Abramul Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 So far, the only thing close to this has been your argument that a homosexual union that adopts children could produce dysfunctional members of society, but, as a previous post -- one which you, yourself quoted -- pointed out, that argument also has a clear converse; in addition to that, this whole class of argument has been refuted at least once before, the latest falsification occuring in the post directly above yours.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>As opposed to other dysfunctional members of society? I'm sure that there isn't much difference between a DMoS raised in a heterosexual household, and a DMoS raised in a homosexual household. For that matter, probably no difference between a forum poster raised in one versus the other :P P.S. Mr. Robin? Did something get baleeted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marxist ßastard Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Abramul:<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Mr. Robin? Did something get baleeted? Great Scott! You don't know who Robin Scott is!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Postaldudeleo's garbage ignored as it isn't worth dignifying with a reply. Dark0ne, maybe you could ban him for the third strike he already has before he makes your side look any worse? Thankfully I am not the only non-Christian who believes sex is special (not sacred, special) and should be kept only for such cases that involve a special person...that is my opinion of sex, and the opinion of many others (I would claim a majority, without the FOX statistics to back it up). I know I saved my virginity for someone I truely loved, and it pleases me that I did. Similarly I don't plan to idly spread my seed if I ever leave the one I love. Err, your point? That's a decision each person deserves the right to make for themselves. Nobody's saying you should be required to do differently, just that you can't require everyone else to follow those same beliefs. And which adds to society more, the two homosexual men who adopt a child, screw up the childs life, not because they're homosexual, but because they force their homosexuality upon him -- or the loving 2.4 children family complete with loving house-wife and hard working and caring father? Your proposed situation is just that; a situation which could be reversed yet have an "inexplicable" tendency of having a higher ratio among homosexual couples rather than straight ones. Thank you for continuing that ignorant and absolutely false stereotype. Where do you get the insane idea that homosexual parents are all trying to force their sexuality on their (potential) children? You might not be christian, but you sure seem to be quoting their propaganda a lot... Quote me saying a woman and a woman together within a relationship is wrong. I believe I said I believe I'm doing it the right way wink.gif Do you honestly believe this garbage, or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? Saying "I'm doing it the right way" implies that all other ways are wrong. Stop trying to word-lawyer your way out of this. ONground (rather than under) I believe telling someone I've had a relationship of 5 years would suggest to them a relationship of the straight persuasion. Same if someone told me of their relationship of 3 years. So let me get this right... there's no problem with people understanding you mean "a relationship with a woman" when you say "relationship" despite there being nothing stopping you from having the same kind of relationship with another man. Yet in the case of marriage, allowing the possibility of the same kind of marriage with another man suddenly adds that confusion? What's the difference? Or are you just using poor arguments to cover your real (and less pleasant) reasons? ====================================================================================================================== And as for your "it's not natural" argument, I'll repost something I said in an old debate. It applies just as well to you now as it did then. Fine, you're entirely right. We must base our society entirely on simple biology. If we abandon our natural selves, life is not worth living. We must smite the heretics who dare to alter such fundamental laws. Now do your part in this glorious revolution and do these simple things as a sign of your dedication! 1) Delete your forum account, disconnect your internet cables, destroy your computer, cancel your electrical service and turn off your water. Such conveniences are the lure of anti-nature trying to drive you away from your biological roots. 2) Never see a doctor or accept medicine of any form. They are tools of anti-nature, abominations that mock our natural selves. If you get a disease or suffer an injury, accept your wounds and embrace death! It is far better to remain entirely natural than to accept corrupted "life"! 3) Have children. Many children. Right now. The survival of the species is at stake. Society's "rules" are no excuse for not doing your duty! I don't care if you're too young for a family, or if it wouldn't be convenient. One child a year until you die, or your soul shall burn in hell for eternity! 4) When you begin to suffer, do not lose faith! Do not let yourself fall into anti-nature's trap and accept unnatural help! The way of nature tests its believers so they may find true glory! Do not mourn when half of your children die at birth! It is the will of nature! Get over it and make more! What do you say to that, hypocrite? How devoted are you to your "principles"? As I thought, not at all if it's even the slightest inconvenience to you. You disgust me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThetaOrionis01 Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 ]And which adds to society more, the two homosexual men who adopt a child, screw up the childs life, not because they're homosexual, but because they force their homosexuality upon him -- or the loving 2.4 children family complete with loving house-wife and hard working and caring father? Your proposed situation is just that; a situation which could be reversed yet have an "inexplicable" tendency of having a higher ratio among homosexual couples rather than straight ones. Please provide some statistics about homosexual couples 'screwing up a child's life - and then contrast that with a few statistics on domestic and child abuse among heterosexuals. http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/hh/what03.shtml A fw examples... which a simple BBC search brought up. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lincolnshire/3700647.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/3424585.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bu...rts/3310219.stm I refined the search to look for incidents involving homosexual couples, but the search showed no result. As for the link between marriage and religion - have a look at a few more statistics: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/mar0204.pdf 2/3 of all marriages in England and Wales in 2001 were civil marriages http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/the...2001/FM2_29.pdf The 'nuclear family' you've described still exists, yes - but it's fallacy to assume to all heterosexual partnerships conform to that pattern. Sexual preference is a personal thing - whatever gives you and your consenting adult partner(s) pleasure is right for you ... there's no absolute right or wrong, any more than there is right or wrong taste in music, clothes, art etc. I've heard teenagers on IRC express disgust at the thought that their parents might be having sex (hello? Did a stork drop you down the chimney? )... should we make it illegal for a couple to have sex once they have become parents, just because some people find the thought distasteful? Once you start assuming that your preferences are 'right' and therefore others' preferences are 'wrong' you start heading down a dangerous path of intolerance and persecution - especially when you force your idea of what's right and wrong upon others by way of legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabbemaster Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 About homosexual pepole that adopt childs: When I was 14, I had a friend and nabor that was son (not adopted) to a homosexual man.His parents separated when he was 3, because his father was homosexual.His father has a boyfriend, and they live togheter.His mother has another husband now.My friend lives with his father in the weeks, and with his mother on the weekends. My friend hasen't been "screwed up", in fact he is a verry nice person, he is heterosexual and has a girlfriend. And:His father and his fathers boyfriend are also verry nice people.So don't say that every homosexual man is "bad", because that is completely wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 The majority of heterosexual men I know are proud of the extent and variety of their sexual conquests (women that is) whether married or not. They are marginally more discreet about their amours after marriage. They are also pretty experimental in their sexual congress. Certainly there is nothing that two homosexual men can do that these men and their girlfiends/wives have not tried. Apart from it not being a subject I feel should be so widely discussed, but that's what alcohol does for you, it does not disgust or upset me. Nor does the thought of two men or women (or ten for that matter) together bother me in the slightest. Like you, Dark0ne, I incline towards avoiding sexual relationships that are not based on something much deeper but I don't feel superior about it. Who cares what people get up to in the privacy of their own homes? Dark0ne, of course it's not what you'd do. And no one suggests you can't have whatever opinion you like. Indeed you have the 'right' to state it. But having given your opinion, you cannot then try to argue that it is right in any sense other than it is right FOR YOU. It would seem that the majority of other posters here, myself included, would not find your views right FOR OTHERS. I have also posted this before in different words. I have an American Cousin who is an episcopalian priest married to a social worker. They have administered to various areas of the US including rural Wyoming and inner-city New Jersey. They both have the same view, that child abuse and incest are commonplace among the 'godfearing' communities who would never tolerate homosexual marriages and that these are almost unheard of in same-sex relationships. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest same sex parents encourage their children to adopt their sexuality, indeed if anything the opposite. This is their finding and of course is not hard evidence. But they have first hand experience and I'm more inclined to believe them than your unsupported assertion that the opposite is true. But I will maintain an open mind. Please post some facts or at least more persuasive arguments and I will listen. At present, whether you intend it to or not, it sounds like pure prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zmid Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Thankfully I am not the only non-Christian who believes sex is special (not sacred, special) and should be kept only for such cases that involve a special person...that is my opinion of sex, and the opinion of many others (I would claim a majority, without the FOX statistics to back it up). I know I saved my virginity for someone I truely loved, and it pleases me that I did. Similarly I don't plan to idly spread my seed if I ever leave the one I love.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> And what if you believed exactly the same thing, but you were gay, and therefore the 'special person' you saved your virginity for was a man? What's the difference? I'm sorry, was this meant to persuade me to think that sex between a man and another man was naturally right -- or was this meant to make me think "Wow, Suzerain's had sex with 2 other people (not just goats) at the same time! He MUST be right"? Frankly it makes me think lower of you, and also pity you. This is my opinion, as is everything I say here. I do not say you're wrong, but I definately don't agree with you. Quote me saying a woman and a woman together within a relationship is wrong. I believe I said I believe I'm doing it the right way But that's the whole point - you are trying to say homosexual marriages should not be allowed because, in your opinion, you are doing it the right way and homosexuals are doing it the wrong way. In my opinion, homosexual sex is disgusting, but that only gives me the right to say homosexuality is wrong for me. It does not give me the right to say it's wrong for everyone, or that homosexuals should be discriminated against purely due to their sexuality. ONground (rather than under) I believe telling someone I've had a relationship of 5 years would suggest to them a relationship of the straight persuasion. You are correct there, but that only really says that a lot of people make the assumption that you're straight unless they already know otherwise. Speaking personally, far from being offended or made uncomfortable, if someone asked me if my partner was male or female, I would actually respect them a little more for being more open-minded than the average person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postaldudeleo Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 I still haven't figured out that offensive language is not allowed here, and therefore have nothing useful to say with this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indoril Nerevar Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 "The word 'marriage' derives from the French and before that Latin. It was certainly never in the Bible when it was written. So the 'word' is completely irrelevant. " Thank you Malchik for that bit o history. The word Marrige may be irrelevent, but the idea is not. It's like, "how do you pronounce St. Louis?" It doesn't matter to me, but I know what you're talking about. if you have a bible look up these verse: Genisis 2:24 "Therefore shall a man leave his mother and father, and shall cleave unto his WIFE; and they shall be one flesh." (From the king james version) have a nice day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Genisis 2:24 "Therefore shall a man leave his mother and father, and shall cleave unto his WIFE; and they shall be one flesh." (From the king james version) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. What the bible has to say about marriage is completely irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.