Court: California gay marriage ban is unconstitutional
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
GVC
Well-Known Member
1. I'm well aware of the definition of "ignorant". I took your suggestion, however, and looked it up. Feel free to post a definition of ignorant from whatever dictionary you use, and I'll explain how the word applies to you, based on your posts in this thread.
2. Just because you stand by something, doesn't make it factual. If breaking up the family does destroy nations (you've yet to provide any evidence of this), how does legalizing same-sex marriages break up the family? Can you provide any support for any of these assertions?
3. I'm far more shocked than pissed off at what you consider "fact". If it is "fact", it should be easy to justify.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Family isn't necessarily the fundamental unit of society. And family itself is defined loosely. In some societies, the entire village is considered family. There are some cultures where the term for "older man," the basic equivalent to when we'd use "sir," is the same word as "father." Mediterranean culture used to be where the sons would build their house after they got married as an extension to their parents' home. I'm sure you don't live next door to your parents (should actually be in the same building), so they would think you're being "selfish" and destroyed the framework of the family unit. How would you respond to that? The concept of "family" isn't set in stone as you make it out to be.
Also, humans find pleasure in sex. It is more than a natural instinct at that point. Other animals use sex to procreate. Humans find an emotional response to it, thus, it has other meanings then to procreate. Nothing selfish about it, unless you equate it to eating chocolate, or something, since eating chocolate is not healthy, nor is it part of the "natural" nutrition.
Link #1: So, what's the point? I could throw out a statistic that x out of y societies are matrilineal (would be under 50%). Would that make those people somehow worse or selfish? In any case, lack of observant homosexual behavior doesn't equate to lack of genetic traits. Last time I looked into it, the issue is unresolved.
Link #2: The inference is that people are saying they're born that way because society tells them it's okay to say so. Of course, new scientific understanding of the genetic code couldn't have anything to do with it.
Link #3: Sure, a risk. I'm sure you could find similar studies for drinkers, smokers, foster parents, single parents, families who move a lot, etc. I do believe the studies have shown the stability seems to be the biggest factor. I guess the solution is to actively force everyone who isn't in a nuclear family and a single detached house with a white picket fence into said conditions.
Link #4 and #5: What's the point? Riskier situations require more vigilance in protecting oneself. Having sex with Africans (hetero or homo) makes one more likely to contract HIV. Does it then become selfish to have sex with Africans?
Link #6: Have the studies been performed to determine whether the higher use is because they're homosexual, or to other social factors that are common amongst homosexuals. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the suicide rate higher in American Mormons than with any other Mormon? Is that because they're Mormon, or because of social norms more common to Mormonism.
If I were an orphan in an orphanage I'd be happy to be adopted by a gay couple. Having people who care about you and can support you beats being an orphan your entire childhood.
I completely disagree with your entire post, but at least you spelled out your reasons and told us all why you believe what you believe. For you, I can respectfully agree to disagree. For Craig? I'd like to jam his face into a rhino's brown-round.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Homosexual couples can already do that without being married.
Really? I thought it was against the law in at least some states.
I'm not convinced you really looked at the links in any sort of detail. It took you 40 minutes to read my post, follow the links and all of their resources and links for their research, and thought through and typed up your post. I'm not buying that you didn't just follow the links for a cursory look so you could have some token word to use as you said it was wrong.
Family is the fundamental unit of society, and attempting to change what the word means does not change the nature of what family is. Do you think grandparents, uncles, cousins, etc are not part of a family? You have your direct family, and you have extended family. I would respond to you that you are being dumb, and intentionally trying to find some lame way to not understand what I am saying. Answer me this, what is the fundamental unit of society if it is not family?
Finding pleasure in things can definitely be a selfish endeavor. You don't think animals find sex pleasurable?
Link 1 - Ok, throw out that stat. I will also throw it out. I apologize for not mentioning I put the stats up more to show that homosexuality does have an affect on society. An argument has been made that homosexuality does not affect society, I say it does.
Link 2 - New understanding of the genetic code? Everything I've read shows there is still quite a debate on that, and that even those that want it to be true have not been able to prove it. You are reaching.
Link 3 - Why don't you just go ahead and find those studies and post them if you are that sure. I posted it because I'm showing some of the different ways homosexuality affects society and individuals that make up society.
Link 4 & 5 - see 1 and 3 again.
Link 6 - Is the link about American mormon vs mormon, or is the link about rates for homosexual individuals vs non homosexual individuals? Stay on topic.
You tell me if there is research that can determine if the rates are high because they are homosexual or if the rates are high for homosexuals because socially more homosexuals are forced to take meth. I'm not even sure it's possible to split the social factors common with homosexuals, from the homosexual individuals themselves. I could be wrong, but I would think not.... or it would be extremely difficult and iffy.