Fence_Sitter Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 While the press give us handpicked examples of long-term homosexual relationships, these are far from the norm. According to Government statistics, same-sex households are very rare (about 0.2% of all households) and the average length of a "closed" homosexual relationship is just 21 months [2]. there's one reason... Quote
Fence_Sitter Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 and another The statistics show that relationships based on cohabitation rather than marriage are weaker. 70% of children born to a married couple will live their entire childhood with both natural parents, compared to only 36% of children born to unmarried couples Quote
RuMR Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Fence_Sitter said: uhm dood... i asked for statistics and this is what you gave me... you asked for statistics in return... i dont know that i care that much to look... but perhaps... i just think There is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents. is quite the telling quote... clearly demonstrates the logic used by these people to perpetuate their stances without really dealing with the issues... and yes i think the ACLU is biased... dont you Flip side of the coin to your statement is that they COULDN'T find any evidence in their studies... that was a two minute google search...you really want the statitistics go to the studies referenced...how many times do i have to say that? Why are you so opposed to it? Is it a personal feeling or do you have something concrete to base it on? Quote
Fence_Sitter Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 COULDN'T find any evidence in their studies... or wouldn't... i am sure the ACLU was trying real hard to find thius type of evidence Quote
RuMR Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Fence_Sitter said: and another The statistics show that relationships based on cohabitation rather than marriage are weaker. 70% of children born to a married couple will live their entire childhood with both natural parents, compared to only 36% of children born to unmarried couples that's only an argument to legalize marriage... Quote
RuMR Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Fence_Sitter said: While the press give us handpicked examples of long-term homosexual relationships, these are far from the norm. According to Government statistics, same-sex households are very rare (about 0.2% of all households) and the average length of a "closed" homosexual relationship is just 21 months [2]. there's one reason... says nothing in there about the effects of a long term family unit does it? My guess is that the 21 month relationships won't be child rearing one... NON point Quote
Fence_Sitter Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 RuMR said: Fence_Sitter said: and another The statistics show that relationships based on cohabitation rather than marriage are weaker. 70% of children born to a married couple will live their entire childhood with both natural parents, compared to only 36% of children born to unmarried couples that's only an argument to legalize marriage... but i thought we were talking about adoption? and the derogatory effects on the children? i satated earlier taht my position was that you dont have the proof you said you do to back up that gay parents are ok... you said you had it... where is it... or are you just blowing smoke? Quote
RuMR Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Fence_Sitter said: COULDN'T find any evidence in their studies... or wouldn't... i am sure the ACLU was trying real hard to find thius type of evidence what about the pediatricians?? Quote
RobBob Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Why do climbers care about this issue? I give it this acid test: How would I feel putting my son into that environment, say, if my wife and I were killed in a car crash? I believe the answer is that he COULD handle it, but I would be heartbroken for him to have to tote that load around from age five to age 30. It would seem almost unfair. My opinion...and everyone is entitled to their own! Quote
RuMR Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 you have no proof to the contrary...i can argue point to point w/ you... I maintain that if two parents, or one single parent, is devoted to the kid that is all that matters...not their orientation... And don't start that crap about relationships...1 in 2 conventional marriages go down and a good portion of those have kids in them... Quote
iain Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 boy some of you guys would flip your lid over the fetal ovarian/womb transplants going on in Spain then! Imagine if your parents were not gay, but were actually never born! or being born in the same womb as your mother! Quote
RuMR Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 RobBob said: Why do climbers care about this issue? I give it this acid test: How would I feel putting my son into that environment, say, if my wife and I were killed in a car crash? I believe the answer is that he COULD handle it, but I would be heartbroken for him to have to tote that load around from age five to age 30. It would seem almost unfair. My opinion...and everyone is entitled to their own! If i thought the people would care for and love my kids, i wouldn't think twice about it. True comment about opinions... Quote
RobBob Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Loving and caring for the kids IS the #1 criterion, but you have to acknowledge that it would be one hell of a load for a child to bear around his/her peers, especially a male. We can debate whether that's good or right or fair until the cows come home, but appears to me to be reality. Quote
allthumbs Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 If my kid's mother and I die, they go to their God Parents...Vickie & Scott (notice that they're a man & woman). Our choice. You screwed up hippies want fags to raise your kids, I could care less, and expect as much from your sorry asses. Quote
RobBob Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 I love trask's post, complete with the "lesbian love" avatar! Quote
Dru Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 when i hear that "a beam in your eye" bible stuff all i can think of is X men death ray beams from your eyes!!! Quote
snoboy Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 RobBob said: Loving and caring for the kids IS the #1 criterion, but you have to acknowledge that it would be one hell of a load for a child to bear around his/her peers, especially a male. We can debate whether that's good or right or fair until the cows come home, but appears to me to be reality. And as long as people have attitudes like this, there will be "a load" for the child to bear... No slight on you RobBob, just a convenient post to make my point with. Quote
aint_this_great Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Fairweather said:Does this mean that I am now free to marry a 12 year old girl? Or boy? Am I now free to marry my sister? First cousin? Actually, as far as I know, it is legal to marry your first cousin in every state. And the 12 year old has nothing to do with this - the point of making it illegal to have sex with 12 year olds has to do with ability to consent, not gender. It is just as illegal for you to have heterosexual sex with a 12 year old, Fairweather, as homosexual sex. Legalizing gay marriage is not a step towards legalizing pedophilia...sorry if that puts a damper on your plans there bud. Getting the government out of marriage has nothing to do with its watchdog function for abuse and caring for children, it has to do with G.W. trying to make the call on who can get married. Marriage started out as a religious thing, and to me it would make sense to go back to that. If the Catholics won't let a gay couple get married, they should be able to get their friend who has a certificate from the Universal Life church to marry them. The civil courts can handle divorce suits based on each couple's individual marriage contract. And when we get our national health care system, Cavey won't have to worry about supporting the dependents of his gay coworkers against his moral convictions. That will also require getting rid of Bush, of course. Quote
RobBob Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 no slight taken, snoboy. Where is my thinking off-base? I don't think most gay males would wish the emotional load that they had to deal with through their adolescence on anybody else. Gay couples can't conceive kids together. Isn't their desire to adopt kids more a statement about demanding to be accepted than it is about being thoughtful toward a potential adoptee kid? Isn't parenting about doing the right thing for the child in your house, and not about righting society's wrongs? Quote
snoboy Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 aint_this_great said:Actually, as far as I know, it is legal to marry your first cousin in every state. "Discover" magazine, August 2003, p.62 In 24 states such marriages are illegal. In 19 states, first cousins are permitted to wed. Seven states allow first-cousin marriage but with conditions. Maine, for instance requires genetice counselling; some staes... trask, PM me and I'll make up a list of where it is OK, just for you. hint: mostly southern and eastern states, not WA or OR. Quote
Formaldehead Posted July 31, 2003 Author Posted July 31, 2003 I wonder what the Shitty Little Shrub Fucking Fucker Fuckstain Fake President Jesus Freak Dictating Warmonger Loser Twat Douchebag would think of watching two turd hurlers doing a little feltching after they spent a night eating tamales. I think this whole issue hits a little too close to home for him, after his partyboy days at the Frat, doing the Elephant Walk with his brothers, and naked sit-ups on the wet concrete in the basement. Or maybe it was the time James Baker snuck into his room after Babs had him all tucked in. "Mommy? There's blood in my B.M." Quote
RobBob Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 necro, I'd say that judging by your anger, you're a little too close to it yerself Quote
aint_this_great Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 It's surprising the things that go on in Washington (no first cousin marriage, defense of marriage act) considering the atmosphere. Perhaps it's trask and all his eastern Washington voter friends. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.