gay same sex couples not a life form, but are entitled to to federal benefits
I gotta be missing something here:
Life definition
1)The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, [COLOR=“Black”]functional…
and one of the attributes for organisms
All organisms reproduce in order to continue the species’ life. This is combining genetic information (in sexual reproduction) or splitting into two organisms (in asexual reproduction) in order to create another of the same species. In sexual reproduction, the new organism will have some characteristics from the mother, and some from father. It may look like either of them, or it may not. In asexual reproduction, the new organism is an exact copy of the first. Sometimes, not every member of a species is able to reproduce. As long as others are (which we know they can, if they still exist today) then it does not threaten the species. (Except for mules, but don’t worry about them, they are a bizarre anomoly.
How do gays reproduce naturally ? damn it’s that natural word again oh yea I said it and I know you were thinking it[/COLOR](oh shit this is gonna ruffle some boa feathers
“I fully support broadening the definition of marriage to include gay couples. Anyone who is against marriage equality has obviously never been in the center of a gay ‘tickle and wink’ session,” said Obama during the interview. “Give me a hardhat, a pink boa and a pair of leather chaps and I’m a happy guy. It’s a gratifying and fulfilling experience. The people of the gay community couldn’t have been more gracious or gentle. They deserve the same rights and privileges afforded to all the other citizens of this country.”
here’s the link
Oh great, now I’m not even an organism. I guess the same goes for pre-pubescent children, virgins, post-menopausal women, men with ED, and anyone else who can’t reproduce or chooses not to.
And as far as “capacity” is concerned, gay people have the same “capacity” for reproduction as anyone else.
No. I’m a straight man who does not have kids. This does not mean I am not alive. My pet cat has been sterilised, but that does not mean she is not alive. Somebody who dies in an accident before they have kids becomes not alive when they actually die - they don’t retroactively become never alive.
Then what’s your damn point? Even if a homosexual chooses not to reproduce, other humans do, which makes it the exact same situation.
Beyond that, human rights aren’t granted on the basis of life, but sapience/sentience. My cat is not entitled to human rights, but a sapient android would be.
I can’t help but point out that businesses, corporations, etc., which fail your “tests” of being life forms in several ways, also receive government benefits on occasion. So do universities, forests, national parks, and statues/monuments.
Really, I can’t fathom why the fact that gay couples exist gets so many people’s panties in a bunch. How does it affect me if Bruce and Spike set up housekeeping in the apartment down the hall? It’s not as if there aren’t a lot of straight couples whom I might find far more disturbing, menacing, or disgusting.
Wow, dumbest thread of the month? The OP completely and obtusely misinterprets the biological definition of “alive”, falls for an obviously fake article about Obama on a site that proudly touts itself as fiction:
And finally, misses that many non-living entities get federal benefits - corporations, charities, etc.