gay marriage

[Emre]

personally i am fully opposed to gay marraige as i feel the function of marriage is to benefit the naturally born decendents [sic] of solely the two individuals married.

What does "naturally born descendants" have to do with anything? So what if a child is adopted or the result of assisted reproductive technologies? Why should a couple that's unable to have kids "naturally" be denied the right to raise a family?

[Incidentally, that might be your definition of marriage. But it's hardly a definition of marriage that most people would agree with.]

So two straight people can get married, have kids and teach them that it's alright to beat up their significant others and/or be beaten up by them? Based on the gay/straight people I know, the homosexuals are WAY better suited to raise children who will be functional members of society.

Agreed. The real issue with people who are bothered by the idea of same-sex couples raising children is that they're afraid that the kids will somehow be "turned gay." They seem to forget that being gay or straight is absolutely unrelated to your upbringing. I can't raise my straight son to be gay...just like a Christian fundamentalist can't make their gay son straight (no matter how hard they might try).

If anyone posting in this thread actually bothered to check the medical literature, they'd find a TON of articles in the reproductive medicine and biomedical ethics literature about the effects on children of being raised by same-sex couples. Every study that has been done has found no correlation between the sexual orientation of the parents and the sexual orientation of the kids. No study has ever shown a correlation between the sexual orientation of the parents and their children's behavioral trouble, academic success, or any other measure of childhood emotional health.

In fact, there is some evidence to show that the opposite is true: children raised by same-sex couples appear to be more tolerant, educated, and well adjusted compared to their cohorts. Of course, some social conservatives may define tolerance and open-mindedness as negative character traits ;)

Do a Medline search and see for yourself.

Emre

[Turf1600]

I get christianity shoved down my throat all the time. It's pretty irritating, really.

[CleanAzzE30z]

if you mention christianity, oh my god you get arrested or cant do it anymore. its pure BS

You have to be joking. In my opinion its the other way around. But you may have had different experiences than I.


Mariano

[Turf1600]

I didn't read a single word in this thread.... but, it looks like it has Fanzotti's name written all over it.

not quite.

[thectrlguy]

I didn't read a single word in this thread.... but, it looks like it has Fanzotti's name written all over it.

[Turf1600]

CSI is over & it looks like I can have more fun here than on TV.


Tim - at the rate things are going here in the states, and the rate at which MX is starting to resemble a truly stable environment, your comment isn't too far fetched. I'm thinking a retirement home down there might be a perfect answer myself.


Wes - if you aren't using religion as what you find so objectionable regarding gay people, what then is the core reason you find it so distasteful to let them have a fair go at life? Just because it isn't your particular flavor in life doesn't mean they shouldn't be entitled to have their rights decided by your personal whims. Wouldn't you agree?

What makes your personal choice & beliefs in life reason to dictate how others can conduct theirs?

What if we made a law that said you cannot take sub-XX,XXX miles cars & use then as track cars? Doesn't that seem crazy to you? I'm speaking in reference to the bubble car in case you are missing me. So why then should your personal belief dictate other peoples' quality/benefits in life? I promise you that letting gay monogamous people show their love & commitment to each other won't make you kids gay. If they are gay, it will be their personal choice according to your written line of logic, and you should send them to bed without their dinner.

And God forbid you ever give your sons a Brautwurst, that will be the "gateway meal" that turns them flamingly homosexual, right after they 'choose' to be gay.

I seriously hope some of what I say is completely crazy to you, as that would be a sign of enlightenment on your part since quite a bit of what I type is me bouncing your own thoughts back at you.

Also, you may want to reconsider what you say of S14 members. I find they are frighteningly conservative in what they type, and I'm not entirely convinced that you are as well respected as you think. Whatever.

Linus - I respect you man. I agree with everything you have said. I'm ahteist though - so I guess for different (or the same?) reasons.

[Fidhle007]

Holy shit, I go teach a few kids how to suck less at the violin and r3v goes apeshit! Being gay is not a choice, it's something you're born with. I know this is true because Mr. Slave said so.

[Purdue89E30]

OK, if someone chooses not to have children, fine, (maybe they are right, and they would make lousy parents and they know it).

I did not say "Marriage exists to protect children", what I said is that a boy raised by a gay couple (and by this i mean two males) or a girl raised by two females, "might" tend to be confused in choosing sex of their couples when starting their sex life, of course this does not apply to everybody, but you can induce certain behaviours on very young people by giving them "confusing" examples.

As an example, inmates in prison are usually sons or daughters of people who have been in prison, usually wife beaters have grown in a home where "daddy" used mommy as a punching bag, sexually abused childrent tend to grow into child abusers, and on and on and on. I am just saying that maybe, it could be sexually confusing for kids.



Regarding that remark, I saw superman, and I don't think there is a guy in blue tights fliying around.

So I'll be more specific, i think they can marry, no big deal, in fact they can travel to amsterdam and get married, then write their wills inheriting their assets to each other, but I don't think it's wise for homosexual couples to raise kids.

It's just my opinion, call me square, or old fashioned, but puberty is confusing enough as it is...

Mea culpa, I guess I reacted to your post too quickly without thinking about what it meant. I still don't agree with you but I don't have a short pithy response and I don't want to add another essay to this thread the nobody really cares to read anyway.

The Junior reference was meant as a joke.

[LINUS]

Dammit Josh - I need to hit refresh more often. You banned Wes before I knew, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered to post.

Oh well. Not like it will be a loss based on what he's shown us so far.

[Jand3rson]

He can't hear you, Linus.

[decay]

Wow, you seriously are a piece of work. And no one here seems to be able to stand your bullshit. Goodbye.

damnit josh, i wasn't through pwning him yet.

:P

[LINUS]

Excellent post. :up:

In my mind, being gay or straight is as much a choice as being right or left handed. Since I'm in the minority on that one I sure hope there's no crazy legislation enacted towards lefties or I'm buying a casita in Mexico and defecting.

Tim

CSI is over & it looks like I can have more fun here than on TV.


Tim - at the rate things are going here in the states, and the rate at which MX is starting to resemble a truly stable environment, your comment isn't too far fetched. I'm thinking a retirement home down there might be a perfect answer myself.


Wes - if you aren't using religion as what you find so objectionable regarding gay people, what then is the core reason you find it so distasteful to let them have a fair go at life? Just because it isn't your particular flavor in life doesn't mean they shouldn't be entitled to have their rights decided by your personal whims. Wouldn't you agree?

What makes your personal choice & beliefs in life reason to dictate how others can conduct theirs?

What if we made a law that said you cannot take sub-XX,XXX miles cars & use then as track cars? Doesn't that seem crazy to you? I'm speaking in reference to the bubble car in case you are missing me. So why then should your personal belief dictate other peoples' quality/benefits in life? I promise you that letting gay monogamous people show their love & commitment to each other won't make you kids gay. If they are gay, it will be their personal choice according to your written line of logic, and you should send them to bed without their dinner.

And God forbid you ever give your sons a Brautwurst, that will be the "gateway meal" that turns them flamingly homosexual, right after they 'choose' to be gay.

I seriously hope some of what I say is completely crazy to you, as that would be a sign of enlightenment on your part since quite a bit of what I type is me bouncing your own thoughts back at you.

Also, you may want to reconsider what you say of S14 members. I find they are frighteningly conservative in what they type, and I'm not entirely convinced that you are as well respected as you think. Whatever.

[ivo316]

You are aware that there are legally married heterosexual couples who choose not to have kids right? Isn't that a pretty big hole in the "Marriage exists to protect children" arguement?

Besides I saw an Arnold Schwartzenegger movie where a dude got preggers so ya never know what could happen.

OK, if someone chooses not to have children, fine, (maybe they are right, and they would make lousy parents and they know it).

I did not say "Marriage exists to protect children", what I said is that a boy raised by a gay couple (and by this i mean two males) or a girl raised by two females, "might" tend to be confused in choosing sex of their couples when starting their sex life, of course this does not apply to everybody, but you can induce certain behaviours on very young people by giving them "confusing" examples.

As an example, inmates in prison are usually sons or daughters of people who have been in prison, usually wife beaters have grown in a home where "daddy" used mommy as a punching bag, sexually abused childrent tend to grow into child abusers, and on and on and on. I am just saying that maybe, it could be sexually confusing for kids.

I saw an Arnold Schwartzenegger movie where a dude got preggers so ya never know what could happen.

Regarding that remark, I saw superman, and I don't think there is a guy in blue tights fliying around.

So I'll be more specific, i think they can marry, no big deal, in fact they can travel to amsterdam and get married, then write their wills inheriting their assets to each other, but I don't think it's wise for homosexual couples to raise kids.

It's just my opinion, call me square, or old fashioned, but puberty is confusing enough as it is...

NOTE: I have some gay firends, in fact my GF and I are friends to a gay couple, I do not hate gays, I will stand for their rights, and (at least the ones i know personally) are cultured, polite, dress quite well, their homes look great, and are very good friends.

But I still think you are not "born" gay, I think you are "made" gay at an early stage of your life.

[Jand3rson]

If my kid 'chooses' to be homosexual, I will deal with it. I firmly believe though that through proper child raising, my child won't be.

Really a sad world what places like this are turning into :( . Homosexuals are accepted and slander and libel are accepted forms on the internet.

Wow, you seriously are a piece of work. And no one here seems to be able to stand your bullshit. Goodbye.

[decay]

People that use religion as a basis for hating homosexuals are just going by irrational thought, but its what happens.

ok, so, you must have a perfectly rational reason for hating them.

what would that be?

If the mass of the people want gay marriage to be legalized, then it should be; the will of the people. At its current state though, most people just don't care which is not enough to justify it.

really? that's your argument?

"there just aren't enough of them to go to the bother of recognizing their rights as human beings."

are you fucking serious?

get this through your head- i may not disagree with the argument that our legal system is the best that humans have managed to come up with at this point.

but that DOES NOT mean it's perfect or infallible, and any argument that says a minority's right to the trifecta of "life/liberty/happiness" (which, as i interpret it, is promised to everyone) should be ignored simply because they are not in the majority is, to put it kindly, "flawed".