Are Children A Part Of The Gay Marriage Conversation?

[beagle9]

I'd say No they don't matter, because it's all about the agenda...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Elektra, we all accept your right to have an opinion.

But opinion is not factual evidence.

You all have offered nothing that adults, homo and hetero, are often dangerous to children.

That is no reason to end arriage for adults.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I'd say No they don't matter, because it's all about the agenda...

The agenda is that far right evangelical morality dominates America: no, not going to continue.

 

[ShackledNation]

^^
Here we go again.

A couple does not have to raise children, have the intent of raising children, or even be capable having children to obtain a marriage license.

That's all true, but the welfare of children is the only reason the marriage contract exists. If it wasn't for the fact of reproduction, why bother with marriage at all?

Obviously the welfare of children is not the only reason the contract exists, since, as I said, a couple does not have to raise children, have the intent to do so, or even be capable of having children in order to obtain a marriage license.

Obviously wrong. the fact that not everyone has children proves nothing. Not everyone who gets a driver's license ever uses it to drive. Why something is created and how people use it are two separate things. Anyone with half a brain could understand that.

And just as the welfare of children is not the only reason the marriage license exists, driving is not the only reason the driver's license exists. It is also used as a universal form of identification in the United States.

The fact that the marriage license does not require children to be involved in the marriage whatsoever proves irrefutably that the welfare of children is not the only reason it exists. If you can't follow that logic, then there is nothing more anyone can do to help you.

Those "studies" are all bogus. They're little more than propaganda.

No, they are valid. Calling studies that disprove your bias bogus is typical of close-minded individuals.

They are bogus. They all have serious methodological flaws. They're propaganda.

Do they? Here is one study.
Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers research shows - The Washington Post

Please point out the serious methodological flaws, if you can that is.

 

[ShackledNation]

The heterosexual couples in your neighborhood that are telling everybody they are having Anal Sex are broken-headed.

And yet....people here seem to have the expectation that gay couples tell their kids about what kind of sex they are having.........

Gays don't need to talk to kids about what type of graphic sex they're having. They just take them to a pride parade and let it do the talking for them. Just ask Seawytch.

Here's your gay sex-ed, marching down main street, with nice kiddy-rainbow colors and streamers flying everywhere..soberly...as a matter of pride...hoping kiddies will be looking on...

Here's two dudes showing the kids how it's done:

Here's a guy and the crowd showing exactly what position the "bottom" takes during anal sex. The lesbians in the background are helping out by spelling it out for the kids with their signs.

And here's a man being quite helpful and honest showing kids about the basic mental stability of gay people and what happens when the anus is used too much as an artificial vagina. Anal leakage starts to happen. Or maye that's real from taking a pounding just before the parade?

Don't kid yourselves. Graphic gay sex education for kids and adults alike is in every town going on floats down main street. They are screaming for involuntary committment to a psyche ward. And here we are as a society, still slavish to being politically-correct to such a degree that we would place children in these homes before we frankly confronted what was going on right in front of our eyes.

Jake, do you approve of these actions as a matter of sober "pride" in public or not. And if not, how can we trust these people with orphaned children behind closed doors?

Your pictures are irrelevant. Here's a picture of a straight woman.

By your own reasoning, clearly, she is disgusting and perverse. She sings her music to children across the United States! Corrupting them! She is a heterosexual. Therefore, heterosexuals should not be allowed to marry. Because Miley Cyrus.

This one is even worse!

This heterosexual male is encouraging young boys to have anal sex with women! And the woman likes it! He isn't even wearing a shirt! Can we seriously allow heterosexual people to raise children and get married???

I can just as easily post pictures of straight people doing the same things you are harping on people at pride for doing. Yet they don't have any effect on whether or not straight people should be allowed to marry or adopt children. Do you see how idiotic your argument is yet?

It's all sinfulness or sin that is being ramped up all over the place, so how about one topic at a time or how about staying on topic ?

It's called a double standard. The "sinfulness" of the straight people I pictured is never used as a reason to deny all heterosexual couples the right to a marriage license and adoption. Yet when gay people show the same behavior, it is used to deny all gay couples the right to a marriage license and adoption. Pointing out hypocritical double standards is quite on topic.

 

[Silhouette]

And yet....people here seem to have the expectation that gay couples tell their kids about what kind of sex they are having.........

Gays don't need to talk to kids about what type of graphic sex they're having. They just take them to a pride parade and let it do the talking for them. Just ask Seawytch.

Here's your gay sex-ed, marching down main street, with nice kiddy-rainbow colors and streamers flying everywhere..soberly...as a matter of pride...hoping kiddies will be looking on...

Here's two dudes showing the kids how it's done:

Here's a guy and the crowd showing exactly what position the "bottom" takes during anal sex. The lesbians in the background are helping out by spelling it out for the kids with their signs.

And here's a man being quite helpful and honest showing kids about the basic mental stability of gay people and what happens when the anus is used too much as an artificial vagina. Anal leakage starts to happen. Or maye that's real from taking a pounding just before the parade?

Don't kid yourselves. Graphic gay sex education for kids and adults alike is in every town going on floats down main street. They are screaming for involuntary committment to a psyche ward. And here we are as a society, still slavish to being politically-correct to such a degree that we would place children in these homes before we frankly confronted what was going on right in front of our eyes.

Jake, do you approve of these actions as a matter of sober "pride" in public or not. And if not, how can we trust these people with orphaned children behind closed doors?

Your pictures are irrelevant. Here's a picture of a straight woman.

By your own reasoning, clearly, she is disgusting and perverse. She sings her music to children across the United States! Corrupting them! She is a heterosexual. Therefore, heterosexuals should not be allowed to marry. Because Miley Cyrus.

This one is even worse!

This heterosexual male is encouraging young boys to have anal sex with women! And the woman likes it! He isn't even wearing a shirt! Can we seriously allow heterosexual people to raise children and get married???

I can just as easily post pictures of straight people doing the same things you are harping on people at pride for doing. Yet they don't have any effect on whether or not straight people should be allowed to marry or adopt children. Do you see how idiotic your argument is yet?

It's all sinfulness or sin that is being ramped up all over the place, so how about one topic at a time or how about staying on topic ?

It's called a double standard. The "sinfulness" of the straight people I pictured is never used as a reason to deny all heterosexual couples the right to a marriage license and adoption. Yet when gay people show the same behavior, it is used to deny all gay couples the right to a marriage license and adoption. Pointing out hypocritical double standards is quite on topic.

Once again you show a venue which is a party for young adults at a destination. I doubt that any of these people hope that young children will be looking on their antics [which they will later regret as I'm sure the gal in that last photo does to this day...you're using here for example].

In stark contrast of venues, gay pride parades are held on public thoroughfares, in all hopes that kids of all ages will attend and watch the goings-on. And these parades aren't drunken bacchanals. They are sober displays to children of what the participants are PROUD to show them. They wake up the next day and the next and the next being proud of what they did in front of kids. Hence the name of the parades "pride".

The venue and the context make all the difference in the world as it happens. If they are proud of what they do in public in front of little kids, then what will they be even more proud of behind closed doors. The stop-valve and boundaries are missing in this subculture when it comes to exposure of lewd sex acts in front of kids. They don't even have the slightest perspective of shame, to want to display these things to kids. It's like an idea they're used to....children involved in lewd sex acts. It's like they grew up being used to that idea.

[See the study below]

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

 

[ShackledNation]

Gays don't need to talk to kids about what type of graphic sex they're having. They just take them to a pride parade and let it do the talking for them. Just ask Seawytch.

Here's your gay sex-ed, marching down main street, with nice kiddy-rainbow colors and streamers flying everywhere..soberly...as a matter of pride...hoping kiddies will be looking on...

Here's two dudes showing the kids how it's done:

Here's a guy and the crowd showing exactly what position the "bottom" takes during anal sex. The lesbians in the background are helping out by spelling it out for the kids with their signs.

And here's a man being quite helpful and honest showing kids about the basic mental stability of gay people and what happens when the anus is used too much as an artificial vagina. Anal leakage starts to happen. Or maye that's real from taking a pounding just before the parade?

Don't kid yourselves. Graphic gay sex education for kids and adults alike is in every town going on floats down main street. They are screaming for involuntary committment to a psyche ward. And here we are as a society, still slavish to being politically-correct to such a degree that we would place children in these homes before we frankly confronted what was going on right in front of our eyes.

Jake, do you approve of these actions as a matter of sober "pride" in public or not. And if not, how can we trust these people with orphaned children behind closed doors?

Your pictures are irrelevant. Here's a picture of a straight woman.

By your own reasoning, clearly, she is disgusting and perverse. She sings her music to children across the United States! Corrupting them! She is a heterosexual. Therefore, heterosexuals should not be allowed to marry. Because Miley Cyrus.

This one is even worse!

This heterosexual male is encouraging young boys to have anal sex with women! And the woman likes it! He isn't even wearing a shirt! Can we seriously allow heterosexual people to raise children and get married???

I can just as easily post pictures of straight people doing the same things you are harping on people at pride for doing. Yet they don't have any effect on whether or not straight people should be allowed to marry or adopt children. Do you see how idiotic your argument is yet?

It's all sinfulness or sin that is being ramped up all over the place, so how about one topic at a time or how about staying on topic ?

It's called a double standard. The "sinfulness" of the straight people I pictured is never used as a reason to deny all heterosexual couples the right to a marriage license and adoption. Yet when gay people show the same behavior, it is used to deny all gay couples the right to a marriage license and adoption. Pointing out hypocritical double standards is quite on topic.

Once again you show a venue which is a party for young adults at a destination. I doubt that any of these people hope that young children will be looking on their antics [which they will later regret as I'm sure the gal in that last photo does to this day...you're using here for example].

In stark contrast of venues, gay pride parades are held on public thoroughfares, in all hopes that kids of all ages will attend and watch the goings-on. And these parades aren't drunken bacchanals. They are sober displays to children of what the participants are PROUD to show them. They wake up the next day and the next and the next being proud of what they did in front of kids. Hence the name of the parades "pride".

The venue and the context make all the difference in the world as it happens. If they are proud of what they do in public in front of little kids, then what will they be even more proud of behind closed doors. The stop-valve and boundaries are missing in this subculture when it comes to exposure of lewd sex acts in front of kids. They don't even have the slightest perspective of shame, to want to display these things to kids. It's like an idea they're used to....children involved in lewd sex acts. It's like they grew up being used to that idea.

[See the study below]

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

More fabricated nonsense. Perhaps you missed my post about Martigras parades? Particularly New Orleans? It is held on a public thoroughfare, women flash their breasts, and there are plenty examples of scantily clad men and women.

Your pathetic double standard is showing again.

 

[bendog]

Sil, since you guys are losing so badly here in the states, some of you are taking it abroad.

America s gay rights battle goes global - Yahoo News

 

[ShackledNation]

In case you are forgetting, Sil.

A mardigras parade

Clearly these people are trying to attract children to a sinful heterosexual lifestyle of premarital sex and teenage pregnancy. How dare you allow heterosexuals to get married and adopt children.

 

[Silhouette]

In case you are forgetting, Sil.

A mardigras parade

Clearly these people are trying to attract children to a sinful heterosexual lifestyle of premarital sex and teenage pregnancy. How dare you allow heterosexuals to get married and adopt children.

Nope, that's not what they're doing. They're blowing off steam in a drunken bachhanal. They are not waking up that day thinking "gee I hope a bunch of little kids see me this way" or the next "gee I'm so proud of having shown my tits when I was drunk last night on the party street".

Gay pride parades entice and want little kids to be there. Bacchanals don't. They are adult venues and everybody knows it. Anyone who brings little kids there should be fined by police. Pride parades encourage kids of all ages to attend.

Again, venue difference.

 

[ShackledNation]

In case you are forgetting, Sil.

A mardigras parade

Clearly these people are trying to attract children to a sinful heterosexual lifestyle of premarital sex and teenage pregnancy. How dare you allow heterosexuals to get married and adopt children.

Nope, that's not what they're doing. They're blowing off steam in a drunken bachhanal. They are not waking up that day thinking "gee I hope a bunch of little kids see me this way"

Nobody in a pride parade wakes up thinking that either. You are the only person who has ever brought up thinking that. Is that what you are thinking about? I suggest you get help.

 

[elektra]

Yep, even when specifically debating an issue within Homosexuality, Man and Man adopting 9 year old boys, the Activist dictates the discussion must only be about Heterosexuals.

There will be no, First Amendment Rights, Heterosexuals are not allowed Free Speech. You will be talked down to, you will be dictated to, you will be demeaned, you will be called foul nasty names, you will be intimidated.

Yes, the Activist have the power.

Heterosexual's is the issue in this discussion, if a Heterosexual has ever committed a crime then Homosexual Men have the Right to adopt a Heterosexual's child, and teach him the way Daddy and Daddy live.

That is exactly what ShackledBrain/Nation is stating.

 

[ShackledNation]

I am stating a gay guy in a speedo at a pride parade is not a reason to prohibit gay couples from getting married and adopting children, just as a straight woman flashing her breasts at a Martigras parade is not a reason to prohibit straight couples from getting married and adopting children.

Enjoy your double-standard. Clinging to it is why your side keeps losing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sil's proposed double standard has been robustly rebuked legally, philosophically, and morally.

And will continue to be so.

 

[bripat9643]

^^
Here we go again.

A couple does not have to raise children, have the intent of raising children, or even be capable having children to obtain a marriage license.

That's all true, but the welfare of children is the only reason the marriage contract exists. If it wasn't for the fact of reproduction, why bother with marriage at all?

Obviously the welfare of children is not the only reason the contract exists, since, as I said, a couple does not have to raise children, have the intent to do so, or even be capable of having children in order to obtain a marriage license.

Obviously wrong. the fact that not everyone has children proves nothing. Not everyone who gets a driver's license ever uses it to drive. Why something is created and how people use it are two separate things. Anyone with half a brain could understand that.

And just as the welfare of children is not the only reason the marriage license exists, driving is not the only reason the driver's license exists. It is also used as a universal form of identification in the United States.

Wrong, actually. The welfare of children is the only reason the marriage license exists. Originally, driving was the only reason driver's licenses were created. Politicians have since found other uses for them, but that's immaterial. That's all you proved.

The fact that the marriage license does not require children to be involved in the marriage whatsoever proves irrefutably that the welfare of children is not the only reason it exists. If you can't follow that logic, then there is nothing more anyone can do to help you.

It proves nothing of the sort. I know you want to believe that, because you have no other counter arguments, but it's just plain false and idiotic. It's an invalid syllogism. The conclusion doesn't follow from the premise.

Those "studies" are all bogus. They're little more than propaganda.

No, they are valid. Calling studies that disprove your bias bogus is typical of close-minded individuals.

They are bogus. They all have serious methodological flaws. They're propaganda.

Do they? Here is one study.
Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers research shows - The Washington Post

Please point out the serious methodological flaws, if you can that is.

Kaz has already done that.

 

[bripat9643]

Sil's proposed double standard has been robustly rebuked legally, philosophically, and morally.

And will continue to be so.

The fact that you whined about it proves nothing

 

[elektra]

I am stating a gay guy in a speedo at a pride parade is not a reason to prohibit gay couples from getting married and adopting children, just as a straight woman flashing her breasts at a Martigras parade is not a reason to prohibit straight couples from getting married and adopting children.

Enjoy your double-standard. Clinging to it is why your side keeps losing.

No double standard, I just do not agree with you ShackledNation, I do not think 9 year old boys adopted boys should be taken to Gay Pride parades with Daddy and Daddy/Mommy.

It is not about men in speedos, its about men wearing thongs and jock straps in public while simulating sex as well as participating in sex. Yes some people do not see that as a sign, that these men are doing things 99% of men are not willing to do, and at that a majority of Homosexuals do not parade in public, strictly as a sexual thrill.

Yes, sex, so many bad aspects, from pain to blood, scat, you name it. How much do Children need to be exposed to, at a young age, before they develop.

Is it proper to allow two men to adopt 9 year old boys, no matter what type of sex they practice and how freely, how openly they practice.

What do we force upon children, at that other people's children, people who may have died, their children are now being forced into a homosexual "family".

This is not a debate about should something happen, like men adopting boys.

It has already happened, Homosexual Men are adopting 9 year old boys.

Man Man relationships, where the Daddy is in his 60's and Daddy's boy Husband is in his 20's. They have adopted a boy that is like 5 years old. I will have to link to the story.

This is what ShackledNation believes is right.

Such an age difference, the old guy can die, or in this case he went to Jail for having Child Porn. Now what happens to the child.

and I know, shacklednation believes this is okay because we are playing, "cards", google is his, "deck". Heterosexual crime is the "wild card".

sick

 

[mudwhistle]

I believe that, as usual, the poll is skewed and inaccurate.

People have kids. Some people have spouses and some do not. Some people are good parents, some are not.

Yes, of course kids are and should be part of the conversation.

Only as a political tool.

 

[elektra]

So, now that all this is settled, Children are not part of the conversation,

Still, I wonder, how will a child react, knowing one daddy is the top, the other is the bottom, how will that child react if his biological father is the bottom, or how will the child react if he is adopted into this situation.

Children are curious things, we discover stuff as children, we figure things out.

But just for this conversation we will pretend all heterosexuals are bad and sex in a homosexual "family" is the best kept secret in the world, sound proof walls and all.

 

[ShackledNation]

^^
Here we go again.

A couple does not have to raise children, have the intent of raising children, or even be capable having children to obtain a marriage license.

That's all true, but the welfare of children is the only reason the marriage contract exists. If it wasn't for the fact of reproduction, why bother with marriage at all?

Obviously the welfare of children is not the only reason the contract exists, since, as I said, a couple does not have to raise children, have the intent to do so, or even be capable of having children in order to obtain a marriage license.

Obviously wrong. the fact that not everyone has children proves nothing. Not everyone who gets a driver's license ever uses it to drive. Why something is created and how people use it are two separate things. Anyone with half a brain could understand that.

And just as the welfare of children is not the only reason the marriage license exists, driving is not the only reason the driver's license exists. It is also used as a universal form of identification in the United States.

Wrong, actually. The welfare of children is the only reason the marriage license exists. Originally, driving was the only reason driver's licenses were created. Politicians have since found other uses for them, but that's immaterial. That's all you proved.

If the welfare of children is the only reason the marriage license exists, then people who don't have children or can't have children would not be granted marriage licenses. But they are. Sorry, but that fact alone debunks your nonsensical claim. Restating it over and over doesn't change that.

Why are infertile couples allowed to get married if the only reason the marriage license exists is for the welfare of children?

The fact that the marriage license does not require children to be involved in the marriage whatsoever proves irrefutably that the welfare of children is not the only reason it exists. If you can't follow that logic, then there is nothing more anyone can do to help you.

It proves nothing of the sort. I know you want to believe that, because you have no other counter arguments, but it's just plain false and idiotic. It's an invalid syllogism. The conclusion doesn't follow from the premise.

No it isn't. If the only reason for marriage licenses are for the welfare of children, couples would be required to have children to get a marriage license. Otherwise, it cannot be reasonably argued that marriage licenses are only for the welfare of children. Calling something invalid doesn't make it so, and if you can't follow that basic logic you have larger issues to deal with.

Those "studies" are all bogus. They're little more than propaganda.

No, they are valid. Calling studies that disprove your bias bogus is typical of close-minded individuals.

They are bogus. They all have serious methodological flaws. They're propaganda.

Do they? Here is one study.
Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers research shows - The Washington Post

Please point out the serious methodological flaws, if you can that is.

Kaz has already done that.

No he hasn't. Pathetic attempt at a dodge.