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.
Just because my fellow heteros have debased marriage to the point of divorce being so common place, doesnot mean that homosexuals will do the same.
Dare I say that homosexuals will no doubt value marriage far more then heteros do, simply because they had to fight to get it. Kind of like when the rich kid bangs up his brand new mustang that daddy bought him, while the working class kid saved his money to buy a twenty year old pinto that he treats with great care. Face it, heterosexuals have demeaned marriage in part because we felt it was a 'right' for us to use and abuse. And we did.
It's liberalism that has debased marriage, not "heteros", because prior to the cultural marxist takeover of media and academia in the US, the heteros had a low divorce rate.
I don't agree with that. Blacks fought for the right to vote, but they don't exercise or value that right to the level of other groups.
There is no reason whatsoever to believe that gays will value marriage better than heterosexuals.
Homosexuals have always been promiscuous, then and now (as the stats in the OP state), and therefore they will always have higher rates of break-ups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camping!
Just because my fellow heteros have debased marriage to the point of divorce being so common place, doesnot mean that homosexuals will do the same.
Dare I say that homosexuals will no doubt value marriage far more then heteros do......
camping (and any other liberal for that matter): just out of curiosity, how is it that someone can take positions antithetical to their own interests??? and the facts??? Does this make you "feel better" or give you a sense of superiority over your fellow heteros? Can't you find another outlet to feel unique and special and cleverly different in life rather than taking positions that hurt your own people?
It's liberalism that has debased marriage, not "heteros", because prior to the cultural marxist takeover of media and academia in the US, the heteros had a low divorce rate.
And just who are these 'liberals' that held guns to heterosexuals heads and made them divorce at unheard of levels? Who are these 'liberals' that forced formerly chaste young women to being 'easy' and walk down the aisle with their illegitimate children in tow -- if they even got that far!
I don't agree with that. Blacks fought for the right to vote, but they don't exercise or value that right to the level of other groups.
They certainly came out to support Obama. At anyrate, the educated black demographic have always voted on par with the educated white demographic. Sadly for both groups, the poor and the young don't vote (or as often as they should).
There is no reason whatsoever to believe that gays will value marriage better than heterosexuals.
I think that there is every reason to believe that gays will value marriage more......anything hard won is valuable. Look how long the actor George Takei has been with his newly legitamized husband -- 25 years in case you didn't know
Homosexuals have always been promiscuous, then and now (as the stats in the OP state), and therefore they will always have higher rates of break-ups.
As have heterosexuals. Geneology is a wondrous thing, especially when you see how many 'premature' infants managed to survive a few hundred years ago
Look, the best way to eradicate, or at least greatly diminish, promiscuity is to make marriage an attractive alternative - for both gays and straights.
camping (and any other liberal for that matter): just out of curiosity, how is it that someone can take positions antithetical to their own interests??? and the facts??? Does this make you "feel better" or give you a sense of superiority over your fellow heteros? Can't you find another outlet to feel unique and special and cleverly different in life rather than taking positions that hurt your own people?
Liberal? Moi?! Check out the abortion and immigration threads if you want to see how 'liberal' I am
Nonetheless, I have no idea how supporting gay marriage is not in my best interest. Encouraging monogamy, family and a sense of belonging is paramount in structuring a safe community. Marriage for straights and gays would provide exactly that. Hiding my head in the sand and pretending that 'gayness' is something that will never happen in my family is enormously harmful for society at large. I mean, who do you think those guys are that are hanging out in restrooms waiting for the special toe taps? They are gay men -- who were bullied into getting married to a straight woman by 'loving' family who hope that being gay is a phase, or perhaps sign of being possessed by a demon
Well, it's not. Gay people are just that --- people. People who work, pay taxes, go out to eat, attend church, play sports, and yes - even have children. They deserve to be treated equally in our society because they are equel. They are American citizens, and by god they deserve to be treated as such.
gayness is not "equal" to heterosexuality and God and/or Nature (take your pick) agree that it isn't. It shouldn't be elevated against the norms of nature, just to serve some untested experimental thesis you might have about how it could supposedly help society.
The OP reveals that homosexuals are not equal to heterosexuals when it comes to STDs, and we all know these statistical results apply across the lines of all single people (heteros included) without discrimination, so put the blame squarely where it belongs.
It's unfair to subject a heterosexual adopted child into having to think about what his 'two dads' are doing behind closed doors. It's sick and unnatural. Nature never intended for young to be raised by two homosexuals, in any species.
There are many issues related to it. For one, the media in its unending position of alleging egalitarianism would never report something like this.
Unless you are blind or willfully unawares, this issue has been widely reported in the "mainsteam media" for years. Further is has been a staple topic for black current affairs programs for an equal amount of time. So, puleeze, inform yourself before posting so that you don't come off looking like a idiot.
Wrap it Up — STD’s on the Rise in the US | Lifestyle | Black Power (http://www.blackpower.com/lifestyle/wrap-it-up-stds-on-the-rise-in-the-us/ - broken link)
gayness is not "equal" to heterosexuality and God and/or Nature (take your pick) agree that it isn't. It shouldn't be elevated against the norms of nature, just to serve some untested experimental thesis you might have about how it could supposedly help society.
The OP reveals that homosexuals are not equal to heterosexuals when it comes to STDs, and we all know these statistical results apply across the lines of all single people (heteros included) without discrimination, so put the blame squarely where it belongs.
It's unfair to subject a heterosexual adopted child into having to think about what his 'two dads' are doing behind closed doors. It's sick and unnatural. Nature never intended for young to be raised by two homosexuals, in any species.
What? You think your mom and dad never did a little oral? Or was it strictly christian missionary position?
Because you see -- imagining any parent having sex is pretty much gross. I don't want to think of my parents doing anything more then holding hands.....but since they did have five kids it is fair to assume that they did much more, at least five times
The point is....what sicko is thinking about the kind of sex his/her parents are having? Trust, if you are doing this your problems go much, much farther then having gay parents.
Now as to god/nature disliking homosexuality. Well, we can pick and choose among the old testament (christians tend to like to do that....why did christs death mean we can eat shellfish, yet the ban on gays remain for instance?) but in the end GOD IS IRRELEVENT TO THE QUESTION OF HOMOSEXUALS GAINING THE RIGHT TO WED IN A CIVIL SETTING. Did you get that? Because while there may be a strong christian history in this country we are not a christian theocracy.
As to nature....well, my third dd should not have been born according to nature -- we tend to pick and choose among those situations as well, don't we?
camping (and any other liberal for that matter): just out of curiosity, how is it that someone can take positions antithetical to their own interests??? and the facts??? Does this make you "feel better" or give you a sense of superiority over your fellow heteros? Can't you find another outlet to feel unique and special and cleverly different in life rather than taking positions that hurt your own people?
Some people are speaking on principle for what they believe is right. Principled arguments don't favor one group or another based on the speaker's affiliation with a particular group.
gayness is not "equal" to heterosexuality and God and/or Nature (take your pick) agree that it isn't. It shouldn't be elevated against the norms of nature, just to serve some untested experimental thesis you might have about how it could supposedly help society.
The OP reveals that homosexuals are not equal to heterosexuals when it comes to STDs, and we all know these statistical results apply across the lines of all single people (heteros included) without discrimination, so put the blame squarely where it belongs.
It's unfair to subject a heterosexual adopted child into having to think about what his 'two dads' are doing behind closed doors. It's sick and unnatural. Nature never intended for young to be raised by two homosexuals, in any species.
Homosexual attractions are completely natural. You may not agree with homosexuality, but it's a naturally occurring phenomenon.
I'm not sure what you're saying with your statement about homosexuals and STDs. The news report also includes blacks in its headline; should blacks also be prohibited from marrying because of their rate of STD transmission?
It's silly for you to say that "nature never intended for young to be raised by two homosexuals". "Nature" - whatever you deem that to be - never intended for us to take antibiotics, cut our hair, eat processed food, etc.
Extending your argument, nature never intended for heterosexuals to use contraception either, so maybe birth control pills and devices should be outlawed too.
I remember a song that was rather popular a little ways back. "Baby's Mama".
Unfortunately the statistics explain it all. 7 out of 10 children born out of wedlock. In turn they are also more promiscuous as they see their parents acting like that (hence the young ages of child bearing youth). It's an exponential problem. The main cause being a lack of decent leadership, the leaders that are in charge need to speak out against the garbage bringing them down (it's not cool to sell crack, weed, women..etc.). While it's easier to join a gang and sell drugs in the environments they are in that's not going to change.
I know the ACLU has a fit but the statistics of single motherhood and out of wedlock children are appalling. Mix that with a culture that for the most part glamorizes crime and it doesn't leave high good odds for that youth. It's perpetual without serious intervention. It's also happening in the Hispanic community and white community but in lower ratios.
My point being you don't spread disease with responsible sex. If you have a super high ratio of children born out of wedlock then you can only expect most of the sexual intercourse is being done responsibly.
I remember a song that was rather popular a little ways back. "Baby's Mama".
Unfortunately the statistics explain it all. 7 out of 10 children born out of wedlock. In turn they are also more promiscuous as they see their parents acting like that (hence the young ages of child bearing youth). It's an exponential problem. The main cause being a lack of decent leadership, the leaders that are in charge need to speak out against the garbage bringing them down (it's not cool to sell crack, weed, women..etc.). While it's easier to join a gang and sell drugs in the environments they are in that's not going to change.
I know the ACLU has a fit but the statistics of single motherhood and out of wedlock children are appalling. Mix that with a culture that for the most part glamorizes crime and it doesn't leave high good odds for that youth. It's perpetual without serious intervention. It's also happening in the Hispanic community and white community but in lower ratios.
My point being you don't spread disease with responsible sex. If you have a super high ratio of children born out of wedlock then you can only expect most of the sexual intercourse is being done responsibly.
Let me clarify. The white music/culture isn't much better if at all. The difference is in part there is more of family type environment that gives a better chance curtail the Britney Spears types although obviously it still happens.
Some people are speaking on principle for what they believe is right.
Yeah maybe. More often it's people speaking to set themselves apart and give them some sort of feeling of righteousness, superiority, etc.
It's like Clinton talking big about minorities but sending his own daughter to the most private of all schools and then buying a house in Chappaqua, NY.
I respect people who walk the walk, but too often liberals take their positions solely to make themselvs "feel" superior, because they usually don't walk the walk when it comes to themselves acting on what they recommend for everyone else.
Liberalism is basically "white vs. white" war. It has nothing to do with actually wanting to be around gays or minorities. It's white v. white status striving. One-half of the white population is constantly developing new ideological positions to solely to distinguish itself from the more traditional half of the white population, and make themselves "feel" superior.
I would agree in the "principle" theory if the vast majority of liberals actually lived up to the principles they purport. Do you carpool to work in a Volkswagen car with an Asian and a Black neighbor?? I thought not.
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.
