Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is best for society is the long term stability of relationships and family structures and the instillation of the correct values.Heterosexuals don't seem to be any better at that than gay people,at least not from what I have seen.
Okay, well that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I don't agree with it at all, but that's your opinion. End of discussion.
what wrong message would that be? That only god can judge them? Or that its ok to stop people from doing what they're going to do any way, even though it has no affect on you, your pockets or where you live? They won't be raising your kids so what do you care?
First, G_d has already judged homosexuality to be an abomination.
It is not a matter of "stopping" people. Its not a matter of what people do in the PRIVACY of their bedrooms.
Its a matter of making the private public. Of reconstructing society so that my children will be institutionally influenced against my values.
Unfortunately, it does, indeed, have effect in every respect. Specifically where one might live. For example, if a particular school district were to adopt books espousing a family norm of 2 mmomies and/or 2 daddies, such effects where one lives, one's taxes (I would not choose to pay for such), as well as much more.
Think more deeply on the question.
Quote:
You know what really sends the wrong message to our kids? Giving money to the same wall street people who stole from us in the first place, it teaches them that crime pays.
First of all crime does pay.
Second, your comment demands that you educate your self, and evidences (along with your gay agenda position) a propensity to be victim of propaganda.
The comment is simply ignorant of fact and reality with no analagous value.
I happen to be in a lesbian relationship and laughed at how silly some of the comments on here are. Honestly, opinions like the OP's don't really bother me or my partner. We could really care less if marriage is legalized or not. What matters is that we still have the same legal rights to a certain extent. I do not believe gays should raise children (adopt, etc.) because I think a child is best raised in an environment where there is a mom and a dad. I do not believe it is healthy for them as it goes against nature. But if they happen to see two men or two women holding hands while walking down the street, to me that is a loving and caring gesture and I don't see anything wrong with it. There is too little love expressed openly in the world today IMO. Whichever form it happens to appear in is a good and positive thing as long as it's within the boundaries of good taste.
I fully support this person and her position.
I fully support Civil Union.
Hers is a recognition of reality. Not an effort to change it.
She is living her life, enjoying it I presume, and doing so within the construct of society.
Along with Civil Union, what more can a Gay person want while accepting the inherent nature of male and female, men and woman, and the intended construct of family.
I am not gay, I am a happily married man. Saying that, who has the right to tell anyone how the can live their life and be happy. If two people are in love and respect one another why shouldn't they get married. We really need to get past petty B.S. and come together as human beings. The world is going to hell in a hand basket and you are worried about gay marriage, get real.
I dunno if this is a troll thread or not, but I can say the same argument was made about whites and blacks marrying..and that was only 40 years ago. There was a time when women were not allowed to be anything but housewives using this same argument...IVY League schools didn't even allow women until around 1970!!!
And we all now know (well at least most of us I hope) that it was wrong to deny these people basic right that others took for granted..and gay marriage is no different. Marriage is only how we define it..it is not innately man and women..we just say it is...therefore we can change it to be whatever we want..and it should be 2 consenting adults...whatever gender/race/height/weight/religion they may be.
And that's all I will say about this thread b/c I want it to go away.
If there is no difference, as you put it, then why is it that proceation requies opposite sexes?
You can choose to have a different sexual and societal construct if you so want, BUT your argument that there is no difference, that there is nothing "innate" is ridicuously SPECIOUS!!!
There are beings on this Earth that can proceate with the same sex, humans cannot.
****
Even greater than the above, WHY would you be of the mindset to squash disscussion and debate. Particularly, when the question of Gay Marriage is before our legislature?
Squash decent?
Why is it that while you may have a view of one societal construct, and I may have another, do you appear to self-righteously choose to impose yours upon me?
One of my best friends was raised in Greenwich Village by two mommies.He is in his 40's now,a very successful restauranteur,married(to a woman),father of 3 and one of the most normal,likable guys you will ever meet.His two mommies(one of them his biological mother) by the way recently celebrated their 50th anniversary as a gay couple.
It's not who raises kids,it's how they are raised.
To say that gay couples can't or shouldn't raise children is just plain bigoted.
Your argument is PRESUMPTUOUS!
It is based upon what YOU view as NORMAL; and what you view to be good and correct.
The ONLY reason he has a biological mother is because there can be no other way. Gosh, was the father consented, or was he some unsuspecting drunken sperm donor met in a bar?
Moreover, from your value view and societal construct your friend is 'normal', but does your friend's mentality equate that of the normal societal construct?
That is the issue, whether your friend will be apart of and reinforce the construct of normal society.
There are those who believe, desire and intend a society which perpetuates itself. While you may view him as "normal", how likely is he to perpetuate the normal society in which he was born.
I do not mean to offend, but such persons were conceived abnormally, and consequently are likely to be proponents of abnormal conceptions, and the alteration of the construct of society.
Conclusively, your argument is specious, as "normal" is self defined and not objective in viewpoint.
Last edited by jcoltrane; 05-23-2011 at 06:32 PM..
It is base upon what YOU view as NORMAL; and what you view to be good and correct.
The ONLY reason he has a biological mother is because their can be no other way. Gosh, was the father consented, or was he some unsuspecting drunken sperm donor met in a bar?
The biological mother had been raped by a priest of the Catholic church.It's the lesbian mother who was non consenting.
I don't think we will need this same sex marriage thing in New York; and I think it will send a wrong message to our children.
Well, my 3 sons don't have a problem with their father being with another man....come to think of it, neither does my mother and father, cousins aunts uncles and friends.....
Just what is the wrong message you think is being sent?
This is not the politics forum. Thread is off-topic in entirety.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.