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.
We're discussing how North Carolina voted on an amendment that did not just keep marriage to "one man, one woman" (which was already on the law books), it also removes any sort of civil union benefit from any couple (homosexual or heterosexual) that is not strictly married. It also allows North Carolina to completely ignore the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the constitution in regards to homosexual marriages from states where homosexual marriage is allowed.
I'm just waiting to hear how allowing the marriages to take place will affect me.
That's it.
If the GOP can explain how further expansion of the Government will further benefit me, I'd appreciate it.
On another note: Since the Justice of the peace isn't a pastor I wonder if he can perform a marriage?
I would call lesbian "parents" convincing a pre-puberty boy to have a sex change perverted. The more I see of homosexuals, the more convinced I am it's a complete perversion. Keep it in the closet and away from children too.
This is complete BS and I find it perverted how you completey twisted the real story to suit your own prejudice. Keep your perverted prejudice in the closet and away from children.
The story was discussed in great depth in these threads some time ago:
before you say the bible is not against gay relations look at Jewish sources.
there's a reason that Orthodox Jews (the demographic that by far knows Biblical Hebrew and the 5 books of Moses the best in this country are strongly against homosexual "marriages)
You mean extremely conservative Jewish sources? Well Duh.
What would you expect?
this will lead to more people living a lifestyle that more then doubles the likelihood of getting STDs.
This will lead to less people getting married because it totally take the family out of it.
this will lead to underpopulation for a variety of reasons including the one above.
How does gay marriage lead to higher rates of STD's? That is just silly. Gay marriage would cut down on promiscuity.
How does gay marriage lead to less people getting married? Gays marrying would lead to more marriages not less. I don't see how gays marrying would lead to fewer heterosexual marriages.
Gay marriage would in no way impact the population rate. Do you think gays will just suddenly start to procreate if marriage is unavailable.
This is such a disgusting topic, I really hate to delve into the details, but such pure propaganda that you've just spread needs to be called out, and such a vulgar approach to the discussion says more about you and your lack of decorum than you should want to reveal .... if I may be so brutally honest.
First of all, everyone has a sexual orientation .. and pedophiles are no different. They, by overwhelming majority, observe a consistent pattern of gender preference in the selection of their victims. This is a documented fact, and to attempt to spin that as something other than the obvious indication of sexual orientation is a blatant fraud, perpetrated primarily by homosexual apologists who value image over honesty and the welfare of children, because nobody is that bloody stupid. And engaging in subterfuge like this aids the offenders in concealing their identities, either deliberately or indirectly, and those choosing this tactic deserve to be held in highest contempt. Shame on you! Shame on you!
And don't give me this other lair's line about victim selection being based on opportunity and not gender preference, because these creeps purposely situate themselves in occupations and places that offer regular access to children .... their behavior is quite calculated, including the careful recruitment and manipulation of selected victims. In other words, it doesn't follow a spur of the moment pattern at all. It's well calculated, with much effort going into the strategy of positioning of themselves for their targeting opportunities. Those who set their sights on girls will create that environment for such access, and the same is true for those targeting boys.
Secondly .. the majority of children molested are abused by someone they know .. a family member, father, brother, uncle, coach, teacher, etc. ... not just their fathers. But for those crimes committed by sicko fathers, the victim is almost exclusively daughters .... it's extremely rare for fathers (and I use the term father very loosely) to molest their sons.
Thirdly, one's marriage status provides no evidence at all of one's sexual orientation, as there are countless examples of homosexuals married or otherwise in relationships with straight partners ... often times with their partners completely unaware of their secret lives as homosexuals.
There is another consistent pattern to homosexuals in general .. almost every one of them I've debated, present the same exact lies, and it's become clear to me that it is a purposeful and premeditated deception. When involving the dastardly crime of harming children, this public image you're trying to protect is of ZERO importance, in comparison, and it's high time that fact is universally acknowledged, else all can be considered at least accomplice, after the fact.
There is no fine line here ... no gray areas. You can choose honesty or deception ... you either condemn or condone. Those are the only choices when it comes to defending the children from those who are among the most despicable creatures alive ... child predators.
We've gone through this on several occasions but you have yet to come up with any evidence from reputable sources to support your uninformed opinions.
I rememember when I presented all these studies (below) to you with links directly to the articles in academic peer-reviewed Journals and you accused me of linking to 'gay websites.
All you were able to come up with was some blatant misrepresentations and distortions from anti-gay religious propaganda sources.
“Homosexual males who preferred physically mature partners responded no more to male children than heterosexual males who preferred physically mature partners responded to female children” Journal of Sex Research -Freund, Kurt; Watson, Robin J.; Rienzo, Douglas. “Heterosexuality, homosexuality, and the erotic age preference.” Journal of Sex Research 26, no. 1 (1989): 107-117
**************************
“..a child’s risk of being molested by his or her relative’s heterosexual partner is 100 times greater than by someone who might be identified as a homosexual." (Carole Jenny et al., Are Children at Risk for Sexual Abuse by Homosexuals?; 94 Pediatrics 41; July 1994)
**************************
“The adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater risk to the underage child than does the adult homosexual male” National Institutes of Health – PubMed (Groth and Birnbaum, “Adult Sexual Orientation and Attraction to Underage Persons.”)
**************************
"Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine. . . . The child offender who is attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male." A. Nicholas Groth, William F. Hobson, and Thomas S. Gary, “The Child Molester: Clinical Observations,” in Social Work and Child Sexual Abuse, eds. Jon R. Conte and David A. Shore (New York: Haworth Press, 1982), p.136.
**************************
"Amongst the heterosexuals, the commonest remarks concerning attractive features of the victims, were that the young boys did not have any body hair and that their bodies were soft and smooth." Marshal, W.L.; Barbaree, H.E.; Butt, Jennifer. “Sexual offenders against male children: Sexual preferences.”
**************************
“The belief that homosexuals are particularly attracted to children is completely unsupported by our data.” National Institutes of Health – PubMed (Groth and Birnbaum, “Adult Sexual Orientation and Attraction to Underage Persons.”)
“A gay man is no more likely than a straight man to perpetrate sexual activity with children.” Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality -(Stevenson, “Public Policy, Homosexuality and the Sexual Coercion of Children.”)
**************************
“The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation. There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual." Groth, A. N., & Gary, T. S. (1982). Heterosexuality, homosexuality, and pedophilia: Sexual offenses against children and adult sexual orientation.
**************************
The Abel and Harlow Child Molestation Prevention Study of over 4000 child molestors in the US also show that 97% of child molestors were religious and over 70% were married with children: Child Molestation Research & Prevention Institute
**************************
And here is a general article showing how some conservative religious anti-gay groups misrepresent and distort studies like those above to vilify homosexuals. Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation
How does gay marriage lead to higher rates of STD's? That is just silly. Gay marriage would cut down on promiscuity.
How does gay marriage lead to less people getting married? Gays marrying would lead to more marriages not less. I don't see how gays marrying would lead to fewer heterosexual marriages.
Gay marriage would in no way impact the population rate. Do you think gays will just suddenly start to procreate if marriage is unavailable.
PURE AND UNADULTERATED BIGOTED RUBBISH!!!!!
The ignorant bigoted rubbish on this thread is astonishing.
Here's a conservative argument for same-sex marriage by Ted Olsen:
How does gay marriage lead to higher rates of STD's? That is just silly. Gay marriage would cut down on promiscuity.
How does gay marriage lead to less people getting married? Gays marrying would lead to more marriages not less. I don't see how gays marrying would lead to fewer heterosexual marriages.
Gay marriage would in no way impact the population rate. Do you think gays will just suddenly start to procreate if marriage is unavailable.
PURE AND UNADULTERATED BIGOTED RUBBISH!!!!!
is to complicated for you ?
gay marriage -> more acceptance of homosexuality -> people who never would have had a homosexual relationship now do so -> more people now have STDs.
New research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area. The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.
if you understand what I wrote above (which I highly doubt) then I'll explain the rest to you because if not it would be like explaining algebra to a person who doesn't know addition.
Even before the outcome, I noted that the bill would strike down all relationships that are not sealed with a marriage license. It was written in such a way that it purposely misled ignorant voters who are only fixated on the "one man one woman" aspect. It succeeded. The amendment did nothing for gay marriage - which was already "banned" in the lawbooks of North Carolina. What it did do is take away any state recognition of any relationship that is not marriage. As seen here:
Where health insurance benefits provided to non-married partners are being asked to be removed... seeing as how "non-married partners" is no longer a recognized relationship.
Already, privileges and benefits are being asked to be removed from relationships that have not (or can not) be sealed with a marriage license.
Another thing to note that is that this law could also violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause if a homosexual couple were married in one state and ended up moving to NC. I am actually curious as to which has more power - the Full Faith and Credit Clause from the Federal Constitution or this Amendment to North Carolina's Constitution - if taken to court. Would be interesting, at the least.
I imagine that there will be a whole swathe of law suits clogging up the courts because of Amendment One's impact on heterosexual non-married couples and their children.
You liberals can post all your bs studies, but it's not going to change anything at the polls in regards to how conservatives feel about changing the institution of marriage based on the whims of an extremist fringe minority. In November everything will change and the conservatives will take America back!!!
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.
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.
Well Duh.
