Are Children A Part Of The Gay Marriage Conversation?

To what degree are children a part of the gay-marriage conversation?

  • They are THE concern of marriage. Marriage was mainly created for their benefit after all.

    Votes: 7 63.6%
  • Part of the conversation for sure. But in the end the adult civil rights trump them.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Somewhat part of the conversation, but only a secondary role.

    Votes: 2 18.2%
  • Marriage is for and about adults. Kids will accept what they have to.

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 1 9.1%

  • Total voters
    11
Rik is quite a clever clogs, as my mother would use to say about some of the John Birchers that attended our services.
 
Rik is quite a clever clogs, as my mother would use to say about some of the John Birchers that attended our services.

I've moved in the opposite direction of society. Started out supporting homosexual marriage and adoption and the more flawed research I read the more I suspected that I was being manipulated.
 
St. Patrick's Day occurs every March 17th. That doesn't mean that the Irish are launching a thought control agenda.

But once upon a time, they might have been. Back when there were regularly signs that said, "Irish need not apply."

Do you know that once upon a time, children were not allowed to use their dominant left hand when learning to write? Something changed that.

Sounds like an agenda to me.

It wasn't an agenda. It was an issue of how a leftie dealt with his parents. Homosexuals can tailor their relationship with their own parents as they best see fit, same too with their friends. Forcing me to comply, often under penalty of law, makes me their enemy. If left-handers forced me to comply with their agenda, and used law-fare to do so, they'd be my enemy too,.
Right handed people used to make left-handed people comply or be punished....under shady religious grounds too.

But let me add to your analogy. Are right-handed people trying to keep left-handed people from legally marrying? No? What do you think left-handed people would do, if the right-handed majority was telling them that they were perverted and they should not be allowed legal marriage? Do you think left-handed people would just be quiet...or would they have an "agenda" too?

I missed this last paragraph somehow.

No one has ever kept homosexuals from marrying. Rock Hudson was married. Dr. Sally Ride was married. Meridth Baxter-Birney was married.
How many times does this failed argument have to refuted? interracial marriage bans prohibited a black person from marrying a white person. But nobody was kept from marrying, because everybody could still marry someone of their same race, right?

The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. Marriage is a union between people of the opposite sex. No amount of propaganda or verbal legerdemain can change that.
Why would you want to change marriage being a union between people of the opposite sex? What are you some kind of hetero hater? But yeah happy marriage... I suppose for jerks that's an oxymoron.
How does expanding marriage rights make me a hetero hater? Am I stopping heterosexual couples from getting married by allowing gay couples to get married? What a stupid argument.
HUH? my post was to bripat, not you and he didn't say expand marriage rights he said "Marriage is a union between people of the opposite sex. No amount of propaganda or verbal legerdemain can change that." Look again. For some reason he wanted to change that... that being the last sentence... which was marriage being a union between people of the opposite sex. Are you familiar with english?
 
St. Patrick's Day occurs every March 17th. That doesn't mean that the Irish are launching a thought control agenda.

But once upon a time, they might have been. Back when there were regularly signs that said, "Irish need not apply."

Do you know that once upon a time, children were not allowed to use their dominant left hand when learning to write? Something changed that.

Sounds like an agenda to me.

It wasn't an agenda. It was an issue of how a leftie dealt with his parents. Homosexuals can tailor their relationship with their own parents as they best see fit, same too with their friends. Forcing me to comply, often under penalty of law, makes me their enemy. If left-handers forced me to comply with their agenda, and used law-fare to do so, they'd be my enemy too,.
Right handed people used to make left-handed people comply or be punished....under shady religious grounds too.

But let me add to your analogy. Are right-handed people trying to keep left-handed people from legally marrying? No? What do you think left-handed people would do, if the right-handed majority was telling them that they were perverted and they should not be allowed legal marriage? Do you think left-handed people would just be quiet...or would they have an "agenda" too?

I missed this last paragraph somehow.

No one has ever kept homosexuals from marrying. Rock Hudson was married. Dr. Sally Ride was married. Meridth Baxter-Birney was married.
How many times does this failed argument have to refuted? interracial marriage bans prohibited a black person from marrying a white person. But nobody was kept from marrying, because everybody could still marry someone of their same race, right?

The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. Marriage is a union between people of the opposite sex. No amount of propaganda or verbal legerdemain can change that.
Why would you want to change marriage being a union between people of the opposite sex? What are you some kind of hetero hater? But yeah happy marriage... I suppose for jerks that's an oxymoron.
How does expanding marriage rights make me a hetero hater? Am I stopping heterosexual couples from getting married by allowing gay couples to get married? What a stupid argument.
HUH? my post was to bripat, not you and he didn't say expand marriage rights he said "Marriage is a union between people of the opposite sex. No amount of propaganda or verbal legerdemain can change that." Look again. For some reason he wanted to change that... that being the last sentence... which was marriage being a union between people of the opposite sex. Are you familiar with english?
My mistake. The quote notification on the new layout notifies you even if your post was not directly being quoted, so in a rush I assumed you were responding to me and making the argument that changing marriage to include gay-couples made me a hetero-hater. Obviously that was not the case, sorry.
 
We should call Oranges, Lemons.

Lemons sell for more and everything has the same rights.

I should not suffer the price of oranges when I sell them, the are equal to lemons.

Why would anyone care, I make more money for Oranges, even though you thought you bought Lemons.

They are both citrus so it's only equal to call oranges, lemons.
 
We should call Oranges, Lemons.

Lemons sell for more and everything has the same rights.

I should not suffer the price of oranges when I sell them, the are equal to lemons.

Why would anyone care, I make more money for Oranges, even though you thought you bought Lemons.

They are both citrus so it's only equal to call oranges, lemons.
Yeah cause lemons and oranges can't both be fruits there's only room on this lemon phobic planet for orange fruit.
 
We should call Oranges, Lemons.

Lemons sell for more and everything has the same rights.

I should not suffer the price of oranges when I sell them, the are equal to lemons.

Why would anyone care, I make more money for Oranges, even though you thought you bought Lemons.

They are both citrus so it's only equal to call oranges, lemons.
Yeah cause lemons and oranges can't both be fruits there's only room on this lemon phobic planet for orange fruit.
His point was that you cannot call people who do gay sex "father/mother" "husband/wife". For they are not and will never be. States have a right to incentivized father/mother husband/wife. And this right is theirs for the sake of children's welfare. Children have a right to have father/mother be incentivized and the only legal couple who may raise them. Children's rights trump any alleged "gay rights" when it comes to marriage.
 
We should call Oranges, Lemons.

Lemons sell for more and everything has the same rights.

I should not suffer the price of oranges when I sell them, the are equal to lemons.

Why would anyone care, I make more money for Oranges, even though you thought you bought Lemons.

They are both citrus so it's only equal to call oranges, lemons.
Yeah cause lemons and oranges can't both be fruits there's only room on this lemon phobic planet for orange fruit.
His point was that you cannot call people who do gay sex "father/mother" "husband/wife". For they are not and will never be. States have a right to incentivized father/mother husband/wife. And this right is theirs for the sake of children's welfare. Children have a right to have father/mother be incentivized and the only legal couple who may raise them. Children's rights trump any alleged "gay rights" when it comes to marriage.
Parents can be male or female, adoptive or genetic. Marriage is not a requirement for being a parent.

Are you mentally handicapped?
 
We should call Oranges, Lemons.

Lemons sell for more and everything has the same rights.

I should not suffer the price of oranges when I sell them, the are equal to lemons.

Why would anyone care, I make more money for Oranges, even though you thought you bought Lemons.

They are both citrus so it's only equal to call oranges, lemons.
Yeah cause lemons and oranges can't both be fruits there's only room on this lemon phobic planet for orange fruit.
His point was that you cannot call people who do gay sex "father/mother" "husband/wife". For they are not and will never be. States have a right to incentivized father/mother husband/wife. And this right is theirs for the sake of children's welfare. Children have a right to have father/mother be incentivized and the only legal couple who may raise them. Children's rights trump any alleged "gay rights" when it comes to marriage.
there is no law stating a child must have a Father and a mother. You are making things up
 
We should call Oranges, Lemons.

Lemons sell for more and everything has the same rights.

I should not suffer the price of oranges when I sell them, the are equal to lemons.

Why would anyone care, I make more money for Oranges, even though you thought you bought Lemons.

They are both citrus so it's only equal to call oranges, lemons.
Yeah cause lemons and oranges can't both be fruits there's only room on this lemon phobic planet for orange fruit.
His point was that you cannot call people who do gay sex "father/mother" "husband/wife". For they are not and will never be. States have a right to incentivized father/mother husband/wife. And this right is theirs for the sake of children's welfare. Children have a right to have father/mother be incentivized and the only legal couple who may raise them. Children's rights trump any alleged "gay rights" when it comes to marriage.

(1) States have an oblifation to serve their citizens and follow the laws of the land.

(2) Terms can be and will be changed if enough people agree and adopt the usage, which seems to be happening in the USA

(3) Children always have the right to be loved and cared for by parents with no obligation, Sil, to have you feel about these matters.
 

Forum List

Back
Top