Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

Rogan just won't listen to Walsh's point on the meaning and purpose of marriage. Rogan can only see it in the standard "what's wrong with gays getting married?" angle and personal choice. He cannot grasp what marriage is actually for, having and raising offspring in a stable environment, and that people pretending they're married and calling it that waters down the meaning and the respect for the institution. He just keeps whining on and on about "but what's the harm?" The faggots and child-free idiots can just call it co-habitation or something.

Rogan just won't listen to Walsh's point on the meaning and purpose of marriage. Rogan can only see it in the standard "what's wrong with gays getting married?" angle and personal choice. He cannot grasp what marriage is actually for, having and raising offspring in a stable environment, and that people pretending they're married and calling it that waters down the meaning and the respect for the institution. He just keeps whining on and on about "but what's the harm?" The faggots and child-free idiots can just call it co-habitation or something.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (22).
[–] • 1 pt

Good points. I wish Walsh had just called these other "marriages" best friendships or partnerships, because that's all they are. The legal benefits muddy the waters because people just want the tax breaks by being legally married. Should have always been a civil union to decouple it from marriage. In fact those benefits shouldn't be given to anyone except a man and woman married who are having kids, because that's the whole fucking point (or should be) of giving benefits to married couples: it is essential for the country's future. This is like in Poland(?) where they upped the benefits for families having multiple kids.