Laymen's Closing Arguments on Gay Marriage

[Syriusly]

Maynard v. Hill,125 U. S. 190(1888), the Court characterized marriage as "the most important relation in life,"id.at125 U. S. 205, and as "the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress,"

In Meyer v. Nebraska,262 U. S. 390(1923), the Court recognized that the right "to marry, establish a home and bring up children" is a central part of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause,

Yes, marriage is "the foundation of the family and of society" and it is in order to "bring up children". Any man/woman can marry providing they are of age and consenting. What you want to do is change the fundamental nature of marriage to deprive children of either a mother or a father.

So you see, the cases you cited are working against you, for they never anticipated fundamentally destroying what marriage is: a man and a woman, a father & mother, a grandfather & grandmother. Marriage is about children because children are about the core of society. You just made a case against yourself.

I and many gay couples I know have children. So you support legalized marriage for us, right?

No- Silhouette supports denying you marriage, knowing that doing so will result in direct harm to your children.

Pretty sick -eh?

 

[OKTexas]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically.

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

 

[Silhouette]

Once again- how does two men marrying deprive a single child of a mother?

Answer that simple question.

They take that child away from the prospective pool of parents waiting to adopt: A mother and father. And, they teach the child by example, if they are the opposite gender, that that child's gender (herself) doesn't matter in a functioning adult world. That damage is the type spoken of in the Prince's Trust Survery, the largest of its kind: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Syriusly]

Once again- how does two men marrying deprive a single child of a mother?

Answer that simple question.

They take that child away from the prospective pool of parents waiting to adopt: A mother and father. m

How do they do that Silhouette?

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

 

[Silhouette]

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

Mary and Ellen cannot have had children together. They are both female. Where is the boy(s) father?

 

[SwimExpert]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically.

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

 

[Syriusly]

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

Mary and Ellen cannot have had children together. They are both female. Where is the boy(s) father?

Mary and Ellen do have two children together- they are parenting two children.

So once again- how does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

 

[OKTexas]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically.

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

Actually it makes prefect sense, the left claims businesses that don't want to participate in gay activities, hate gays. Explain the difference in what I said and what they say. I don't see any.

 

[SwimExpert]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically.

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

Actually it makes prefect sense, the left claims businesses that don't want to participate in gay activities, hate gays. Explain the difference in what I said and what they say. I don't see any.

Where did I say anything about businesses? I was talking about Silhouette's obsession with all things gay.

 

[OKTexas]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically.

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

Actually it makes prefect sense, the left claims businesses that don't want to participate in gay activities, hate gays. Explain the difference in what I said and what they say. I don't see any.

Where did I say anything about businesses? I was talking about Silhouette's obsession with all things gay.

Yet you quoted me, OK.

 

[SwimExpert]

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

Actually it makes prefect sense, the left claims businesses that don't want to participate in gay activities, hate gays. Explain the difference in what I said and what they say. I don't see any.

Where did I say anything about businesses? I was talking about Silhouette's obsession with all things gay.

Yet you quoted me, OK.

Erm, you quoted me.

 

[OKTexas]

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

Actually it makes prefect sense, the left claims businesses that don't want to participate in gay activities, hate gays. Explain the difference in what I said and what they say. I don't see any.

Where did I say anything about businesses? I was talking about Silhouette's obsession with all things gay.

Yet you quoted me, OK.

Erm, you quoted me.

Right, you said there is no conversation, I tried to engage you in one because the op did mention businesses. Care to engage?

 

[Skylar]

Once again- how does two men marrying deprive a single child of a mother?

Answer that simple question.

They take that child away from the prospective pool of parents waiting to adopt: A mother and father.

They take *whose* child away? Remember, in almost every instance the child belongs to them. You're literally insisting that a woman who bears her OWN child is 'depriving a prospective pool of parents waiting to adopt'. That's quite mad.

And of course is spectacularly irrelevant to same sex marriage.

And, they teach the child by example, if they are the opposite gender, that that child's gender (herself) doesn't matter in a functioning adult world. That damage is the type spoken of in the Prince's Trust Survery, the largest of its kind: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The Prince Trust study makes no mention of gays, gay parenting, same sex marriage, or any of the blithering nonsense you attribute to it. Nor does it say that a same sex role model must be a parent.

You hallucinated all of it. And your hallucinations have no relevance to us or the Prince Trust study.

Worse, a litany of studies have found that the children of same sex parents are fine. You simply ignore any study that contradicts what you want to believe....regardless of methodology, sample size, origin, or even country. Any study that contradicts you you ignore.

But why would a rational person ignore what you do? Especially when your sources say nothing you claim they do?

 

[Skylar]

So Silo......you can't site any child benefiting from denying same sex marriage. And have already conceded that your proposal hurts tens of thousands of children now and far more in the future.

You've already conceded that the Supreme Court recognizes marriage as a right. You simply ignore the Supreme Court and offer us your own pseudo-legal babble in its place. But surely you recognize that your willful ignorance doesn't actually change the fact that marriage is a right.

Your claims that rights must be articulated in the Constitution was proven gibberish by the 9th amendment.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

Mary and Ellen cannot have had children together. They are both female. Where is the boy(s) father?

This fails as a red herring fallacy.

 

[Skylar]

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

Mary and Ellen cannot have had children together. They are both female. Where is the boy(s) father?

This fails as a red herring fallacy.

His citation of the Prince Trust Study fails the 'batshit hallucination' fallacy. Fallacies of logic have never stopped Sil. They're unlikely to matter much now.

 

[AntiParty]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically. Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation..

We have a couple of questions. 1. The "should the fed mandate gay marriage and silence any opposition" question and 2. The "should the fed allow some people/businesses to refuse to participate in "gay marriages" question. I sort of walk back and forth between the two questions and have a bit more of a discussion about the invisible demographic in all these conversations: children and their spongy, socially-learning minds. It weighs heavily on the future of society as we sit poised, deliberating at such a divergent fork in the social fabric...

What if a community in Iowa where pigs are raised a great deal, decided to pass a local law that said all citizens who aren't allergic to pork, must eat pork at least once a week to show their civic devotion to their mainstay and town's name? Just for instance, hypothetically.
A jew who refused to abide by that law would be in his rights. Would he not?

Denying participation in gay marriage isn't a statement about a race. It's a statement about BEHAVIORS. "I don't want to eat pork" ...where "to eat" is a verb, not a noun. "I don't want to support people who identify with a lifestyle where they have sex with the same gender".....where "they have sex with the same gender" is an action, a verb, not a noun. In contrast African Americans or First Nation People etc. are not verbs. They are nouns. Please learn the legal difference.

The equivalent is if bulimics got together and organized to force restaurant owners to place vomit urns on every table, because to not do so was "hurtful and discriminatory to bulimic Americans!". Bulimia, like homosexuality, is a stubborn habitual behavior that once learned is very difficult to change. And youngsters often pass on the bad habit socially by teaching/learning/observation of peer behaviors.

Gays claim homosexuality is innate, intrinsic. They have not demonstrated this. And in fact a vast source of knowledge from some of the most credible institutions suggests that homosexuality is learned. And worse, considering this particular question of law on marriage (the hub of modeled behavior in any society), may actually be passed on socially:

The little ole' Mayo Clinic, 2007 < (what a bunch of inbred hillbillys! )

One of the most obvious examples of an environmental factor that increases the chances of an individual becoming an offender is if he or she were sexually abused as a child. This relationship is known as the “victim-to-abuser cycle”or “abused-abusers phenomena.”5,23,24,46......
why the “abused abusers phenomena” occurs: identification with the aggressor, in which the abused child is trying to gain a new identity by becoming the abuser; an imprinted sexual arousal pattern established by early abuse; early abuse leading to hypersexual behavior; or a form of social learning took place http://www.drrichardhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

And...the shabby source called "The CDC".. < (THAT bunch of college dropouts!? )

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... Drug Use among Gay Men Pervasive by Worcester Sharon - Clinical Psychiatry News Vol. 33 Issue 2 February 2005 Online Research Library Questia

LGBT professional bloggers/spammers would say instead we must listen to the latest lavendar "CQR" "excellence" being pumped out of the rainbow-propaganda machine, erstwhile known as "The American Psychological Association", right?

Legal discussion: (the underlined and (parentheses) parts are part of the argument)

Since objecting to participate in supporting so-called "gay marriage" isn't an affront to life or limb of the the "victims" of such a "crime", then there's the gold standard of law when it comes to rightful and lawful discrimination against BEHAVIORS (verb) but not race (noun). Hurting people's feelings by practicing free speech and freedom of religion rejecting what they do (not what they are: people of all races and walks, of both genders) is not against the law. It may hurt homosexuals' feelings to be reminded that their behaviors aren't universally and blindly accepted/acceptable and promoted, but that isn't a crime.

I'll just end this here by saying that children are watching what we approve of and what we don't, and making decisions in their own learning/habituating experiences based on what is modeled before them.

Enjoy the thread.

What if the closing argument was simply;

FREEDOM

Crazy how the "Freedom Loving Right" dislikes any Freedom they don't like in America.

It stems from our Christian background as a Country. It's not ok to be gay in the Bible. That is covered.

But then Freedom of Religion was made so we don't oppress other religions like ours was oppressed before we had to oppress the Indians and make a new home where we wouldn't have to worry about Christian oppression. *Shew*

Our Country was obviously "founded" by Christianity but our Constitution strictly prohibits force of any religion under Freedom of Religion. This is where many in 2015, a couple years later still haven't caught up with the topic. Freedom of Religion does not mean Freedom to impose your Religion onto others. It means you have to accept that there are 4200+Religions in the world and we won't treat them like we were treated before our journey to America.

Being gay is bad for Christianity. Not for America. We made law against gays in the name of our Religion which is directly conflicting "Freedom of Religion".

Obviously the reason our Religion is so emotional about gays is because the Bible says there will be a lot of gays at the "end of times".

As a Christian I wonder what sparked the end of times, the gays or the "Do not judge or be judged gays trying to judge everyone".

As a struggling Christian I wonder if "The end of times" talk is "The end of brainwash" talk. But that is my own struggle. I'm still scared of hell.

 

[danielpalos]

Well, I said I would come back now and again. So I might as well hang in until June sporadically.

Of course, every time you need to get your "I hate gays" fix is not sporadic.

Let's see how vigorously the *usual crowd* will spam good points into oblivion, trying to silence the conversation.

There is no conversation. You hate gays. That's all. Nothing more to it than that.

So if your child decides they want to smoke, are saying you hate them if you don't light up with them, really?

Actually it makes prefect sense, the left claims businesses that don't want to participate in gay activities, hate gays. Explain the difference in what I said and what they say. I don't see any.

Where did I say anything about businesses? I was talking about Silhouette's obsession with all things gay.

if i win a lottery, should i hire some really hot lesbians strippers and then go harass Silhouette for sex?

 

[SwimExpert]

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

Mary and Ellen cannot have had children together. They are both female. Where is the boy(s) father?

The father is in prison for raping Mary. Being a devout Christian woman, Mary never considered having an abortion.

 

[danielpalos]

Mary and Ellen have two children. They are not married.
Mary and Ellen have two children. They get married. How does the act of Mary and Ellen getting married take their children away from any prospective parents?

And why do you want to take those children away from their mothers?
.

Mary and Ellen cannot have had children together. They are both female. Where is the boy(s) father?

The father is in prison for raping Mary. Being a devout Christian woman, Mary never considered having an abortion.

Should she have "harassed a Priest" for special dispensation?