I answered. What about policemen who sit at the desk? Should we remove their rights to use force? Rights are grantet for one to have ABILITY to perform some duties. If the rights are not granted they can't perform the duties! But if they do not USE their rights, it is their problem and problem of society. But this is exceptional state. Also couples who are unable to procreate are good for adoptation, as they still have the right model of society!
You're skipping the issue. A straight couple that is biologically incapable of reproducing is incapable of performing the duties you demand are the only qualification for marriage. Therefore they shouldn't be married. But then you change the argument to modeling something - not actually doing something. So should your hypothetical police officer be allowed to be a police officer if he is blind? He cannot then drive and arrest people, but I suppose he could model an arrest in a controlled environment. You are using circular logic and you just gave a counter-example for your own argument. So can someone be a police officer if they can only model police office behavior?
Teaching WHAT? What Values? Well it would be pain to ask for them to teach values which are agaisnt their own values. So what they can teach is THEIR values... but to whom... to THEIR children or to other children? So in general, they can teach values they believe in without cognitive dissonanse only if the values reflect their own... but their values generate family whcih can't produce humans biologicallhy, so their values produce society which dies out.
So you argument went from reproduction to teaching some undefined and fuzzy values. Are gay people incapable of teaching values? Which values are you ascribing to? Being honest? Not stealing? Treating other with respect? Respecting differences? Abiding by the golden rule?
Where do gay parents get their children? And what VALUES they teach? Do they teach values to create families which are able to born and carry and teach other children - society members? All what they can is higjact other children and teach them their values which they would not be tought should they grow in theri original family.
Anyone who teaches procreative values is better suited for teaching then one who teaches values which bear no fruit!
They get their children the same way straight parents do when they are incapable of having children. Adoption or surrogacy. Are you saying that simply having a gay parent or having gay people present in society will suddenly make straight people gay? That straight people will suddently not want to reproduce and teach their children?
And now we're talking about procreative values? Just what the heck kind of values are those? Do we need to teach people how to reproduce? How could humanity have evolved without language??!?!
See... that means that GAY society is only possible in high-tech society. But this high-tech society is possible only from low-tech society evolution. But only way how low-tech society gets to high-tech society is - procreation trhough traditional value. So GAY society can exist only if it parasites on STRIGHTS traditional value oriented society... Is it your values? Do you grant equal rights to cancer and to healthy organism?
What's high tech about surrogacy or adoption? Are straight couples who adopt parasites too?
Your hatred is starting to shine though. Now gay people are parasites!!
How do you define "harming anyone else"? What IS harming? If Cult leader takes YOUR children indoctrinates them in the way they GLADLY obey to this Cult Leader and gladly makes himself into slave... is it OK... as nobody is harming anyone. Both sides are very HAPPY!
I would define "taking" of a child as harm to his or her freedom and to the parent's rights of custody. That is harm. Wouldn't you define that as harm?
See... this is very bad argumentation as you will paint yourself into corner, where "Leave me alone coz your care is harming me" will make drugs legal! :) I feel good, and leeave me alone. How do you define "harm to anyone". If I feel offended - does it qualify as harm to me? If your target is society where nobody is being harmed, then your target is utopia in this world... And sometimes harm is for greater good! And sometime FEAR of Harm gets you to loose of your sick limb, which just falls off because of cancer! To cut out cancer is HARMFUL... To leave cancer... yes... nobody is harmed.. . for some time, while whole organism dies out.
As I told... gay-oriented society and marriage can exist only as parasitic form of society. If you remove traditional family and hig-tech technologies, gay-society will die out as will become sterile. OR it will be forced to enforce sex between opposite genders but now without love... wich would qualify as rape!
So gay-oriented society is what we are advocating? Hardly. Who said that? We just want a just society. You can be straight or gay. Doesn't matter to me. Allowing some people the same, equal rights, as others would not create a "gay-oriented" society. Far from it. No more than banning slavery created a "black-oriented" society, or allowing women to vote created a "women-oriented" society. Those expansion of freedoms and rights created a society oriented toward equality under the law.
And from there your argument simply degenerates into babble.....
