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.
Nobody has ever been able to explain to me why marriage between a man and woman benefits society any more than a same sex marriage would....Can you?
I requested the same thing above, but they will never be able to explain this one... the only attempted explanation I've heard has to do with children, and clearly a marriage certificate isn't required to procreate. And if they're SO concerned about the "traditional" nuclear family, why isn't anyone trying to outlaw divorce? Considering more than half of married straight couples end up divorced, you'd think that would be a bigger concern to them!
How do you figure?
I have created kids. I have created a warm and loving home for them. I have even created a garden of fresh veggies to feed them.
Anything a hetero can do, so can I.
Hey, you've done a lot more than I have so Kudos to you.
This Hetero woman has no kids and no intention to get any either. Another abnormal tick after my name !!! And I suspect your garden of fresh veggies is a lot better than my measly failure of a veggie patch which is being devoured by all kinds of beasties.
So all in all, Gay or not you have certainly created more and been far less "stagant".
I do find it beyond astonishingly stupid for anyone with even an ounce of brains to imply that the "Gay lifestyle" ( somebody really has to sit me down and explain to me this so called lifestyle because I really have no idea what it means)creates nothing and is a stagnant pool of nothingness.
Without even having to think too hard or too long I can name some pretty darn influential Gay people throughout history from great Leaders, to Scientists, Social Reformers, Painters, Sculptors, Philosophers etc ... and of course this does not include the silent masses of Medical Researchers, Nurses, Surgeons, Engineers, Sportsmen , Explorers, etc... who have changed or are changing our lives, constantly creating, improving, changing our world and making it what it is.
People who serve us in restaurants, clean our houses, do our gardens, mend our cars, electricians, plumbers , everyone from janitors to soldiers with everything in between will have in its ranks people who are Gay.
The idea that a Gay person produces nothing is so absurd and offensive it becomes laughable.
I am starting to think that those rabid Homophobes are almost suffering from some kind of mental psychosis or block and simply cannot see what it in front of their noses.
Homosexuality has always existed, this is not a new fnagled fad which will go away because some narrow minded people think they can pray it away. The only difference between now and 500 years ago is that those Gay people are now not so scared to come out, are less likely to be ostrscised, persecuted , vilified and attacked. And that to me surely is a goodthing.
We had just as many Gays people 50 years ago , except of course they weren't allowed to be themselves and had to marry, raise kids and pretend to the world they were straight. And of course the wife would know, the kids also I suspect. There were certain meeting places and clubs and everyone in essence suffered.
So thank goodness for a world in which we no longer treat Gay people as outsiders, rogue members of society with no say in it. Those rights have been long overdue and it is time to ensure full equality and parity of rights. There is still a way to go but I would like to believe we are making progress. Though some posters belie this and terrify the hell out of me with their ignorant rants and hateful rhetoric.
Why is it a Homophobe cannot see what it must be like to be denied your own self and sense of true identity ? I would love to see how they would cope if the "norm" was Gay and they were the ones treated like excrement and refused to marry the person they love or raise children ? I am quite sure they would take it meekly on the cheek and remain quiet.... NOT.
Some people really do need to grow up, find a little humanity and gain a little emotional intelligence. And concentrate on something else than other people's sex lives which i find really quite a prurient disturbing trait I must admit. Basically they should get a life and concentrate on real serious issues.
Marriage between a man and woman benefits society.
In what ways does this coupling benefit society, since we have decided child bearing is not a requisite, that a marriage between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, doesn't?
Is it an important issue because you are gay, can't deal with it and subsequently could not marry the person you loved (aka same gender?). Since you can't be happy and live in a way consistent with how God created, no-one else should be allowed to either?
Basically I can't be a flaming *** and raise my children because I can't deal with my own sexuality, so you can't be gay or raise children either.
Got it.
Hi ! hows it going ?......really enjoy all your postings and noticed the interesting entries like above. I see you are a Reverend of some kind, very nice to see taking your time out of a busy day. Are you a United Church gay minister? Trying to piece together the insightful commentary
Many gay activists try to state that the homosexual condition is "normal" and not a result of any type of environmental effects.
Gay activists also say that gay marriage has no effect on the sexual condition of the child.
Why would they even care if there was no effect on children, if the effect were something they say is perfectly nice, normal and natural anyway? Do they truly care about the child's well being?
Why would they attempt to make the argument?
Do you have links to any studies? Preferably not ones done by the Family Research Council?
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,833,234 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Many gay activists try to state that the homosexual condition is "normal" and not a result of any type of environmental effects.
Gay activists also say that gay marriage has no effect on the sexual condition of the child.
Why would they even care if there was no effect on children, if the effect were something they say is perfectly nice, normal and natural anyway? Do they truly care about the child's well being?
Why would they attempt to make the argument?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
It doesn't matter. If you believe that homosexuality is "normal" you will reject it anyway because you are biased.
Please address the original question.
Because someone said it's not normal. IT would be like if you were white and I called you black and you say No, I'm white and then I say You are making an argument that you are white. Which, you are. So it's pretty obvious I'm wrong and you're white, ermm, right. So I'll agree that you are white.
And you can agree that they are normal. Then you don't have to say they are not normal and they don't have to defend themselves.
P.S.
You question someone's bias, when your original question is biased. That's an example of "trolling."
Many gay activists try to state that the homosexual condition is "normal" and not a result of any type of environmental effects.
Gay activists also say that gay marriage has no effect on the sexual condition of the child.
Why would they even care if there was no effect on children, if the effect were something they say is perfectly nice, normal and natural anyway? Do they truly care about the child's well being?
Why would they attempt to make the argument?
Their body parts don't fit together to make children. If you're thinking of them adopting, wouldn't it have to be approved by govt? It's generally believed that gays can't convert anyone.
Many gay activists try to state that the homosexual condition is "normal" and not a result of any type of environmental effects.
Gay activists also say that gay marriage has no effect on the sexual condition of the child.
Why would they even care if there was no effect on children, if the effect were something they say is perfectly nice, normal and natural anyway? Do they truly care about the child's well being?
Why would they attempt to make the argument?
What is "normal" for you Ozzy, premature ejaculation in the missionary position?
Many gay activists try to state that the homosexual condition is "normal" and not a result of any type of environmental effects.
Gay activists also say that gay marriage has no effect on the sexual condition of the child.
Why would they even care if there was no effect on children, if the effect were something they say is perfectly nice, normal and natural anyway? Do they truly care about the child's well being?
Why would they attempt to make the argument?
imprinting is what homosexuals are all about, they know if they get to child early enough they can make him gay. it is the only way such sick and abnormal human behavior can be pass to other humans!
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.
And I suspect your garden of fresh veggies is a lot better than my measly failure of a veggie patch which is being devoured by all kinds of beasties. 
Gays with children
