Are Children A Part Of The Gay Marriage Conversation?

[RKMBrown]

The origins of which, civil or religious? How are the origins relevant to the discussion?

The discussion is about why marriage exists. That goes right to the subject of origins.

except marriage doesn't exist for procreation.

That's the only reason marriage exists.

that's absurd and made up by the voices in your head

No, logic and historical facts tell me that. To believe that reproduction has nothing to do with marriage is what requires true insanity.

Do you understand the difference between association and requirement?

 

[Silhouette]

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Running out the page eh? So folks won't see this?:

I don't believe this topic belongs in our political discourse. I am not a fag but at the same time if I were I would have the opinion that it's none of the government's business.

Good luck to the two dudes trying to get each other pregnant. I'm fine with them thinking that anal homosexual sex is the way to go, but once they figure out that it's not going to work, then they're going to have to go outside of their "marriage" in order to get a child and then it does becomes society's business.

Agreed. Grampa Murked U, this isn't a discussion about what two dudes do behind closed doors. Marriage is a society's business precisely because it is the one institution that stands to affect all children the most of any of our institutions...natural born to couples and orphans. It is particularly the orphans case we are focusing on here. A society can be judged on how it treats its women and orphans.
Perhaps pictures can explain what I cannot get through to some people here...
Here's a group of kids who were not just brought to a gay pride parade, they participated in it!

Here's what went on:

CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to “Gay Pride” Parade
...Hartline says last year the not-for-profit San Diego Pride organization was under investigation for employing numerous pedophiles as volunteers and staff during its yearly parade and festival. He believes these pro-homosexual events are generally pornographic and that they are frequented by militant sodomites.
This is evidenced, the Christian activist says, “by the numerous triple-X porn companies that have vendors [at the San Diego Pride events], the distribution of condoms and sexual lubricants, and also just the really perverted sex classes that go on to teach people about S&M sex.”
For example, Hartline recalls, the San Diego Pride organizers had a tent exhibit this year called ‘the Leather Room.’ In this tent, he says, “they actually were demonstrating piercings and other really grotesque types of sado-masochism.”
Hartline says he feels the teachers with the San Diego Cooperative Charter School exhibited “gross disregard for the safety of children” when they brought students to the city’s 2006 “gay pride” parade. The charter school is a K-8 institution in the San Diego Unified School District, and he believes the teachers had no business bringing young children into such a depraved and pornographic environment. CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to 8220 Gay Pride 8221 Parade Family Policy Network

In addition to the leather S&M booth and tons of other sexually explicit displays on the sidelines, here are examples of what those kids were almost certainly exposed to, or worse, "as a matter of LGBT pride"...

Clearly this gay marriage debate isn't about what two dudes do in their bedroom behind closed doors... This is a debate about what is good for society's children. We are all their caretakers and watchers. All manners of horrors and abuse can and do occur to our nation's most vulnerable. When we are given a metric ton of red flags about a given subculture with respect to what they're "proud" of doing in front of kids on main street in a parade, we are all mandated to act in anticipation of what certainly will be waiting for them behind closed doors...
Let gays do whatever they want on their own time. Just don't let it involve children....ever...in any capacity.....

 

[mdk]

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Running out the page eh? So folks won't see this?:

I don't believe this topic belongs in our political discourse. I am not a fag but at the same time if I were I would have the opinion that it's none of the government's business.

Good luck to the two dudes trying to get each other pregnant. I'm fine with them thinking that anal homosexual sex is the way to go, but once they figure out that it's not going to work, then they're going to have to go outside of their "marriage" in order to get a child and then it does becomes society's business.

Agreed. Grampa Murked U, this isn't a discussion about what two dudes do behind closed doors. Marriage is a society's business precisely because it is the one institution that stands to affect all children the most of any of our institutions...natural born to couples and orphans. It is particularly the orphans case we are focusing on here. A society can be judged on how it treats its women and orphans.
Perhaps pictures can explain what I cannot get through to some people here...
Here's a group of kids who were not just brought to a gay pride parade, they participated in it!

Here's what went on:

CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to “Gay Pride” Parade
...Hartline says last year the not-for-profit San Diego Pride organization was under investigation for employing numerous pedophiles as volunteers and staff during its yearly parade and festival. He believes these pro-homosexual events are generally pornographic and that they are frequented by militant sodomites.
This is evidenced, the Christian activist says, “by the numerous triple-X porn companies that have vendors [at the San Diego Pride events], the distribution of condoms and sexual lubricants, and also just the really perverted sex classes that go on to teach people about S&M sex.”
For example, Hartline recalls, the San Diego Pride organizers had a tent exhibit this year called ‘the Leather Room.’ In this tent, he says, “they actually were demonstrating piercings and other really grotesque types of sado-masochism.”
Hartline says he feels the teachers with the San Diego Cooperative Charter School exhibited “gross disregard for the safety of children” when they brought students to the city’s 2006 “gay pride” parade. The charter school is a K-8 institution in the San Diego Unified School District, and he believes the teachers had no business bringing young children into such a depraved and pornographic environment. CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to 8220 Gay Pride 8221 Parade Family Policy Network

In addition to the leather S&M booth and tons of other sexually explicit displays on the sidelines, here are examples of what those kids were almost certainly exposed to, or worse, "as a matter of LGBT pride"...

Clearly this gay marriage debate isn't about what two dudes do in their bedroom behind closed doors... This is a debate about what is good for society's children. We are all their caretakers and watchers. All manners of horrors and abuse can and do occur to our nation's most vulnerable. When we are given a metric ton of red flags about a given subculture with respect to what they're "proud" of doing in front of kids on main street in a parade, we are all mandated to act in anticipation of what certainly will be waiting for them behind closed doors...
Let gays do whatever they want on their own time. Just don't let it involve children....ever...in any capacity.....

I've already addressed this exact post in a previous thread. You abandoned our conversation because you couldn't answer the questions I presented you.

 

[RKMBrown]

except marriage doesn't exist for procreation.

That's the only reason marriage exists.

Really? Then show us the state laws...any state law...on marriage that requires procreation.

The absence of such laws doesn't disprove my contention. Are their any state laws that require you to use your driver's license to drive?

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

Apparently you did not read my answer. I said.. "that would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it."

 

[bripat9643]

No it wouldn't.

 

[Silhouette]

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Running out the page eh? So folks won't see this?:

I don't believe this topic belongs in our political discourse. I am not a fag but at the same time if I were I would have the opinion that it's none of the government's business.

Good luck to the two dudes trying to get each other pregnant. I'm fine with them thinking that anal homosexual sex is the way to go, but once they figure out that it's not going to work, then they're going to have to go outside of their "marriage" in order to get a child and then it does becomes society's business.

Agreed. Grampa Murked U, this isn't a discussion about what two dudes do behind closed doors. Marriage is a society's business precisely because it is the one institution that stands to affect all children the most of any of our institutions...natural born to couples and orphans. It is particularly the orphans case we are focusing on here. A society can be judged on how it treats its women and orphans.
Perhaps pictures can explain what I cannot get through to some people here...
Here's a group of kids who were not just brought to a gay pride parade, they participated in it!

Here's what went on:

CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to “Gay Pride” Parade
...Hartline says last year the not-for-profit San Diego Pride organization was under investigation for employing numerous pedophiles as volunteers and staff during its yearly parade and festival. He believes these pro-homosexual events are generally pornographic and that they are frequented by militant sodomites.
This is evidenced, the Christian activist says, “by the numerous triple-X porn companies that have vendors [at the San Diego Pride events], the distribution of condoms and sexual lubricants, and also just the really perverted sex classes that go on to teach people about S&M sex.”
For example, Hartline recalls, the San Diego Pride organizers had a tent exhibit this year called ‘the Leather Room.’ In this tent, he says, “they actually were demonstrating piercings and other really grotesque types of sado-masochism.”
Hartline says he feels the teachers with the San Diego Cooperative Charter School exhibited “gross disregard for the safety of children” when they brought students to the city’s 2006 “gay pride” parade. The charter school is a K-8 institution in the San Diego Unified School District, and he believes the teachers had no business bringing young children into such a depraved and pornographic environment. CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to 8220 Gay Pride 8221 Parade Family Policy Network

In addition to the leather S&M booth and tons of other sexually explicit displays on the sidelines, here are examples of what those kids were almost certainly exposed to, or worse, "as a matter of LGBT pride"...

Clearly this gay marriage debate isn't about what two dudes do in their bedroom behind closed doors... This is a debate about what is good for society's children. We are all their caretakers and watchers. All manners of horrors and abuse can and do occur to our nation's most vulnerable. When we are given a metric ton of red flags about a given subculture with respect to what they're "proud" of doing in front of kids on main street in a parade, we are all mandated to act in anticipation of what certainly will be waiting for them behind closed doors...
Let gays do whatever they want on their own time. Just don't let it involve children....ever...in any capacity.....

I've already addressed this exact post in a previous thread. You abandoned our conversation because you couldn't answer the questions I presented you.

Looking at pictures isn't a conversation. It's an expose'.

 

[Pop23]

I think you're the one obsessed with fertility since you seem to believe that's the only reason for marriage when you know it isn't. You also know that no one is prevented from civilly marrying if they are unable or unwilling to procreate so why keep bringing it up as though it matters?

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

Fertility is only an issue between opposite sex couples.

Not exactly. Fertility is an issue for those that wish use a surrogate but use their own sperm so they can biological related. It's also an issue for women that wish to be fertilized via en vitro.

Lol, name one same sex couple that have had a child that shares the couples DNA.

Just one

I can't. Besides I never made that claim, you did. One parent can share the DNA of their children via surrogates or en vitro. It isn't that hard to understand.

Then, as stated earlier, fertility is only an issue between opposite sex couples.

Don't back track. The couple with issues with fertility are male and female.

The fertility of two individuals of the same sex is moot

 

[Pop23]

I think you're the one obsessed with fertility since you seem to believe that's the only reason for marriage when you know it isn't. You also know that no one is prevented from civilly marrying if they are unable or unwilling to procreate so why keep bringing it up as though it matters?

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

The issue is REPRODUCTION, not fertility. The numbskulls on your side of the dispute are the ones trying to make fertility an issue.

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

If the fact that same sex couple can't reproduce due to a disability?

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

 

[mdk]

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Running out the page eh? So folks won't see this?:

I don't believe this topic belongs in our political discourse. I am not a fag but at the same time if I were I would have the opinion that it's none of the government's business.

Good luck to the two dudes trying to get each other pregnant. I'm fine with them thinking that anal homosexual sex is the way to go, but once they figure out that it's not going to work, then they're going to have to go outside of their "marriage" in order to get a child and then it does becomes society's business.

Agreed. Grampa Murked U, this isn't a discussion about what two dudes do behind closed doors. Marriage is a society's business precisely because it is the one institution that stands to affect all children the most of any of our institutions...natural born to couples and orphans. It is particularly the orphans case we are focusing on here. A society can be judged on how it treats its women and orphans.
Perhaps pictures can explain what I cannot get through to some people here...
Here's a group of kids who were not just brought to a gay pride parade, they participated in it!

Here's what went on:

CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to “Gay Pride” Parade
...Hartline says last year the not-for-profit San Diego Pride organization was under investigation for employing numerous pedophiles as volunteers and staff during its yearly parade and festival. He believes these pro-homosexual events are generally pornographic and that they are frequented by militant sodomites.
This is evidenced, the Christian activist says, “by the numerous triple-X porn companies that have vendors [at the San Diego Pride events], the distribution of condoms and sexual lubricants, and also just the really perverted sex classes that go on to teach people about S&M sex.”
For example, Hartline recalls, the San Diego Pride organizers had a tent exhibit this year called ‘the Leather Room.’ In this tent, he says, “they actually were demonstrating piercings and other really grotesque types of sado-masochism.”
Hartline says he feels the teachers with the San Diego Cooperative Charter School exhibited “gross disregard for the safety of children” when they brought students to the city’s 2006 “gay pride” parade. The charter school is a K-8 institution in the San Diego Unified School District, and he believes the teachers had no business bringing young children into such a depraved and pornographic environment. CA Teachers Take Elementary Students to 8220 Gay Pride 8221 Parade Family Policy Network

In addition to the leather S&M booth and tons of other sexually explicit displays on the sidelines, here are examples of what those kids were almost certainly exposed to, or worse, "as a matter of LGBT pride"...

Clearly this gay marriage debate isn't about what two dudes do in their bedroom behind closed doors... This is a debate about what is good for society's children. We are all their caretakers and watchers. All manners of horrors and abuse can and do occur to our nation's most vulnerable. When we are given a metric ton of red flags about a given subculture with respect to what they're "proud" of doing in front of kids on main street in a parade, we are all mandated to act in anticipation of what certainly will be waiting for them behind closed doors...
Let gays do whatever they want on their own time. Just don't let it involve children....ever...in any capacity.....

I've already addressed this exact post in a previous thread. You abandoned our conversation because you couldn't answer the questions I presented you.

Looking at pictures isn't a conversation. It's an expose'.

I already responded to your post in another thread Either you didn't like my response or choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit the narrative your trying to paint.

 

[rightwinger]

That's the only reason marriage exists.

Really? Then why can heterosexual couples with no ability to procreate marry? Oh yeah. Because procreation is irrelevant to who can marry.

It's because they didn't have fertility tests when the marriage laws were originally written, numbskull. Even if they did, they probably wouldn't have thought it worth the trouble to make an exception.

Your anal obsession with infertility only makes you look ridiculous.

I think you're the one obsessed with fertility since you seem to believe that's the only reason for marriage when you know it isn't. You also know that no one is prevented from civilly marrying if they are unable or unwilling to procreate so why keep bringing it up as though it matters?

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

Fertility is only an issue between opposite sex couples.

Of course not

Gay couples can discuss fertility also. They can also discuss whether they want to raise children....just like heterosexual couples

 

[Silhouette]

Funny how gay activists are "debating with each other" in order to bury the page with the damning photos. It's OK, I've copied and saved the post. I'm waiting for a new page.

 

[mdk]

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

The issue is REPRODUCTION, not fertility. The numbskulls on your side of the dispute are the ones trying to make fertility an issue.

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

If the fact that same sex couple can't reproduce due to a disability?

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

Thanks
Of course not. It's because they are biological unable to reproduce as a couple. Being able to produce offspring isn't a requirement to get hitched. It seems you only want that requirement for gays but not straights seeking marriage. You want to have it both ways and you can't. Sorry.

 

[RKMBrown]

No it wouldn't.

Yes it would.

You have to have a certain types of licenses to drive certain types of vehicles in particular locations. However, you do not have to have certain types of licenses to drive other types of vehicles or in other locations. Thus, your question is ... naive at best. You can't ask a broad question like that and it not have yes and no answers.

 

[Pop23]

The issue is REPRODUCTION, not fertility. The numbskulls on your side of the dispute are the ones trying to make fertility an issue.

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

If the fact that same sex couple can't reproduce due to a disability?

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

Thanks
Of course not. It's because they are biological unable to reproduce as a couple. Being able to produce offspring isn't a requirement to get hitched. It seems you only want that requirement for gays but not straights seeking marriage. You want to have it both ways and you can't. Sorry.

We will see whether I can or can't. That will be decided by SCOTUS.

The point is, the two demographic groups are as different as night and day. Adults should be able to agree to that point.

 

[Pop23]

Really? Then why can heterosexual couples with no ability to procreate marry? Oh yeah. Because procreation is irrelevant to who can marry.

It's because they didn't have fertility tests when the marriage laws were originally written, numbskull. Even if they did, they probably wouldn't have thought it worth the trouble to make an exception.

Your anal obsession with infertility only makes you look ridiculous.

I think you're the one obsessed with fertility since you seem to believe that's the only reason for marriage when you know it isn't. You also know that no one is prevented from civilly marrying if they are unable or unwilling to procreate so why keep bringing it up as though it matters?

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

Fertility is only an issue between opposite sex couples.

Of course not

Gay couples can discuss fertility also. They can also discuss whether they want to raise children....just like heterosexual couples

But that's not what you said.

"Same as" as implies they discuss all possibilities, which of course they might, but it would be ridiculous

 

[Seawytch]

Really? Then why can heterosexual couples with no ability to procreate marry? Oh yeah. Because procreation is irrelevant to who can marry.

It's because they didn't have fertility tests when the marriage laws were originally written, numbskull. Even if they did, they probably wouldn't have thought it worth the trouble to make an exception.

Your anal obsession with infertility only makes you look ridiculous.

I think you're the one obsessed with fertility since you seem to believe that's the only reason for marriage when you know it isn't. You also know that no one is prevented from civilly marrying if they are unable or unwilling to procreate so why keep bringing it up as though it matters?

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

The issue is REPRODUCTION, not fertility. The numbskulls on your side of the dispute are the ones trying to make fertility an issue.

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

Gays are icky. Guess how well that argument goes in court?

 

[mdk]

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

If the fact that same sex couple can't reproduce due to a disability?

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

Thanks
Of course not. It's because they are biological unable to reproduce as a couple. Being able to produce offspring isn't a requirement to get hitched. It seems you only want that requirement for gays but not straights seeking marriage. You want to have it both ways and you can't. Sorry.

We will see whether I can or can't. That will be decided by SCOTUS.

The point is, the two demographic groups are as different as night and day. Adults should be able to agree to that point.

The SC will decide this issue in the next year or so. Then we can all start focusing on more pressing matters.

And yes, the two demographics are in fact different. I don't see that difference as a negative though. Just different.

 

[Pop23]

No it wouldn't.

Yes it would.

You have to have a certain types of licenses to drive certain types of vehicles in particular locations. However, you do not have to have certain types of licenses to drive other types of vehicles or in other locations. Thus, your question is ... naive at best. You can't ask a broad question like that and it not have yes and no answers.

Why would you need a different kind of license for different forms of transportation?

Hmmmmmmm

 

[rightwinger]

It's because they didn't have fertility tests when the marriage laws were originally written, numbskull. Even if they did, they probably wouldn't have thought it worth the trouble to make an exception.

Your anal obsession with infertility only makes you look ridiculous.

I think you're the one obsessed with fertility since you seem to believe that's the only reason for marriage when you know it isn't. You also know that no one is prevented from civilly marrying if they are unable or unwilling to procreate so why keep bringing it up as though it matters?

They are running out of arguments so they are clinging to this fertility nonsense. It's being laughed out of almost every courtroom I might add.

Fertility is only an issue between opposite sex couples.

Of course not

Gay couples can discuss fertility also. They can also discuss whether they want to raise children....just like heterosexual couples

But that's not what you said.

"Same as" as implies they discuss all possibilities, which of course they might, but it would be ridiculous

Seriously....you have a sick mind

 

[Pop23]

Funny how gay activists are "debating with each other" in order to bury the page with the damning photos. It's OK, I've copied and saved the post. I'm waiting for a new page.

Funny how you'll never answer any question presented you.

If the fact that same sex couple can't reproduce due to a disability?

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

Thanks
Of course not. It's because they are biological unable to reproduce as a couple. Being able to produce offspring isn't a requirement to get hitched. It seems you only want that requirement for gays but not straights seeking marriage. You want to have it both ways and you can't. Sorry.

We will see whether I can or can't. That will be decided by SCOTUS.

The point is, the two demographic groups are as different as night and day. Adults should be able to agree to that point.

The SC will decide this issue in the next year or so. Then we can all start focusing on more pressing matters.

And yes, the two demographics are in fact different. I don't see that difference as a negative though. Just different.

I don't think I implied either was negative.

That would be like saying commercial airliners are great and bicycles are bad.