Printable View
Maybe I have misunderstood your post... I thought you were referring to when gay men have had children in the past but after coming out obviously had to divorce, but they still raised them fine. When I said about court proceedings, I was just referring to standard divorce procedures... they're never ideal for anyone whether your parents are heterosexual or not but what can you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
bolloxQuote:
Or the state/commune/whatever institution... but rarely (if ever, idk) homosexual couples.
Tribesman gets right to the point. :laugh2:
Indeed he does, and quite rightly too.
I shall wait and see how long it takes people to come up with the right answer to "how have children been raised through history?"
The historical western view to raising children has been in a very judaic fashion, nothing wrong with that. However, if you go back to before Jay-sus the line blurs quite a bit. There really isn't much documentation on the subject, suffice it to say the Greeks were pretty indifferent in regards to homosexuality (and in some cases overtly supportive).
Show me cultures where homosexuals raised children.
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Greece Rome Egypt Siam China India Persia Melanesia.......
Would you like a bigger list as there are a lot of countries and cutures in the world
No, the problem is you don't know split about life, kids, parenting or history. It'll come. Hopefully.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Parts of Polynesia, the Caribbean...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Half of them also think its OK to be a pedo. Not comparing homosexuals to pedo's but I think we should not base our values on those guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
So you want to take places that and cultures that are the cradles of western civilisation and reject their values because it just ain't western culture:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
I think we should not base our values on those guys.
I guess it's just the paedophilia that turns me off the idea. Judeo-Christian values work. Doesn't have to be the nuclear family of course which is a modern phenomenon, but some sort of standard family model will do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Ah yes Judeo-Christian values like are established culture inBritain , so tell me Rhyf in the history of your nation did people get married and have sex in situations which we would now call paedophilia ? Was it a standard family model in your cherished enlightened Christian culture?Quote:
guess it's just the paedophilia that turns me off the idea. Judeo-Christian values work. Doesn't have to be the nuclear family of course which is a modern phenomenon, but some sort of standard family model will do.
And of course this is both before and after the rather late date when Christianity actually decided that marriage was a religious thing.
Yeah there's nothing with the system they have in feudal times with the extended family, except when parents try to arrange marriages that is very disgusting, or when some pedo tries to push his luck just because there isn't a set rule. But that's why we have an age requirement, problem solved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
I guess you're talking about the Catholic Church when you say marriage didn't come in to rather late? Because its a big thing with Protestants like myself (except for the Shakers but you've got to love them). And if you want to talk about my country, marriage was common in the Celtic Church, even for the clergy, ever since it came to British soil.
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
I guess you're talking about the Catholic Church when you say marriage didn't come in to rather late? Because its a big thing with Protestants like myself
Protestants , thats a newfangled thing isn't it . So its a big thing with protestants because they took it over from the Catholics who took one hell of a time to introduce it.:dizzy2:
Ah marriage in the Celtic church , this could get interesting , are you sure you want to go down that line ?Is it just a case of throwing some nugget out there in a futile attempt to support your position:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
And if you want to talk about my country, marriage was common in the Celtic Church, even for the clergy, ever since it came to British soil.
Oh come on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
You whined about pedo's, Tribesman called your whine. The least you can do is be a sport and answer him properly.
But then again, the fact remains that up until recent times, the age people were considered fit for marriage was when the girls got their period and the boys willie started acting up, or what we usually call "sexually mature". Which is usually about half the age we now consider an appropriate age for marriage, and well beyond our standard for pedophilia.
Also, arranged marriages are disgusting? Considering it's been the staple marriage in all layers of society throughout our christian history up until modern times, wouldn't that mean that you hate the traditional christian marriage? Or is this another case of "I'll pick the parts I like and forget the other stuff"-syndrome?
Hell the FLDS already came under serious fire for marrying off several very underaged girls to some quite advanced in age men. So that kind of shoots the whole pedophilia argument out of the sky...
I don't think marriage is some grand institution that you need a big fancy service in front of a clergyman and then that's you making your household in God's favourite style. Marriage just wasn't a big thing to the early Catholics, that's fine by me as far as I'm concerned two people can just say right we're now married and there you go. If pedo's abuse that and try to disguise it under a Christian marriage whatever that's supposed to mean then that's just digusting like it would be in any religion/culture. In any case, families in Christian Britain have always been based on heterosexual relationships, and I like things that way. :yes:
I think it's best I don't go into that epic debate on the Celtic Church, I've derailed enough threads recently. :sweatdrop:
If it is unnatural, then humans must be above nature. I suppose you would say that the first humans who ended the nomadic life were doing something unnatural; i.e. doing something else than the "tradition"? Was every new "specie" that evolved; every new human behaviour (cooked meat rather than raw meat, farmers rather than nomads, cities rather than farms, cars rather than walking) unnatural in the beginning, and eventually got natural? What is natural?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
One can live in a city and long for nature. But if cities do not count as "nature", do ant-hills?
I find your lack of any kind of answer fascinating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
I mean, this must be the 7th or 8th time in this thread you avoid simple, direct questions and instead come with some minor, idiotic and irrelevant nonsense.
If I didn't know better, I would've thought it to be on purpose, as a poor attempt to hide an impossible position.
Strictly speaking, the computer you're using isn't natural. It's made out of plastics and composite materials! IT'S AGAINST GOD'S LAW!
Or perhaps, just as human society has progressed and evolved, our understanding of morality needs to grow up as well. Church organizations who abuse and molest children are now considered immoral, while adult gay people who consent to sexual relations with one another are now considered just fine.
It makes sense to me and a growing sector of the population, particularly the young people. I get a kick out of, say, Republican children.
Bush daughters having a wild swingin' time. Cheney's daughter is gay. Palin's daughter has a child out of wedlock. McCain's daughter is a pro-gay marriage liberal.
And now they teach us about good family values.
What was the question?
Anyway, for modern history at least children have been raised by heterosexual couples whenever possible. Please explain why an alternative works just as well, I'm not the one proving something.
No, the burden of proof is on YOU to demonstrate, using facts, that gays cannot raise their children just as well as anyone else, because you're arguing for the side which says that they cannot. Demonstrate why, or don't object when they raise their children.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Go.
The scary part is, what if we were able to somehow prove that gay couples raised smarter children or happier children? Would that then mean that all children need to be raised by gays because they are better parents? NO! Parents of children should raise their own children unless it can be demonstrated WHY they are unfit parents! They don't need to prove they are better than anyone else, they just need to raise their child in a manner befitting a parent, and they do so until YOU can prove otherwise! You have yet to make any progress demonstrating why gays being married would be bad for them or bad for society. You have yet to demonstrate why they would be unfit adoptive parents. You have yet to demonstrate why they shouldn't be allowed to raise their own children. Other than religious objections, you have no case.
Either make a case, or accept it is your own prejudice and nothing else. The burden of proof is on you.
Good point , face it Rhyf , you have attempted many different angles on this in an attempt to make your case, and each has fallen apart very quickly.Quote:
Either make a case, or accept it is your own prejudice and nothing else