210K)

It's gross. Theoretically it leaves more women for me, I mean if I was a chad it would mean that.

Sterile individuals (unlike gays) actually have the physical desire to breed with the opposite sex. You’re question is irrelevant

Doesn't really matter.
Marriage is already kinda gay desu

You can prove that some people are born incapable of having children. Can you prove some people are born gay?

>saying not an argument without further explanation
Damn you really showed him

your point is irrelevant since their union won't provide any children regardless of their desire.

fags are gay

No. They have the intention to physically breed, they just don’t have the capability. Homosexuals have the capability, just not the intention

what further explanation is needed? How are any of those things he stated an argument against homo marriage? Most of his points boil down to
>it's icky!
and
>they can't have kids!
yeah well a lot of people find mixed marriages "icky" and barren people can still get married so no, these are not compelling arguments.

What are some secular arguments in favor of gay marriage?

Pro-tip:
The secular argument against gay marriage stems from the fact that homosexuality is detrimental to society. There is no evidence for a biological basis of homosexuality which means that it is prompted by environmental factors (twin studies confirm this). This means that people who should have been in heterosexual relationships which result in children are instead remaining in gay relationships - a dead end for the nuclear family unit which is necessary for a thriving society. In summary, more gays means fewer children being born, and because homosexuality is prompted by environmental factors, more people who should have be straight are instead homosexual.

Additionally, 67% of those infected with HIV in America are gay/bi men. Gay/bi men compose merely 2% of the overall population, indicating that homosexuality isn't healthy on the individual basis as well.

>they have the intention
that's completely irrelevant if your argument is "marriage is designed solely for reproductive purposes"
>gays don't have the intention
no, actually gay people do have kids. You've never heard of queers hiring a surrogate or lesbos using donated sperm to get pregnant?

it's also irrelevant given the fact that we now have artificial wombs.

How does the physical desire equate to breeding? In either case, there is no potential for breeding, but the bond maintains its moral context and sanctity in spite of the couples in question not being biologically equipped to fulfill its reproductive component.

Even so, a couple has the option to choose adoption, or, in the case of homosexuals, surrogacy and thus fulfill marriage's fostering role, albeit indirectly.

Objectively false, as proven by numerous recent studies which I'm willing to list should you wish to look into them.

Genetic Evidence of Homosexuality:

archive.is/grwgp

just let the gays fall into degeneracy in the privacy of their homes, keep watch on your children, leave homosexual bastions, stop using television, stop using facebook, punish your children for degeneracy, instill in them a drive to improve their lineage by marrying up in the gene pool (smarter, more beautiful, more aryan etc..) and have many kids, tell them to have many kids, and in 2 generations all the gays will have died out because of lack of procreation, lack of success with propaganda and a natural disgust for the actions of homosexuality being firmly reinstated into the public psyche due to normalization of biology coming full circle. This goes for drug use, militant atheism, multiculturalism, and obesity as well. All of these horrors of the west are destined to die out either through inherit conflict, inherit self-destructive principles, as well as the normal progression of future generations rejecting the status quo when it goes against rationality. (boomers and millennials were subjected to technologically advanced subterfuge on what rationality means, so this doesn't apply to them. But now that we have access to such technology we can raise our families in defense of it (tv, social media, pornography)

>The secular argument against gay marriage stems from the fact that homosexuality is detrimental to society.
based on what?
>There is no evidence for a biological basis of homosexuality which means that it is prompted by environmental factors (twin studies confirm this)
the twin studies confirms the complete opposite of what you just said
>HIV rates
hmm it's almost like their inability to get married helped encourage promiscuous lifestyles...

There are none. Why should breeders have the right to marry and not every other person? I love my husband, he loves me. We make each other feel good. Marriage is about love, not procreation, at least not anymore. Come on Jow Forums, it's 2018, your ideas of marriage are outdated.

>intention
No my argument is genetic impulse to breed
>surrogates
Again, normal genetic desire is to find a partner. Breed with them (if you can). Then raise the children through a monogamous relationship. So unless your precious gays are doing that. They aren’t healthy

You clearly didn’t read the post

>secular morality
What are some non-religious arguments against murder?

>what does physical desire have with breeding
Everyone has the desire to have their own children
>surrogacy
See

For me the big problem with gay marriage is that they want to make marriage, a religious concept that they don't believe in to begin with, gay.

Gay marriage is like making an atheist church or a hindu mosque.

Just call it what it is. People that want to butt fuck each other.

>genetic impulse to breed
and gays still have this. did you not read my post? your argument falls apart either way

yes, yes I did. That's how I could analyze boil down his "arguments" into two main non-points.

Yes, of course.

>Everyone has the desire to have their own children
thank you for just destroying your own argument. Gays still have the impulse and because of modern science they can do it. You've just dug yourself into a hole.

Marriage is literally a religious institution. There doesnt have to be a single reason outside of religion.

STD statistics.
Colon cancer statistics.
Over-representation among paedophiles.
Over-representation among rapists.
Over-representation among child abuse suspects.
Over-representation among suicides.

If your country pre-emptively bans harmful behavior (by, for example, banning possession of certain substances or certain types of firearms), then it's right to ban faggotry. Not just gay """marriage""", but faggotry as a whole.

>gays still have this
Did you not read MY post? Healthy human behavior is to breed AND have a monogamous relationship with the other sex while engaging in k selection behavior. Homosexuals engage in R selection

Are gays more likely to be pedophiles?

archive.is/gK3Si

I love how literally nobody questions why the government has any fucking business WHATSOEVER to decide what is and is not a marriage.

The government. The entity which handles relationships with other nations, makes decisions on import tariffs, runs the military and other big picture operations. Why should they have any say in what should be private, religious practice? Perhaps they should start giving their stamp of approval on your interior design, too.

Pisses me off.

Jesus christ, more fags walking around the street in fucking bondage gear? Time to ground my kids for a month so they dont see this filth.

literally the only compelling argument itt. without the sanction of the state and without the benefits given by the state, marriage would be entirely a religious institution and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

But people upset with gay marriage right now just seem to be upset at the idea of two queers getting the same benefits for their union as they would in a hetero union and that's....retarded.

Really?
No wonder I hate them so much

Not proof

>destroying your own argument
I was talking about the sterile people. Not gays.

This is the willful ignorance we're dealing with, Jow Forums: Marriage was a business contract. Marriage for love is less than 200 years old, and was a result of first-wave feminism.

>Healthy human behavior is to breed AND have a monogamous relationship with the other sex while engaging in k selection behavior.
ohhhh buddy you've stepped into conjecture zone here. Please cite your sources for health human behavior being monogamous relationships with the other and k selection behavior because that's not how it has been for the vast majority of human history.

It's a matter of culture we aren't going to give an outlet for destructive sexual practices either for people who should reproduce or as an outlet in a feminized society for the 40% of non reproductively viable males.

And I already fucking told you twice that gay people still have this impulse proven by their use of surrogates or in the case of female homos, donor sperm.

How is the intent relevant when it can bear no results? The fact that the genetic desire to breed is natural doesn't ascribe moral qualities to it, unless you believe every trait to have been inscribed within mankind's genetics at this particular point in our evolutionary course to be virtuous.

Lmao so you can do what? Point out some examples of early civilization and royals engaging in polygamy and promiscuity?

>archive.is/grwgp
>In men, sexual orientation correlates with the number of older brothers, each additional older brother increasing the odds of homosexuality by approximately 33%.

Again, there are no genetic differences between gay and bisexual men. As indicated before, homosexuality is prompted by environmental factors - one of which could be having reared in a hierarchy of males (older brothers).

>Identical twins are not 100% identical due to differences in womb environment:

And your "article" admits it too.

I explained why it's detrimental, as it causes more men to resort to homosexuality instead of furthering the nuclear family unit.

>twin studies
There are no studies which show the homosexuality rate for identical twins being greater than 20% - with both of the twins being gay. Most of the studies show that when one twin is gay, the other is gay only 12% of the time.

>HIV rates
Again, gay marriage normalizes homosexuality, and because homosexuality is caused by environmental factors, it's possible to adjust the environment to prevent homosexuality. Without social stigma of homosexuality, more men who experience even a slight gay urge will resort to fucking dudes because it's viewed as "progressive." People are even congratulated for being gay now. This results in more HIV and fewer nuclear family units.

Do you believe that people are born with type 1 diabetes?

I have no argument against letting 2 gay people marry. They shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.

>Over-representation among child abuse suspects.
This is the only instance of this argument
Nupol suks

What is that

No it's not. In ancient Rome marriage was legal. A man would be the owner, and the female would be the property of the male. Their union was for the purpose of creating a family and to procreate. This is why faggot marriage was almost inconceivable to the Romans and why it was not legally recognized because it did not make sense. There was a lot of fags in Romans times, but every got that gay marriage simply did not make any sense.

How is it relevant?
>hey I want to have kids
>but shit I can’t
They still possess the desire to breed and raise children with their parents

Twin resemblance was moderate for the 3,826 studied monozygotic and dizygotic same-sex twin pairs. Biometric modeling revealed that, in men, genetic effects explained .34–.39 of the variance, the shared environment .00, and the individual-specific environment .61–.66 of the variance. Corresponding estimates among women were .18–.19 for genetic factors, .16–.17 for shared environmental, and 64–.66 for unique environmental factors

from:

Långström N, Rahman Q, Carlström E and Lichtenstein P (2010) Genetic and environmental effects on same‐sex sexual behavior: a population study of twins in Sweden. Archives of Sexual Behavior 39(1): 75–80.

-

That's more than 20%, and many older studies got up to 50%. What's more, recent studies on Type 1 diabetes indicate only 1/3 of identical twins both have the condition. Is that a choice?

healthline.com/diabetesmine/twins-and-diabetes

Attached: GayTwins.png (1328x516, 117K)

>Point out some examples of early civilization and royals engaging in polygamy and promiscuity?
No, so I can point out that promiscuity has been the norm for the vast majority of human history even after marriage (which is a relatively new institution) came about.

psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success

or have you not heard the news?

That kind of public display should get you arrested and put in a labor camp. We really are in Weimar USA.

Attached: 3825B2E1-0FC5-4BD5-8B00-859E18485335.jpg (700x663, 60K)

Better to ask for examples of gay marriage in early civilization, to end the discussion. It's just not what marriage is. We still use that word, but we're not talking about the same thing.

Your "twin study" is refuted here:

concernedwomen.org/images/content/bornorbred.pdf

discord gg/pwvH8aX

add a .

Attached: Pic5.jpg (960x960, 215K)

And I mean, that's notwithstanding the fact that the first post articulates all the problems with homosexuality perfectly. People keep making noise after that but it doesn't matter.

According to whom? Many possess no desire to breed, and those who do have the capacity to fulfill it through surrogacy. Their genetic lineage is therefore secured, which should render your objection null.

Those who have no desire to breed may not do so, and those who do are given the means to realize it.

Funny how it’s been a thing since Ancient Greece and In 320AD polygamy was outlawed in rome

That paper only briefly addresses a 1991 study included in my image and is so fucking old it doesn't even address the actual study I linked by Langstrom from 2010, let alone more recent studies linked

showing gay twins have certain genes in common typically.

I mean its great that you have a position paper, but maybe find one that isn't nearly 20 years old?

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-05-27 at 6.37.42 PM.png (1986x230, 91K)

1. It's just gross to fuck someone of the same gender
2. I don't want AIDS, AIDS is gross and bad for you
3. Fags are annoying, dykes are violent and angry, both shitty people
4. All either cares about is sex, and I don't want to hear it
5. They're all creepy as fuck
6. They have no bounds, only person to try grabbing me inappropriately was a drunk faggot
7. They're mentally defective

I'm sure I can come up with more if need be.

funny how if you bothered to read the article you would see that and I quote "In more recent history, as a global average, about four or five women reproduced for every one man."

Marriage doesn't seem to impede slutting around or chad getting his dick wet from multiple sources.

That image so really dumb and doesn't actually provide any arguments, and most of it is pure unadulterated sophistry

>many do not possess the desire to breed
Even plants have the desire to breed so a human who doesn’t isnt healthy
>surrogacy
Again. In monogamy a man and a woman raise their own children in a collective effort (if they can have children)

That natural selection has selected their genes to not reproduce, therefore making them unable to complete the basic function of human or any species goal, to reproduce. Gays shouldn't be given marriage or held up above us, as evolution and nature has made them a genetic dead end. I don't know what to do beyond this, just that natural selection has chosen them to not reproduce. That is how to argue against the left, as you can say that they are against evolution, calling them hypocrite's, etc.

The study, titled “Choices: Perspectives of Younger Gay Men on Monogamy, Non-monogamy and Marriage,” was conduced by researchersBlake Spears and Lanz Lowen. They surveyed over 800 single, monogamously-coupled, and non-monogamously coupled gay menages 18-40 years about their relationships. A handful of “monogamish” men were also interviewed.

“The most striking finding of this study is younger gay men’s greater inclination toward monogamy,” the researchers report. “We see this in the overwhelming number of relationships that are monogamous (86percent). In addition, 90percentof the single younger gay men were seeking monogamy. This is a sea change compared to older generations of gay men.”

thecouplesstudy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CHOICES-Younger-Gay-Men-final-160812.pdf

You fucking retard, it refutes the whole basis of "twin studies". I hate faggot so fucking much. You should be stoned.

The overwhelming majority of homosexual marriages are monogamous, and those who raise children do so through mutual effort.

It counters the evolutionary process. People are meant to reproduce. On the other hand, it's a good thing they don't.

>The overwhelming majority of homosexual marriages are monogamous
Lol let's see those numbers

>as a global average
As In counting shitskins in the equation? Lmao you’re entire argument just crumbled buddy. Shitskins(unlike whites) don’t have k selection. They breed like rats with as much partners as they fucking can. I grew up in the hood and I’ve seen this culture firsthand.

Good thing that's by far not the only thing included in

Genetic Evidence of Homosexuality:

archive.is/grwgp

Man and a woman buddy. That’s what monogamy is.

Prior to religion there were no pairings "under god", there was no marriage. The notion of what a husband and a wife are is religious in nature, its not natural you fucking twit. If it were natural we would take what we wanted, we wouldnt be bound. "Marriage" is not the same as the ownership you want to make it, and it did not become "marriage" until religion. The contractual aspect means nothing, it was simply needed in the times.

It's okay to be homosexual, as long as you aren't being mentally ill about it.

>In honor of pride month coming up
I swear to god there are more than one pride months a year somehow and they're insufferable.

You are beyond retarded.

And just to make clear, even if faggotry is genetic that does not legitimatize it. You really ought to be stoned.

Promiscuous faggots rarely marry or maintain stable long term relationships. Of those who do, none are responsible enough to comply to the moral demands of a romantic affair, let alone raise children, so they generally avoid it.

so you're equating faggotry to a disease? well done lad.

this

Because approx. a third of identical twins are gay vs having type 1 diabetes. So yes, I am comparing it do a disease, but no, being gay itself is not a disease. If I compared rates of left-handedness in twins, I would not be implying left-handedness is a disease either, but rather looking numerically at how often traits are shared by identical twins.

It has no purpuose.
Life is about reproduction.
Feelings and emotions are tools of the body to perceive the environment.
And how harmful is faggotry to your genes? Do you know that? Maybe sucking that one cock destroys the heritage of many generations of alphas in your bloodline?!

Faggotry is bad and you know it.

Attached: chloecunt.jpg (1424x2106, 1.05M)

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.12141/abstract

Attached: GayMarriageStability.png (902x612, 159K)

Attached: GayMarriageStability2.png (2016x1262, 243K)