Do you oppose same-sex marriage for religious reasons?

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

Quote

Thank you for the additional example from your own experience.

You're welcome. I'm happy about the family I grew up in. It wasn't perfect-- none are-- but I can't feel sorry for myself, claim victimhood and blame my background for the problems I have. IOW, I consider myself extremely blessed. But then I have to look at others who didn't have the advantages of a happy childhood that I had and I truly admire them for overcoming the obstacles that I didn't have to overcome. Most of them are better people than I am. I think that God is gracious to ALL of us in some way or another--- in giving us the grace to overcome or in giving us the grace of a happy childhood.

And the above relates to the topic how, exactly?

Quote

Quote

That has nothing to do with sex

Oh really? That's funny, 'cos I thought it did at the time. Oh well. I'm wrong again. What an ignorant child I was.

Unusual child.

Children do not normally think of their parents as sexual creatures, nor do they voluntarily consider their parents' sex lives, unless such thought is forced upon them.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[billvon 3,033]

>A racial-issue marriage and a sexual preference/orientation-issue
>marriage are not comparable.

Sure they are. Heck, people are even using similar rhetoric to fight against them, and pursuing similar legal strategies. The good news is that given they have followed similar paths so far, I suspect the end result will be the same - more people able to be part of loving families, and more good parents to raise healthy kids.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

A racial-issue marriage and a sexual preference/orientation-issue marriage are not comparable.

I'd take that stand if I was committed to preventing the outcome of one issue from prevailing in the other. But nonetheless, they are comparable.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

But nonetheless, they [racial issues and homosexual issues] are comparable.

No, that they are comparable is propaganda.

Now, the conversation from here usually goes something like this:
You: Why
Me: because race is something inherited.
You: So is homosexuality.
Me: No it isn't.
You: A person's race is unchangeable; so is a person's homosexuality.
Me: Then why do ex-homosexuals exist?
You: Those people weren't really homosexual-----
or something like this. Right?

There doesn't seem to be much point to my participation in this discussion. As long as you and others are gay, you will be in favor of same-sex marriage, and will have some heterosexual support. And I assure you that I will always be in favor of opposite-sex only marriage and against all deviations, including polygamy, same-family marriages, man and animal marriages, polyamorous marriages, etc.

I'll duck out now since I've given my point of view, much more than I intended.

RL, VERCETTI, BILLVON, KEITH... sorry if I don't respond further. If you replied to a post of mine in the last few minutes, I'll read it, but I don't want to spend any more time on it. For me, its an irresolvable issue. I'll express my opinions at the ballot box.

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

And the above relates to the topic how, exactly?

That's pretty funny coming from one who is so generous with the irrelevant one-liners!

I'll play along, tho'. You mentioned my childhood experience, and I replied. Sorry to have wasted your time.

Quote

Unusual child.

Children do not normally think of their parents as sexual creatures, nor do they voluntarily consider their parents' sex lives, unless such thought is forced upon them.

rl

Can't deny being an "unusual" child.

Perhaps for you I must clarify that although I didn't think of my parents "having sex" in graphic detail, I did consider that their sleeping together, kissing, and cuddling had something to do with loving one another as husband and wife, and was somehow related to "sex."

***********
Sorry, had this reply typed out but had overlooked the "Post Reply" button. Anywho, this is it for me on this particular thread. See ya' at the next controversy.

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

You: Those people weren't really homosexual-----
or something like this. Right?

Actually, I would argue that they weren't really ex-homosexual.

You can choose to live a lie. But you're still living a lie.

[billvon 3,033]

>And I assure you that I will always be in favor of opposite-sex only
>marriage and against all deviations, including polygamy, same-family
>marriages, man and animal marriages, polyamorous marriages, etc.

Funny that you would claim that comparing interracial marriage to same-sex marriage is not a valid comparison, then lump homosexuality in with bestiality. Ironically that's exactly what the anti-interracial-marriage folks did. "Will white women marry monkeys next?" was a common retort. Didn't work then either.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

What the world, needs now, is love, sweet love...
It's the only thing, that there's just, too little of...

...No not just for some, but for everyone...eve-ry, eve-ry, every-one

I've had this song in my head since you posted it... but I have to say that it always makes me think of "swinging"... since it was pretty much the theme song of "Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice." (I love that movie.)

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Man is in charge:

Genesis 3:16 - To the woman He said . . . Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you."

Now I see why you like the Bible so much.

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

And I assure you that I will always be in favor of opposite-sex only marriage and against all deviations, including polygamy, same-family marriages, man and animal marriages, polyamorous marriages, etc.

I know bill already responded to this, but I'm just wide-eyed and slack-jawed.

It's not only the cheapest of all possible shots, it also doesn't follow from the discussion--we aren't, and never were, talking about inter-species relationships involving human beings.

But I'm somewhat relieved that you have included a God-approved relationship in your list, because it tells me clearly that your position has nothing to do with what is considered Biblical and everything to do with your own world-view.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[Lindsey 0]

Perhaps "gay parents have existed throughout history"--- you'd have to provide a source in order for the statement (because it is implying something rather extreme) to carry much weight-- but the percentage was too small to have much of a generalized effect one way or another.

Well, there's the berdache in some cultures who have been highly respected in their roles as parents. In the Sioux culture, they were often taken as wives by men and often adopted children. Also the Nadle of the Navajo were considered to be excellent parents. Now I'm sure that neither all of the Nadle or berdaches were "excellent" parents, but the bias was toward them being preferred as parents, and certainly not against them being fit as parents.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[MC208B 0]

Quote

Quote

LJ's a handful, but if I were still young enough to need parents, I'd pick him and his husband hands down over what I had.

That's really sweet. Raist and I both had a happy smile over what you said.

At this point we're convinced we're not ready to parent. Unlike oh so many het couples who just get pregnant, we're in an excellent position to wait until we both make a firm, considered decision to have kids.

And that's just one way that kids from gay couples have a MAJOR advantage over the typical het parents. We don't make kids until we make a conscious decision to do so.

Imagine how the world would be better if every child arrived that way.

You and your man don't "make" kids, period!

[labrys 0]

Quote

Me: because race is something inherited.
You: So is homosexuality.
Me: No it isn't.

MB,

Homosexuality is not a choice. Being "out" is. Some people choose to hide their sexuality all their lives. Some people are open about it their entire lives.

Some test the waters, find that they can't handle being "out" for whatever reason (usually religious conflict) and go "back in."

Those people are "ex-out", not "ex-gay"

If sexuality was a choice then straight people could choose to be gay also. Could you? Your are certainly physically capable of having a same-sex relationship. Are you emotionally capable?

Owned by Remi #?

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

You and your man don't "make" kids, period!

But they could. Both of them. It's been done before, and it will be done again. There are gay men out there who are in partnered relationships with children who are their genetic children.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[narcimund 0]

Quote

You and your man don't "make" kids, period!

My gosh! So forceful. So ... so ... MANLY!

Except, um, you don't need all that punctuation. You've ended your sentence with a comma, a period, AND an exclamation point. That's redundant and even somewhat contradictory. So which is it?

And while we're at it, do you know something we don't know? Our fertility hasn't been tested but so far as either of us know, we can make babies just as well as you can. The only difference is we'll certainly wait until we WANT children and straight people keep making them accidently.

Ooopsie!

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[brierebecca 0]

Quote

No I'm not reaching. You're talking in circles. The fact of the matter is you think the definition of a word is more important than human rights.

Keith

This is the single greatest rebuttal I've ever heard to those who think that homosexuals shouldn't be able to marry - it's poetic.

Brie

"Ive seen you hump air, hump the floor of the plane, and hump legs. You now have a new nickname: "Black Humper of Death"--yardhippie

[Keith 0]

Quote

You and your man don't "make" kids, period!

I'm sorry but when I read that, all I could hear was, "You got a perty mouth."

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I would hope so. The ideal family consists of a wife and a husband, living in fidelity and peace with one another. If you want to expand the concept, a loving wife and husband who are blessed with children is ideal.

I think someone needs to convert to Islam and move to the mountains of Pakistan...then again the wife probably knows no better than to produce offspring since education is not a high priority there... the boys go to Madrasas.. the girls.. well not so much....and I bet there is not a lot of peaceespecially if she dares to speak up.


This certainly does not happen in this country... not with our divorce rate.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Would you differentiate between those that generate new people and those that adopt?

Hell No, children are children and should be cared for regardless.

Totally agree that caring for kids is the same. But, I didn't say 'care for' I said create. Two gay men need a woman to create a child. Two gay women need a male to create a child. In adoption, the child is put in a better situation, but they already exist. I have no issue with most any parenting arrangement, but this was strictly about whether or not government should or should not encourage procreation, not parenting. I think parenting should be encouraged for any situation. I'm not sure about the more basic issue of just reproduction. Does the economy need replacement population or not? Should we just let it happen with out anything else? likely so

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,033]

> I think parenting should be encouraged for any situation. I'm not
>sure about the more basic issue of just reproduction.

I agree here - they should not encourage reproduction, but nor should they stand in the way of someone who wishes to have children. I have several friends who have children they did not conceive naturally, and most are straight. The government has no right to prevent any of these people from raising children.

[Keith 0]

Ok, I see where you're going. Should infertile heterosexual couples be allowed envetro fertilization, surrogacy etc? I think you'll find that heterosexual couples make up the majority of people using alternative methods of procreating.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Ok, I see where you're going. Should infertile heterosexual couples be allowed envetro fertilization, surrogacy etc?

no,no,no - It's not about ALLOWING anything to do with reproduction for any kind of infertile couple (hetero or otherwise). That's horrible. The government should butt out.

The question is, should the government preferentially encourage fertile heterosexual unions (via tax breaks) because that is the most likely means of replacing the population? (some small and highly technical countries give tax and bonus $$$ to couples having children, it happens today)

Versus giving those same breaks to any kind of infertile unions which can only adopt (which doesn't create new people, just gives homes to those already here) or use other means such as you mentioned.

So the difference is, does government give additional breaks for those that can do it without help vs those that can't.

I don't know how to answer that one, so I ask the question. But I can't really think on it when you keep reading it in such horrible ways. Sorry I'm not clearer.

Edit: In the end, even if there's a practical reason, it won't work because it's such an emotional issue that any solution would be misinterpreted. Let's just get rid of all 1500 benefits and let everyone fend for themselves in the free market.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[MC208B 0]

Quote

Quote

You and your man don't "make" kids, period!

My gosh! So forceful. So ... so ... MANLY!

Except, um, you don't need all that punctuation. You've ended your sentence with a comma, a period, AND an exclamation point. That's redundant and even somewhat contradictory. So which is it?

And while we're at it, do you know something we don't know? Our fertility hasn't been tested but so far as either of us know, we can make babies just as well as you can. The only difference is we'll certainly wait until we WANT children and straight people keep making them accidently.

Ooopsie!

Thank you for pointing out errors in my sentence structure Narc (not that I really give a shit tho).

So, which one of you are going to carry your child to term and deliver the baby? Last I heard, it takes a female to do that.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

So, which one of you are going to carry your child to term and deliver the baby? Last I heard, it takes a female to do that.

So, what does that have to do with marriage?

Does that mean that if a woman or man is infertile, he/she is not allowed to marry either?

[labrys 0]

Quote

So, what does that have to do with marriage?

Does that mean that if a woman or man is infertile, he/she is not allowed to marry either?

Most of the threads here that start with a discussion about gay marriage usually end up, at least for a time, with someone bringing childbirth into the mix.

IMO, it usually because they can't win any of their other arguments and they need to redirect to one that they feel pretty confident about.

Owned by Remi #?