The Obssession with Homosexuality

[Fragony]

Another Fragonyism

So many times you have equated your own personal opinion with 'all cultures' 'always' 'the whole world' etc etc...

Your statement is obviously not thought through.

Monotheism is too dogmatic and too recent to patronize people over what they believe or not. The homosexual couple are not getting married in churches or mosques or synagogues (no-one forces priests imams or rabbis to perform such marriages) and that is the end of the story really.

Don't care about the religious aspect. They can call it a marriage all they want but it ain't the real thing, that is where the bloodline ends. Never going to be more then a dress-up party, if it is what it is at least be honest about it, it's as much of a marriage as me marrying my boat.

[Samurai Waki]

Well if you look at it from... well, nobody else but your perspective maybe, Frag then that is the way it must be. But it would still be equal marriage according to law, and to the two people who are married it would be something much deeper, a binding of souls perhaps? Marriage isn't always, or even usually just a physical interaction between two people.

[Fragony]

Well if you look at it from... well, nobody else but your perspective maybe, Frag then that is the way it must be. But it would still be equal marriage according to law, and to the two people who are married it would be something much deeper, a binding of souls perhaps? Marriage isn't always, or even usually just a physical interaction between two people.

If it's the exact same thing we would just call it marriage, but we call it gay marriage, even the people who absolutely adore the idea give it a different qualification, so do I. State can't make a difference, I can.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Marriage is a unity for reproduction

Reproduction is not mere procreation. We are not spawning fish. We are highly developed mammals. Reproduction takes years of devotion to a child by adults.

Gay marriage increases the stability of the environment that kids need to grow up in. Hence, gay marriage is all about making human reproduction possible.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Gay marriage increases the stability of the environment that kids need to grow up in. Hence, gay marriage is all about making human reproduction possible.

It's one thing for gay people to be able to do what they want in their own homes but to bring children into the equation just so they can have equal rights is competely unfair on the child.

[rasoforos]

It's one thing for gay people to be able to do what they want in their own homes but to bring children into the equation just so they can have equal rights is competely unfair on the child.

Who are we to judge who is to bring children to the world or not?

Take a look on how many well meaning educated people were leading sterilisation programs in the past century (no it wasn't only the Nazis). Do not even think of using this as an argument.

For example for an atheist like me, religious people flooding a toddler's mind with propaganda and superstitions is atrocious. I sometimes feel that is shouldn't be allowed. But I know better than to judge...

It does not really matter if a child has a mom and a dad, or just one parent or parents of the same sex. I have seen enough heterosexual parents literaly destroy their children and leading them to a life of problems, to know better. I would prefer two dads than two for parents any day (not that it means that my parents were not fine), at least I d have a sense of fashion and style which I unfortunately lack.

[Askthepizzaguy]

It's one thing for people of different races to be able to do what they want in their own homes but to bring children into the equation just so they can have equal rights is completely unfair on the child.

Don't you realize how confusing it is for a child to have bi-racial parents? Daddy's white, Mommy is black... all the kids at school make fun of the fact that the child isn't really white, isn't really black and call the child offensive names. Well it's just a shame and perhaps it is irresponsible for white and black people to have children together, but it's perfectly acceptable for Irish and Italian people to have children together, or Swedish and Spanish people to have children together. I draw the line at Asians and Caucasians, though. That's too different.



Are you saying it's not difficult to be the child of that family with 18 kids? Surely that's normal enough. Heck, religion even encourages it. Or how about being a child of those parents who fight all the time? That's perfectly natural. As long as the parents are male and female, we're all set. And if Daddy comes home drunk and passes out on the couch, that's still better than if he were one of those icky gays, because everyone knows gay is wrong and gays don't love their children like people do. And they are godless sinners, it says so in the Bible... somewhere in Leviticus along with the bit about the shellfish and not sleeping with your cousins.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ooops we had better get on the phone and call some of our friends from (insert stereotypical "redneck" state here) because apparently they didn't get the memo about that even though they go to church all the time. And they used the argument that it was no one else's business, too. How ironic.

[Rhyfelwyr]

So you don't think parents should teach their children anything. My dad said to me when I was about 7 or 8 that God didn't exist, rather blunt. Should he have been allowed to do this?

Anyway, just because heterosexual parents can be bad doesn't mean having two same-sex parents will be good for a child. If it's bad, the state can step in.

I remember watching a documentary recently on some couples trying to get children to adopt, and the process of being accepted as suitable parents is absolutedly brutal. If there's an issue with too many children being raised by the state, then maybe they need to make the rules a bit less tight, if they did there would be plenty of heterosexual couples which I think most people would accept are better for a child.

[Andres]

It's one thing for gay people to be able to do what they want in their own homes but to bring children into the equation just so they can have equal rights is competely unfair on the child.

Why would it be wrong to have a child raised by two gay people? Please, enlighten me.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Why would it be wrong to have a child raised by two gay people? Please, enlighten me.

Being raised by a heterosexual couple has been the standard evolutionary/God given way for the whole of human history. If you think this biological design is no longer relevant, you have to prove it, and why the alternative is acceptable.

[Samurai Waki]

I had a friend who was raised by Gay Parents, straight as an arrow (He's getting married in a few months... to a female), and smart as a whip. He recently got his doctorate from Harvard. He attributes most of his successes to how much his (Dads) stressed the importance that they always paid attention to him, and nurtured his mind way beyond the call of duty.

[Andres]

Being raised by a heterosexual couple has been the standard evolutionary/God given way for the whole of human history. If you think this biological design is no longer relevant, you have to prove it, and why the alternative is acceptable.

Adoption is organised by law, not by relgion or biology.

Not allowing gays to adopt a child together is unequal treatment, since straight couples are allowed to adopt. As I said earlier in this thread, unequal treatment needs to be justified.

What is your justification for the unequal treatment?

Gays can love children. Gays can change diapers. Gays can work and provide for their family. Gays can read their children stories. Gays can visit the zoo with their children. Gays can raise and educate children, just like any other person. Gays are just like you and me. I don't see a reason or justification for the unequal treatment.

Enlighten me.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Adoption is organised by law, not by relgion or biology.

Not allowing gays to adopt a child together is unequal treatment, since straight couples are allowed to adopt. As I said earlier in this thread, unequal treatment needs to be justified.

What is your justification for the unequal treatment?

Gays can love children. Gays can change diapers. Gays can work and provide for their family. Gays can read their children stories. Gays can visit the zoo with their children. Gays can raise and educate children, just like any other person. Gays are just like you and me. I don't see a reason or justification for the unequal treatment.

Enlighten me.

They are unequal because nature didn't make them equal. We can give them human rights and all, but we can't pretend they have the same biological function as everyone else, when they clearly don't. If you want children to be raised in anything besides a natural family, you have to justify it. This isn't an issue of having the right to your private life, because now there's other people being brought into the equation. You have to state your case if you think it's fair on them.

[HoreTore]

It's one thing for people of different races to be able to do what they want in their own homes but to bring children into the equation just so they can have equal rights is completely unfair on the child.

Don't you realize how confusing it is for a child to have bi-racial parents? Daddy's white, Mommy is black... all the kids at school make fun of the fact that the child isn't really white, isn't really black and call the child offensive names. Well it's just a shame and perhaps it is irresponsible for white and black people to have children together, but it's perfectly acceptable for Irish and Italian people to have children together, or Swedish and Spanish people to have children together. I draw the line at Asians and Caucasians, though. That's too different.



Are you saying it's not difficult to be the child of that family with 18 kids? Surely that's normal enough. Heck, religion even encourages it. Or how about being a child of those parents who fight all the time? That's perfectly natural. As long as the parents are male and female, we're all set. And if Daddy comes home drunk and passes out on the couch, that's still better than if he were one of those icky gays, because everyone knows gay is wrong and gays don't love their children like people do. And they are godless sinners, it says so in the Bible... somewhere in Leviticus along with the bit about the shellfish and not sleeping with your cousins.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ooops we had better get on the phone and call some of our friends from (insert stereotypical "redneck" state here) because apparently they didn't get the memo about that even though they go to church all the time. And they used the argument that it was no one else's business, too. How ironic.

Post of the month.

Being raised by a heterosexual couple has been the standard evolutionary/God given way for the whole of human history. If you think this biological design is no longer relevant, you have to prove it, and why the alternative is acceptable.

Irrelevant, since gays are perfectly capable of making their own babies, all it takes is one sloppy one night stand and a needle to puncture the condom.

Your choice is simply between making life comfortable for the children who are being raised in gay families, and making life worse for them.

Get rid of the delusion that you can stop people from breeding.

[Vuk]

Are you saying it's not difficult to be the child of that family with 18 kids? Surely that's normal enough. Heck, religion even encourages it. Or how about being a child of those parents who fight all the time? That's perfectly natural. As long as the parents are male and female, we're all set. And if Daddy comes home drunk and passes out on the couch, that's still better than if he were one of those icky gays, because everyone knows gay is wrong and gays don't love their children like people do. And they are godless sinners, it says so in the Bible... somewhere in Leviticus along with the bit about the shellfish and not sleeping with your cousins.

My ma was from a family of 16 kids. She has only fond memories of her childhood. And yes ATPG, are you now going to tell us why it is good to sleep with your cousins? That is something that BIOLOGY is against. Doing can often result in extreme physical and mental disorders. You wonder why the European ruling class was so up through many periods of history? They were a bunch of inbred . Drrn that nasty old Bible for condemning incest. Boy, good thing we modern people know so much more. *rolls eyes*

[Kralizec]

They are unequal because nature didn't make them equal. We can give them human rights and all, but we can't pretend they have the same biological function as everyone else, when they clearly don't. If you want children to be raised in anything besides a natural family, you have to justify it. This isn't an issue of having the right to your private life, because now there's other people being brought into the equation. You have to state your case if you think it's fair on them.

Strictly speaking, it isn't natural. And that means precisely nothing, because being unnatural does not necessarily equal being "bad" in anyway.

If you think that being raised by a same sex couple is bad for a child's (mental) health, you'll have to prove this because it certainly is not self-evident.

[Vuk]

Strictly speaking, it isn't natural. And that means precisely nothing, because being unnatural does not necessarily equal being "bad" in anyway.

If you think that being raised by a same sex couple is bad for a child's (mental) health, you'll have to prove this because it certainly is not self-evident.

There actually are studies I have read that have shown that both a male and female parent are needed for your child's best potential emotional and mental growth. That is why children from single parents and gay couples actually DO have more emotional problems then those raised in a family of a straight man and a straight woman. I read those several years back actually, and I am not sure if there has been anything more recent on it. I will try to search for it for you.


(and yes, social stigma was suggested in the study as a possible explanation for the lower emotional stability of children raised by gay couples. It is more likely I think though that it is a mixture of both, as other studies have shown the importance of a male and female figure for a child to grow up understanding the emotions of both better.)

[Samurai Waki]

There are also studies that suggest a father's first reaction to seeing his newborn child is that they want to kill it...

[Vuk]

There are also studies that suggest a father's first reaction to seeing his newborn child is that they want to kill it...

I mean studies with good method. I think I know the study you are referring to, and it is tosh and bosh through and through.

[Samurai Waki]

I mean studies with good method. I think I know the study you are referring to, and it is tosh and bosh through and through.

As I've been a student of Law for several years now, I'm pretty skeptical of any "study" regardless of where it comes from, Scientists/Journalists/Whathaveyou are still human, and still have bias.

[Vuk]

As I've been a student of Law for several years now, I'm pretty skeptical of any "study" regardless of where it comes from, Scientists/Journalists/Whathaveyou are still human, and still have bias.

True, as a student of History I know that full well myself, which is why I pointed out that there a certainly other factors in play. A study can always be bent to look one way or another, but I still do not think that it should be ignored, just examined with caution. I have been trying to log into my university system where I can access the academic journals from, but they will not let me do it here in Hungary. :P I guess I will look on Google. :P

[Strike For The South]

If they have a good and stable home. I dont care. In fact it should be criminal negligence to allow qualified to allow orphans to go without parents because some people think it's icky and gays sacrafice goats every tuesday.

I don't care what study you have saying in order for proper toe devolpment you need a penis and vagiania in the house becuase you and I both know that is Daisy.

We have bigger fish to fry.

[Rhyfelwyr]

You can't tell me any child would be happy in such an environment. Or is that just because of my bigotted upbringing.

[Andres]

You can't tell me any child would be happy in such an environment.

Why not?

Really, I can't see any good reasons to refuse a gay couple to adopt a child.

[Askthepizzaguy]

You know, gay people aren't sterile, and many of them have their own biological children, and they raise them just fine.

That means the discussion is over, and the law needs to be amended to be more fair and inclusive.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It's your upbringing.

The question here is not whether two Gay parents are bad, it is whether they are the same as two straight parents.

At the end of the day, they aren't. Two men cannot have a baby together, nor two women. Such is life.

The only purpose of marriage is to contain heterosexual activity for the protection of childen. To be blunt marriage is about preventing bastardry. It has nothing to do with pleasure, or love, or any of that dross.

Marriage is the legal sanction to bear ans raise offsping, and it is entered into before the bearing, not after.

So I suppose that makes marriage completely irrelevant today.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Yes but they usually have those children with women, in which case you've just got to go with the court proceedings and do the best you can.

[Askthepizzaguy]

It's your upbringing.

The question here is not whether two Gay parents are bad, it is whether they are the same as two straight parents.

So, two Gay parents can be good? And they deserve equal rights as everyone else? And I suppose the same goes for Bisexual people and transgendered people as well? My my my we are a bastion of progressive thought today. I am glad we've made progress.

At the end of the day, they aren't. Two men cannot have a baby together, nor two women. Such is life.

At the end of the day, many straight people can't have a baby together, and being gay does not make you sterile. Plenty of gay people have children. Such is life.

The only purpose of marriage is to contain heterosexual activity for the protection of childen.

To be blunt marriage is about preventing bastardry.

It has nothing to do with pleasure, or love, or any of that dross.

Spoken like a true romantic.

Marriage is the legal sanction to bear ans raise offsping, and it is entered into before the bearing, not after.

That's not what the law says. Are you making this stuff up on the spot?

So I suppose that makes marriage completely irrelevant today.

I note that the people clamoring for the sanctity of marriage have a very low opinion of the sacred institution of marriage, and believe it only applies to hypothetical and rare circumstances such as both people being virgins (and therefore childless), being together only for the purposes of dropping children out of vaginas, and staying together forever.

Some people have crazy ideas about two people being together because they want to be together, out of love, regardless of being old, or infertile, or not being virgins, etc... and that if their partner is an abusive child molesting drunk who ends up in jail for example they should be able to get a divorce from that partner.

Common sense stuff. You know, the world doesn't exist as a fantasy page where everyone lives a fairy tale. Real marriage exists in the real world where sometimes, people aren't virgins, or don't want children, or love each other. Imagine!

The more those who oppose gay marriage talk about the sanctity of traditional marriage, the more they invent a fictional "traditional marriage" that almost no one actually has. If they want to run off and join an Amish community where stuff like that actually happens, be my guest. Until then; it's the real world and people don't match the fantasy. That fantasy marriage is fine, but it is no better or holier than any other marriage.

Yes but they usually have those children with women, in which case you've just got to go with the court proceedings and do the best you can.

When you think of homosexuals, I take it that you don't picture women very often. Is it really the fear of another man touching you that drives your arguments?

Women are homosexuals sometimes too, and many of them attempt to be heterosexual due to societal pressure, and have children. Or maybe they are bisexual and they have relations with men at times. Or maybe they are willing to have babies the natural way regardless of their leanings. And gay men end up fathers.

"Go with the court proceedings..." what do you mean? Do you want to take children away from gays?

[Tribesman]

Being raised by a heterosexual couple has been the standard evolutionary/God given way for the whole of human history.

Bollox .

[Rhyfelwyr]

Bollox .

Or the state/commune/whatever institution... but rarely (if ever, idk) homosexual couples.