Gay Marriage- a general discussion.

[The Duke]

Dibble,

You missed the point entirely.  The point is not that I don't want my kids to know about homosexuality, its that they need to understand that it isn't the same as a normal relationship.  Redefining marriage in legal terms will make that a pretty tough sell.

[TomatoSoup]

A) The question we have to ask about mental competence and stability is which one is defined in the consent laws? Clearly it's not mental stability, since there are mentally handicapped people who have just as much rights as another person but are still not mentally stable. For instance, my father is bipolar. Without medication, he can be very much mentally unstable. That of course does not mean the government can take away his rights as a legal adult. My point wasn't to make that all children are mentally competent, my point was that there are children who are mentally competent and stable, and of these children, should they be allowed to have sexual involvement with 40-year-old men?

B) First of all, I would like to make clear that these are my personal experiences, correct. But in this case, I have a huge amount of people to report (I probably know at least 15 men and women with same-sex attraction well, and dozens of others as aquaintances). With this large pool of surveyors, and the diversity of these people, I can tell you that yes this is a good example of how the majority of homosexuals have had problems as children. Every single story I have heard from these people has to do with parental imbalance, abuse, or sexual molestation. Now, what is the reason for this? I will explain later.

C) Firstly, there is no scientific evidence that homosexuality is genetic, which is your implication. The evidence given even by the homosexual-run APA suggests that homosexual attractions come from behavior in the childhood. It is NOT genetic, as no sexuality is genetic. Sexuality doesnt' appear until the third adolescence. Young children may have crushes, or find some people attractive, but they do not think about having sex, and if they do they are seriously disordered. In addition, children who have same-sex attraction are children who are showing signs of a perhaps future homosexuality, but it does not mean they are homosexual. After saying this, I would further say that it is unnatural for children to want to be placed in positions of sexual molestation. If they do, they must have a mental disorder or chemical imbalance, as it is not natural for humans in our youth to be sexually active. Since the study showed that homosexuals are TWICE more likely to have been molested as children (40-50% for both lesbians and homosexuals compared to around 20%), this is proof that they were disordered for having such implications to be in a position of sexual molestation. Interestingly enough, what you are implying is what sparked the APA to form a study saying that children like to be sexually molested. Fortunately, they took that statement back and apologized.

D) No, this study wasn't done by Paul Cameron (whoever he was), it was done by two APA psychologists, AP Bell and Weinberg, I believe was their name. It was done in 1978. I find it interesting that the APA kicked out Paul Cameron for not surveying correctly, since the APA is the master of that. Many of their studies are done here in the castro district of San Francisco, or in the bay area (hence, the 10% gay fallacy). The APA is the one who approved the study that showed 10% of Americans were gay, but the flaw is that there is basically no evidence for this. In addition, San Francisco is 10%-15% homosexual, and our population is the largest of homosexuals by national standards. Clearly, it is a flawed study. Actual studies show the number of homosexuals at around 3%-7%. Finally, most of the studies I used are what homosexuals themselves use.

E) Your last note is very interesting, and I am glad you brought it up. You are correct that homosexuals do not feel loved and so have sex to replace it, and you are correct that they are outcasts, but this is not because of society and them being homosexual, this is because of their search for masculinity. If you have ever noticed that most homosexuals are feminine, the reason is because they gain more feminine traits. Very early on in the childhood, they seek for masculinity with friends, but are unable to make friends because of their femininity. Instead, they becoem loners, or make friends with women. During their adolescence, they still seek this natural masculinity, and the only way to gain it they believe is by sexual pleasure.

From the very site, evidence that homosexuality is not genetic:

Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience.

You call yourself independent?

[The Duke]

Independent does not necessarily mean centrist.

[TomatoSoup]

If you can aswer this question, I'll be impressed. How is it harmful if gay marriage is an potion, not an obligation. If you don't want to , don't. Who cares if those stupid gays go to hell, anyway?

[??????????]

I have a question for you. Why do liberals such as yourself need to lower your arguments to personal insults as a starting point? Could it be you are defending the wrong position?

[John Dibble]

No, I didn't miss the point. I said you should explain your view so your kids know it the way you see it. Since you are the biggest influence in their lives they will likely end up having a view somewhat similar to yours. You should also explain that just because something is legal or illegal does not necessarily mean that it is right to do it or not do it, that we live in a society where not everyone agrees on everything and that sometimes laws get enacted that you do not necessarily agree with. There's quite a few laws I think are wrong, and I follow them, but perhaps for different reasons than they being law(for instance, alcohol is legal and marijuana is not, I don't abuse alcohol and I don't use marijuana because doing either is simply a bad idea, but I don't believe we should force people to not do marijuana, rather let them make their own good or bad choices).

[TomatoSoup]

I have a question for you. Why do liberals such as yourself need to lower your arguments to personal insults as a starting point? Could it be you are defending the wrong position?

Stop talking and answer the question. There were 75 posts between when akno first asked his question to when  some poor excuse for an answer was posted.

[TomatoSoup]

Independent does not necessarily mean centrist.

Good point. My bad.

[??????????]

I have a question for you. Why do liberals such as yourself need to lower your arguments to personal insults as a starting point? Could it be you are defending the wrong position?

Stop talking and answer the question. There were over 50 posts between when akno first asked his question to when  some poor excuse for an answer was posted.

Though I view homosexual marriage as disturbing and homosexual acts as disgusting, I must say that the states should be left up to the legalization of gay marriage. If a particular state wants it legalized it should be put on the ballot and let the people decide. Much like abortion. That is my answer to the question. I do no believe my moral beliefs (in this situation) should interfere with legal processes.

[migrendel]

Then teach your children that the law as it stands is wrong, John Ford. But don't use your tired and paternalistic ideas about what is right and wrong to hinder my right to decide whom I should marry. I wouldn't have the hubris to make that choice for you.

[TomatoSoup]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

[The Duke]

If you want to talk about hubris, lets talk about the hubris of people who want to change fundamental social institutions to suit their own personal life choices, and have no regard for the wishes of their fellow citizens.

[??????????]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

The Netherlands I believe.

[The Duke]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

Sweden, Norway, and Denamrk all have Civil Unions.  And what do you know, in all instances, immediately after they changed the law, out-of-wedlock births shot up.

[migrendel]

Just because something is old doesn't mean it's correct, John. I'm sure many people resisted switching over to the flush toilet. I also cannot see your point about popular sovereignty. I will never believe that a majority of a state's voters should replace the rightful wisdom of judges in the interpretation of equal protection, even if extending basic civil rights to victims of discrimination is controversial. I cannot believe that citizens should replace the legally educated in deciding the structure of laws.

[TomatoSoup]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

The Netherlands I believe.

if you look at the Netherlands standar of living (http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/nl.html) and compare it to the US's standard of living (http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html), the netherlands is superior in the majority of significant categories. And this is from a US biased site, too!

[??????????]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

The Netherlands I believe.

if you look at the Netherlands standar of living (http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/nl.html) and compare it to the US's standard of living (http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html), the netherlands is superior in the majority of significant categories. And this is from a US biased site, too!

Less land and fewer people.

[The Duke]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

The Netherlands I believe.

if you look at the Netherlands standar of living (http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/nl.html) and compare it to the US's standard of living (http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html), the netherlands is superior in the majority of significant categories. And this is from a US biased site, too!

I don't see a significant advantage for the Netherlands in standard of living.  We have a higher per capita GDP by a margin of $10,000 or so.

If I remeber correctly, under the HDI measurement, the Netherlands IS higher than the US, but this was true before gay marriage was legalized there, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[TomatoSoup]

OK. Blame it on population and land area. Earlier, a big argument was that gay marriage was a disorder, hence bringing down your SoL. Incorrect.

[Brambila]

Just because something is old doesn't mean it's correct, John. I'm sure many people resisted switching over to the flush toilet. I also cannot see your point about popular sovereignty. I will never believe that a majority of a state's voters should replace the rightful wisdom of judges in the interpretation of equal protection, even if extending basic civil rights to victims of discrimination is controversial. I cannot believe that citizens should replace the legally educated in deciding the structure of laws.

Migrendel, you can't rely everything on judges- they can be, and have been corrupt. Furthermore, I'm not about ready to have the government allow marriages to people who really are not mentally stable in their definition of love- no more than pedophiles and children are. Do they actually know what love is? If we look at statistics, Migrendel, homosexuals define love based on sexual acts. If you have ever come to San Francisco or any gay-populated region, everything is sexually oriented. In the gay theatres, they have gay porn movies. In the shops, they sell gay sex toys. In the bars, they pass out condoms. It's entirely sex-oriented, which in addition to statistics is displayed by the massive population of homosexuals who have AIDS and other STDs.

Although I find it extremely disturbing that the APA is responsible for this, that they are causing the deaths of millions of homosexuals because of AIDS, violence, and suicide, I have for the most part been tolerant. But when you start having the state recognize this supposed "marriage" (when its in contradiction with the definition), the state is officially sponsering this disorder, and that is extremely detrimental to society, not only morally, but the physically and mentally in regards to health.

[migrendel]

That is not exclusive to homosexuals. You can find condoms in vending machines in bars regardless of the sexual orientation of the patrons. You can see shop windows bedizened with the apparati of gratification, including ones used by heterosexuals. And there is no need for any reminder about the multi-billion dollar predominantly heterosexual pornography industry.

I also think you are very misinformed when you think we cannot love. I have know lust, the same as anyone, but I have been lucky to know love too. That love was built on concern and respect, not sex. Sex is a transient thrill, but love sustains us. And if any of you are fortunate enough to have loved, regardless of who it is, be grateful for it every day.

[The Duke]

OK. Blame it on population and land area. Earlier, a big argument was that gay marriage was a disorder, hence bringing down your SoL. Incorrect.

Even if homosexuality was a disorder, it would take time for the economic impact to be fully felt.

Even so, the Netherlands has a lower per capita GDP than we do, so how have you proven anything anyway?

[The Duke]

Here is a little something from Mitt Romney on why lawyers andjudges should not be in charge of defining marriage.

"(Lawyers) viewed marriage as an institution principally designed for adults. Adults are who they saw. Adults stood before them in the courtroom. And so they thought of adult rights, equal rights for adults. If heterosexual adults can marry, then homosexual adults must also marry to have equal rights."

But, he went on, marriage is not solely for adults.

"Marriage is also for children. In fact, marriage is principally for the nurturing and development of children. The children of America have the right to have a father and a mother."

[migrendel]

First of all, homosexuals can't reproduce. Second of all, the American Academy of Pediatrics says the adopted children of homosexuals show no real variances from other children. But I'm sure an exhaustively conducted study by a mainstream medical organization doesn't count because it's, according to several staunch conservatives, liberal.

[John Dibble]

Do any foreign countries have pro-gay marriage laws?

Sweden, Norway, and Denamrk all have Civil Unions.  And what do you know, in all instances, immediately after they changed the law, out-of-wedlock births shot up.

Actually, the out-of-wedlock births in those areas were increasing before gay marriage was instituted. I've said it befoe and I'll say it again - correlation does not equal causation. The more probable reason for the increase is due to two things:

1. Increased liberalism in those countries. You'll find the more conservative areas there have a more normal rate of in-wedlock births than the more liberal areas. Since conservatives also tend to place more emphasis on religion, that also factors into it. The increase liberalism also resulted in the allowing of gay marriage, so there was a correlation in the increase of out of wedlock births and the legalization of gay marriage, but the causation may have been more liberalism. That being said, I think it's good that the U.S. has a good balance of liberals and conservatives - too much of either can be dangerous, balance in all things and whatnot.

2. There are alternative forms of legal relationships that substitute for marriage, such as cohabitation and civil unions(in this case, it is for both heterosexuals and homosexuals), so when  out of wedlock statistics are counted they generally do not count children born in these legal relationships as born in wedlock. I'll also note that these types of relationships have a higher breakup rate than marriage in those countries do(perhaps because the terms 'cohabitation' and 'civil union' don't seem to carry as much weight as 'marriage' does, so people are more willing to get into them before they are really ready for a lifelong relationship), but the majority of people in these relationships who have a second child do tend to get married. These alternative relationships appeal to young liberals, since they seem less serious but still hold some weight, just not as much as marriage.