@Inkerman: First off, I don't know if you realise but creating the two different categories of heterosexual "marriages" and homosexual "civil unions" is an open invitation for people to discriminate against homosexual couples. Nevermind the fact that they have all the same right legally, how can you expect people not to discriminate if these categories are created because, as you put it, homosexual couples are "inferior". You are wrong when you say that they cannot be socially equal because they cannot reproduce(at an equal cost). Society is what we make it so if we act now by creating 100% equality while not giving people grounds for discrimination it will be accepted regardless of the opposition of a minority.
Your argument that the term marriage shouldn't be used based on a(strange) traditional defninition that you seem to hold is also a very flimsy one. Definitions change all the time and this would be no different, it's part of the evolution of our society and culture. As people have already stated numerous times, heterosexual couples can get married regardless of whether or not they can or even intend to have children.
And lastly I'd just like to point out that your "generic" humn society is pretty messed up and has no relation to modern society. How does a society that needs to maintain a growing population but seemingly not change socially or culturally even begin to resemble anything realistic. The last thing we need right now is a growing population, if anything our population needs to shrink and then level off. Even if this particular scenario resembled reality, it is not relevent to the argument because those homosexual people will exist even in your "generia" whether you call it marriage or not so allowing them to marry has no impact on population growth. This means that the only argument against it is the fact generia's society is not supposed to evolve(unrealistic). You cannot govern in this world and make laws based on some hypothetical world that barely resembles ours. This facet of your argument sounds decidedly homophobic and more like an argument against homosexuality than whether or not they should be allowed to marry or not.
The health risks argument doesn't really hold either because it can be easily overcome with a little sexual health education. Besides there's nothing preventing a heterosexual couple from engaging in the same sorts of sexual activities(eg: anal sex) as those engaged in by homosexual couples.
In short, homosexual people exist via a natural biological process and always have. Who are we as a society to deny them the exact same rights, both legally and socially, that heterosexuals enjoy?
I think maintaining a distinction between homosexual and heterosexual marriage based on the grounds that Inkerman has suggested is very dangerous. The very fact that a distinction is made by calling it something else ensures that true equality cannot be reached. Sure, legally there may not be a difference in terms of the rights that are bestowed on each but social equality will never happen that way. I suppose the point of your argument is that you are pro legal equality but not social equality? To me that doesn't seem to make too much sense.
Not sure if it's been mentioned but I believe the current leading theory is that the rate of expansion of the universe is actually accelerating.
As for how I feel? That's billions of years into the future and I don't believe humans will be around long enough to see the end. Actually nothing that humanity ever does or creates will likely last that long. I just hope no aliens stumble upon the messed up planet we leave behind...(that's a joke)
The GameCube controller. It feels perfect in my hands and I enjoy the button placement. The only problem i have with it is that the dpad is not so good.
@umdesch4: Ninja edit. I'm not trying to insult you, I just think it's a little crazy to say that Nintendo hasn't ever produced a product for the hardcore. As people have said the SNES was indeed quite "hardcore" as was the NES and the N64. Heck even the Gamecube was targetted at the hardcore. And then there's the entire Gameboy line of handhelds.
In terms of games, I agree that this year has been quite boring. Oddly enough I find myself excited for Skyward Sword whereas before the show I only had a passing interest because it was a Zelda game. I'm really digging the artstyle which I was not impressed by after last year's E3. I think it's because I get a more Wind Waker from this one, which is awesome.
In terms of E3 coverage though I think this has been one of the most exciting for me. The Giant Bomb crew really delivered this year with amazing bombcasts with amazing guests every night. I really felt like I got a better view into the industry than I ever had before.
@umdesch4: A company who hasn't ever produced a product for "hardcore" gamers? How old are you? 10?
Anyway, I think it's premature to judge the console when you haven't even been near the thing. I am worried about the number of controllers that can be used but they did say that they were looking into getting more than one working at a time.
Does it have a more appealing artstyle/aesthetic? In my opinion it does. I love the way this game looks, and I'm only playing on what are essentially High settings. Motion blur disabled for me as well, I think it's unnecessary and a little overdone here. Overall I'm loving the artstyle though.
Log in to comment