^^^Most kids grow up fucked up regardless.
I'd rather grow up with 2 parents who loved me than just one.
The majority of people grow up in single parent homes. If there are two people who want to raise a child together they should be able if they are competent and financially able.
With marriage, the problem lies in the so-called "separation of church and state". Whether religious or not, people want to get married because it is significant and has certain benefits. Rather than just something they do to make their union "right in the eyes of God", there are fringe benefits attached to marriage that are incorporated into the paperwork.
Gay couples just want to be able to receive those benefits. Health insurance coverage for both partners is one reason. Being recognized as a real couple with a real dedication to each other is another.
If marriage is strictly under God, why is it that there are material benefits and/or punishments attached to it written in laws?
Also, just because you are gay does not mean you don't believe in God. The bible has an infinite number of things that are considered "sinful" or "wrong". People who are religious oftentimes cash in on the homosexual lifestyle as horrifically wrong while steady using God's name in vain and cheating on their heterosexual life partner. You cannot use religion only when it fits. If you are against homosexuality, you should be consistent and be against coveting your neighbors things, committing adultery, and bearing false witness against your neighbor.
I'd rather grow up with 2 parents who loved me than just one.
The majority of people grow up in single parent homes. If there are two people who want to raise a child together they should be able if they are competent and financially able.
With marriage, the problem lies in the so-called "separation of church and state". Whether religious or not, people want to get married because it is significant and has certain benefits. Rather than just something they do to make their union "right in the eyes of God", there are fringe benefits attached to marriage that are incorporated into the paperwork.
Gay couples just want to be able to receive those benefits. Health insurance coverage for both partners is one reason. Being recognized as a real couple with a real dedication to each other is another.
If marriage is strictly under God, why is it that there are material benefits and/or punishments attached to it written in laws?
Also, just because you are gay does not mean you don't believe in God. The bible has an infinite number of things that are considered "sinful" or "wrong". People who are religious oftentimes cash in on the homosexual lifestyle as horrifically wrong while steady using God's name in vain and cheating on their heterosexual life partner. You cannot use religion only when it fits. If you are against homosexuality, you should be consistent and be against coveting your neighbors things, committing adultery, and bearing false witness against your neighbor.
The legislation provides homosexual partners with an opportunity to obtain health insurance, pension coverage, a state income-tax reduction for dependents, an inheritance tax exemption, and many of the financial benefits of marriage.
And of course being able to be legally married and legally a couple like heterosexuals can. To some people that is important.
And of course being able to be legally married and legally a couple like heterosexuals can. To some people that is important.
Can that be backed or quantified? Obviously we all have problems, but judging by those of us who are functional at a decent level, the amount of people who live with deep seeded, unremittable problems do not outnumber those who don't. Regardless of what you may see on the news, or hear from the commies, life is generally decent in America.
I see your point. However, what will be the effects of growing up with two dads in a redneck ass neighborhood or just a generally unsupportive area on someone's psyche? Even if you support gay marriage, you must admit this will be a factor.
They had a pretty easy time bringing up evidence that homosexuality is genetic in ales. However, in females, they could not bring up as much evidence. Given the more emotionally connected nature of women, it could be argued that homosexuality in women, while definitely sometimes genetic, also could be brought on by contributing psychological factors, and studies of girls with lesbian parents are pointing to the conclusion that they definitely do turn out lesbian more often.
Given that, would you still support lesbian parents? I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with sucking dick like McQueen on a regular basis, but I don't believe our society is ready for it. Intellectually I wouldn't even call the average American in a "90's" mindset.
Tax revenues we will lose if gay marriage is legalized. And also, can you consider a threesome a marriage? Would this open the door to legalization of bestiality, or what we now consider statuatory rape? Where does the re-definition stop? Also, how will we verify the legitimacy of the new ensuing couples? What would be the delineation of live-in couples versus married couples?
Seperation of church and state is a murky area of legality. One could argue that many of the early state principles were based on Judeo-Christian ideals, and much of our written law is largely based on the Bible's definition of an ultimate moral code. That debate will most likely sprak this room...however, many of the activities and organization of what we now call Faith-based institutions very closely mirrors non-religious organizations which are supported and subsidized by the government.
Well of course this is simplicity. I was well schooled in Christianity. The way it was put is that christians are not "sinless", but they intend to "sin less". There is a clear difference in the bible between a 'slip-up' or a 'sin', and a lifestyle of continued 'sin'. You or I cannot judge the ultimate morality of any person, but the layout is pretty defined as to the difference.
If I were a gay activist I would choose a religion other than Christianity with which to legitimize the process as a sacred religious institution.
I see your point. However, what will be the effects of growing up with two dads in a redneck ass neighborhood or just a generally unsupportive area on someone's psyche? Even if you support gay marriage, you must admit this will be a factor.
They had a pretty easy time bringing up evidence that homosexuality is genetic in ales. However, in females, they could not bring up as much evidence. Given the more emotionally connected nature of women, it could be argued that homosexuality in women, while definitely sometimes genetic, also could be brought on by contributing psychological factors, and studies of girls with lesbian parents are pointing to the conclusion that they definitely do turn out lesbian more often.
Given that, would you still support lesbian parents? I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with sucking dick like McQueen on a regular basis, but I don't believe our society is ready for it. Intellectually I wouldn't even call the average American in a "90's" mindset.
Tax revenues we will lose if gay marriage is legalized. And also, can you consider a threesome a marriage? Would this open the door to legalization of bestiality, or what we now consider statuatory rape? Where does the re-definition stop? Also, how will we verify the legitimacy of the new ensuing couples? What would be the delineation of live-in couples versus married couples?
Seperation of church and state is a murky area of legality. One could argue that many of the early state principles were based on Judeo-Christian ideals, and much of our written law is largely based on the Bible's definition of an ultimate moral code. That debate will most likely sprak this room...however, many of the activities and organization of what we now call Faith-based institutions very closely mirrors non-religious organizations which are supported and subsidized by the government.
Well of course this is simplicity. I was well schooled in Christianity. The way it was put is that christians are not "sinless", but they intend to "sin less". There is a clear difference in the bible between a 'slip-up' or a 'sin', and a lifestyle of continued 'sin'. You or I cannot judge the ultimate morality of any person, but the layout is pretty defined as to the difference.
If I were a gay activist I would choose a religion other than Christianity with which to legitimize the process as a sacred religious institution.
Also, I believe most gay people to be open-minded enough to know that they will have to bring in friends and family members of the opposite sex to help out in certain situations. The last thing a parent of any kind wants to do is to deprive their child of help and comfort when things relating solely to their gender are occurring while growing up.
I think more people have serious issues than we really admit. With the divorce rate at 50%, most kids are raised by one parent who has to work and therefore they are raised by TV and friends. Neither of these two are positive role models in most cases.
I agree, that would be hard. Most gay people in that type of atmosphere in closeted anyway out of fear and would most likely not be coupling and adopting. But if they did, it would be an issue that would hopefully break open and enlighten people. You can't live in fear of what other people will say and do all the time. When a child is involved you have to consider what they will go through, but raise them to be proud of who they are and where they came from.
Can you show me this study? I'm not a big fan of stats. I took courses in college about stats. They are never truly correct and are often skewed or riddled with bias.
The same Americans who are outraged by Janet's tit and gay marriage are those who have a collection of "Spank me you whore" video tapes. I think Americans are really hypocrital and self-righteous about things. But you are right, they are not very smart. The majority aren't anyway. If Bush says gay people are bad, they believe it. If Bush says Iraq is a threat, they believe it. Some people will believe anything. Many don't like to formulate their own opinions and that sets us back.
Some people are polygamists...there are already laws about commonlaw marriages...I'm not sure where it will end, but I don't think a person marrying a dog is the same as a person marrying another person. Most people are smart enough to associate between man and animal.
I agree, that would be hard. Most gay people in that type of atmosphere in closeted anyway out of fear and would most likely not be coupling and adopting. But if they did, it would be an issue that would hopefully break open and enlighten people. You can't live in fear of what other people will say and do all the time. When a child is involved you have to consider what they will go through, but raise them to be proud of who they are and where they came from.
Can you show me this study? I'm not a big fan of stats. I took courses in college about stats. They are never truly correct and are often skewed or riddled with bias.
The same Americans who are outraged by Janet's tit and gay marriage are those who have a collection of "Spank me you whore" video tapes. I think Americans are really hypocrital and self-righteous about things. But you are right, they are not very smart. The majority aren't anyway. If Bush says gay people are bad, they believe it. If Bush says Iraq is a threat, they believe it. Some people will believe anything. Many don't like to formulate their own opinions and that sets us back.
Some people are polygamists...there are already laws about commonlaw marriages...I'm not sure where it will end, but I don't think a person marrying a dog is the same as a person marrying another person. Most people are smart enough to associate between man and animal.
I agree with it....I mean If you find someone that your truly happy with and understand each other(same sex) than why not...cause your a step ahead of the rest of us. If they wanted to adopt and have kids I agree with that also....A child needs a pos.,encouraging ,loving, environment and If two men or women can provide that then hell go for it!
I DONT THINK THAT ANYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO CALL ANYONE NOT SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE /A SIN...BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE SINNED OURSELVES.SO IF THEY"GAYS" ARE GOING TO HELL(I DONT AGREE) WELL THEN SO WILL YOU!!!!!
I DONT THINK THAT ANYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO CALL ANYONE NOT SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE /A SIN...BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE SINNED OURSELVES.SO IF THEY"GAYS" ARE GOING TO HELL(I DONT AGREE) WELL THEN SO WILL YOU!!!!!
I'm against gay marriage. I don't have ANY gay male friends. I have SEVERAL bi female/lesbian friends. They know for a FACT that I DON'T bash them over the head with my beliefs. I have remained respectful at all times. Spiritually and morally it's corrupt (these are my opinions) so I don't endorse it. I can't judge the person but I *CAN* judge the sin. Before any of you comment on that DON'T quote "he who is without sin caste the first stone". That verse has NOTHING to do with calling things for what they are. Am I a saint or holier than thou? HELL NO! I'm not trying to be either. Each person WILL answer for his or her actions. At the end of the day you will answer for it not HGK. Personally gay marriages don't shock me, but actually reveal something about society as a whole.
WHITE DEVIL TYPED THIS:
"however, many of the activities and organization of what we now call Faith-based institutions very closely mirrors non-religious organizations which are supported and subsidized by the government."
501 (C) 3 AND THE FAITH BASED INITIATIVE. I WONT TELL ANYONE TO *NOT* STUDY AND READ THE BIBLE. WHAT I WILL TELL PEOPLE IS TO LEAVE YOUR 501 (C) 3 CHURCH.
Romans 1:24-32
HGK
PS@HUSTLE HOWS COITUS?
WHITE DEVIL TYPED THIS:
"however, many of the activities and organization of what we now call Faith-based institutions very closely mirrors non-religious organizations which are supported and subsidized by the government."
501 (C) 3 AND THE FAITH BASED INITIATIVE. I WONT TELL ANYONE TO *NOT* STUDY AND READ THE BIBLE. WHAT I WILL TELL PEOPLE IS TO LEAVE YOUR 501 (C) 3 CHURCH.
Romans 1:24-32
HGK
PS@HUSTLE HOWS COITUS?
once marriage is redifined to mean something other than "between a man and a woman" there will be no end to the sick shit and the institution of marriage will be totally decimated. as it is it is already standing on 1 leg.
as you said what to stop a person from marrying their goat?? or whats to stop 10 people from getting married together???
what if some1 wants to marry her horse and her orange tree???
A MAN AND A WOMAN THATS IT!!!
as you said what to stop a person from marrying their goat?? or whats to stop 10 people from getting married together???
what if some1 wants to marry her horse and her orange tree???
A MAN AND A WOMAN THATS IT!!!
BUT THAT WONT MATTER AND NO1 WILL BE ABLE TO STOP THEM FROM IT BECAUSE IF ANY MARRIAGE OTHER THAN "BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN" IS ALLOWED THERE WILL BE NO LIMITS.
A PERSON WANTING TO MARRY HIS/HER DOG WILL SUE FOR EQUAL PROTECTION AND WIN AND SOCIETY WONT BE ABLE TO STOP THEM FROM BEING MARRIED.
SAME THING WITH A PERSON WANTING TO MARRY A MINOR OR ANY OTHER DEVIANT FROM OF MARRIAGE
A PERSON WANTING TO MARRY HIS/HER DOG WILL SUE FOR EQUAL PROTECTION AND WIN AND SOCIETY WONT BE ABLE TO STOP THEM FROM BEING MARRIED.
SAME THING WITH A PERSON WANTING TO MARRY A MINOR OR ANY OTHER DEVIANT FROM OF MARRIAGE
Gay people shouldn't be able to raise children because why? Many heterosexual people shouldn't be able to raise children either. The only people who shouldn't be able to raise children are bad people who cause the child harm and neglect them physically and mentally. I do not believe gay people will cause their children any more harm than a heterosexual couple who beats and abuses or ignores their child. There are many unfit parents out there and many unwanted kids who'd have a better life with two healthy gay parents rather than one crackhead mother or living in a foster home with a heterosexual woman who is milking the system by taking in kids for the money and then ignoring them. It happens all the time.