Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The difference between you and I is that I ask "Big Brother" to enforce public accomodation laws- you want Big Brother to police Americans bedrooms

Your both fascist fags , I see no difference in the two stances.

Of course you don't.

There IS no difference. In EITHER case you are both asking the government to tell someone they can't do something.

You're a bright guy, so I assume you know this, therefor I must assume you are deliberately denying it.

Unless of course, you are telling me that I am wrong and you aren't that bright????

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

LOL! So humanity does not exist in nature?

ROFLMNAO!

You people have absolutely no control over how stupid you allow yourselves to be, do ya?

 

[Neil N. Blowme]

There IS no difference. In EITHER case you are both asking the government to tell someone they can't do something.

You're a bright guy, so I assume you know this, therefor I must assume you are deliberately denying it.

Unless of course, you are telling me that I am wrong and you aren't that bright????

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Nature has gays in it so I guess Neil just doesn't like gays

You didn't answer the question.

 

[Neil N. Blowme]

Poor queers. Can't answer simple questions. Living a lie is a full time Job.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And you conveniently ignore my post.

Every American child that is adopted by anyone in the United States is a child that is out of foster care- and not going to be aged out of the system onto the streets.

Facts and Statistics

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

Three years is the average length of time a child in foster care waits to be adopted. Roughly 55% of these children have had three or more placements. An earlier study found that 33% of children had changed elementary schools five or more times, losing relationships and falling behind educationally.

Yet to you- all of that is better than letting a single child be adopted by a loving gay couple.

I didn't ignore your post, what you said simply isn't true. not every child adopted by an American couple is American, and not every American child is adopted through foster care. So you are the one ignoring my post, not me ignoring you. As far as your numbers. If the government wanted to encourage adoption, they could do it without putting children in vulnerable situations with homosexuals who are on average, poorer, more likely to molest, suicidal, and mentally ill in general. Provide tax credits like they do for people who have children. There are several ways to remedy this if this is an issue.

Gay people earn more owe less - Dec. 6 2012
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender peopleare better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.
They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.
Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.

Men are more likely to molest than women- all men- all women- this is absolute- men are the molesters up to 98% of the time. Would you deny men or couples with men in them because they are more likely to molest?

Suicidal? Would you deny adoption to people who come from industries with a higher rate of suicide- just in case? Same thing with mental illness. What about if they come from states with higher suicide rates?

These are standards you apply to homosexuals- and do not apply to heterosexuals.

Because your concern is not about the welfare of the children.

It is about your issues with homosexuals.

Well, obviously I have a problem with homosexuality, it is a degenerate and socially destructive lifestyle. I don't think homosexuals shouldn't be prohibited from adopting just because they are on average poorer and their children are as well, that is one reason..

Clearly you do have a problem with homosexuality- because you presume that it is destructive.

You were the one who falsely claimed that homosexuals were on average poorer and posed that as one of the reasons why homosexuals should not be allowed to adopt children.

When I nailed you on that, and your other claims, you now switch claims.

So lets dance.

I will take each of your claims- and show how you do not apply the same standards to homosexuals- as you do to any other group.

Well, obviously I have a problem with homosexuality, it is a degenerate and socially destructive lifestyle. I don't think homosexuals shouldn't be prohibited from adopting just because they are on average poorer and their children are as well, that is one reason. You need to get with the program, are incredibly repressive society is what keeps gays poorer than heterosexuals. You aren't even on with the correct left wing message at the moment.
LGBT Parenting in the United States Williams Institute
LGBT poverty Gay and lesbian couples are poorer than straight ones.

Also, you are simply wrong, children from single parent and homosexual households are far more likely to have been physically and sexually abused than households with a mother and father. So your claim is wrong.
Chapter Five What Factors Contribute to Child Abuse and Neglect
How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships Findings from the New Family Structures Study
Same-sex parenting and children s outcomes A closer examination of the American psychological association s brief on lesbian and gay parenting

It isn't just an issue of suicide rate. But on pure suicide rates, the most suicidal profession, physicians, are 1.87 times the average. Whereas LGBT youth for example are 4 to 6 times the average. Totally different degree of severity. Also whereas physicians aren't inherently suicidal, there is a strong link between homosexuality and mental illness that triggers suicidal tendencies.
Highest Suicide Rate by Profession New Health Guide
Higher Risk of Mental Health Problems for Homosexuals Psych Central
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss60e0606.pdf

Honestly guy, you are out of your depth here. You are essentially ceding to my arguments but admitting you don't care. You put your egalitarian pathology above care for children.

What a spankin'... .

​

 

[Ellipsis]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

Let's keep church and state separate, please.

 

[mdk]

We know marriage doesn't exist in nature, how? Exactly?
Wolves definitely engage in specialized, long-term coupling behavior that is recognized and supported by the pack....so do other animals.

Marriage is a man made construct. Pack behavior in wolves in no way supports marriage existing in nature.

 

[Syriusly]

. You need to get with the program, are incredibly repressive society is what keeps gays poorer than heterosexuals. You aren't even on with the correct left wing message at the moment.
LGBT Parenting in the United States Williams Institute
LGBT poverty Gay and lesbian couples are poorer than straight ones.

.

I will give you credit here- your initial claim was incorrect- that homosexuals tend to be poorer- but I believe your intent was correct- your statistics show that homosexual households tend to be poorer than non- homosexuals households.

Lets look at the statistics:

Analyses of the Gallup data show that single LGBT adults raising children are three times more likely than comparable non-LGBT
individuals to report household incomes near the poverty threshold (less than $12,000 per year). Married or partnered LGBT individuals living in two-adult households with children are twice as likely as comparable non-LGBT individuals to report household incomes near the poverty threshold (less than $24,000 per year).

The median annual household income of samesex couples with children under age 18 in the
home is lower than comparable different-sex couples ($63,900 versus $74,000, respectively).

Income is one of the easiest items to check on when it comes to adoption.

Do you think that gay parents should be prevented from adopting because more of them are poor?

Or do you think that poor people should not be allowed to adopt?

Once again- what I am pointing out here is that you are making an argument against gay people that you will not be using against non-gay people.

If a gay couple is making $100,000 a year in Oklahoma next door to a straight couple making $50,000 you would automatically disqualify the gay couple.

Likewise if we go with averages- I can point out that on average there are racial minorities that fare worse than 'average' Americans- yet I am hoping you would not argue that we for instance- do not allow Native Americans to adopt because their average income is lower than most Americans?

I do believe that adoptive parents should have enough income- and wealth to take care of any adoptive children.

But that is easy to measure- and should never be based upon the averages of whatever group someone chooses to place them in.

 

[koshergrl]

How do you know?

Wolves have a highly structured social system that includes formalized pairings that are recognized by the pack.

How is that not marriage?

What's more, if they act without the authority of the leaders when it comes to pairing, the pack may kill them and their pups.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Well, obviously I have a problem with homosexuality, it is a degenerate and socially destructive lifestyle.

...

What has been the divorce rate of heterosexual marriages for the last 50/60 years?

What about all the long term gay relationships. Long term in spite of societies marginalization of them and benefits that usually are attached to loving couples? Any fair minded person would see many of these gay relationships as heroic

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We know marriage doesn't exist in nature, how? Exactly?
Wolves definitely engage in specialized, long-term coupling behavior that is recognized and supported by the pack....so do other animals.

Is there a doctor in the house?
​

There is obviously a malfunction here. Marriage is a civil contract and sometimes a religious blessing is attached to it. Marriage is a human construct.

 

[mdk]

Your both fascist fags , I see no difference in the two stances.

Of course you don't.

There IS no difference. In EITHER case you are both asking the government to tell someone they can't do something.

You're a bright guy, so I assume you know this, therefor I must assume you are deliberately denying it.

Unless of course, you are telling me that I am wrong and you aren't that bright????

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

LOL! So humanity does not exist in nature?

ROFLMNAO!

You people have absolutely no control over how stupid you allow yourselves to be, do ya?

If it makes you feel good to rail against a point I never made then have it mate. Then again why should I be surprised by the self-proclaimed arbiter of nature?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Nature has gays in it so I guess Neil just doesn't like gays

You didn't answer the question.

Dante is not on trial

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Of course you don't.

There IS no difference. In EITHER case you are both asking the government to tell someone they can't do something.

You're a bright guy, so I assume you know this, therefor I must assume you are deliberately denying it.

Unless of course, you are telling me that I am wrong and you aren't that bright????

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Big deal, my dog eats its own poop to, I wouldn't suggest humans do so.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Poor queers. Can't answer simple questions. Living a lie is a full time Job.

Poor Neil


living under a rock has few benefits

 

[mdk]

There IS no difference. In EITHER case you are both asking the government to tell someone they can't do something.

You're a bright guy, so I assume you know this, therefor I must assume you are deliberately denying it.

Unless of course, you are telling me that I am wrong and you aren't that bright????

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Big deal, my dog eats its own poop to, I wouldn't suggest humans do so.

Which is why I think making appeals to nature cornering this issue is rather silly.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

How do you know?

Wolves have a highly structured social system that includes formalized pairings that are recognized by the pack.

How is that not marriage?

What's more, if they act without the authority of the leaders when it comes to pairing, the pack may kill them and their pups.

Lots of animals eat their own young. Humans slaughter their own children.

What's it all about Alfie?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

There IS no difference. In EITHER case you are both asking the government to tell someone they can't do something.

You're a bright guy, so I assume you know this, therefor I must assume you are deliberately denying it.

Unless of course, you are telling me that I am wrong and you aren't that bright????

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Big deal, my dog eats its own poop to, I wouldn't suggest humans do so.

Why I never let my old pup kiss me.

 

[Syriusly]

[
Also, you are simply wrong, children from single parent and homosexual households are far more likely to have been physically and sexually abused. So your claim is wrong.
Chapter Five What Factors Contribute to Child Abuse and Neglect
How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships Findings from the New Family Structures Study
Same-sex parenting and children s outcomes A closer examination of the American psychological association s brief on lesbian and gay parenting
.

Let us start with 'Chapter 5'

Not one mention of being raised by homosexuals there. Not sure why you suddenly want to equate single parent with homosexual households.

Risk factors they mention:
Parent factors- personality/history of maltreatment/substance abuse/attitudes and knowledge/age
Family Factors- single parents families- families with lots of children- father absence- marital conflict- stress-
Child factors (not really relevant)
Environmental factors- poverty unemployment/social isolation

I am not sure how you think Chapter 5 supports your case.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The government is not tellin' anyone that they can't do something. Nature has merely provided a standard which precludes perverse reasoning from changing the standard born of its immutable design.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

See how that works?

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Big deal, my dog eats its own poop to, I wouldn't suggest humans do so.

Which is why I think making appeals to nature cornering this issue is rather silly.

No one is appealing to nature young lady. The appeal is to the facts of nature, which are represented in the natural physiological design of the human being.

 

[Neil N. Blowme]

Marriage doesn't exist in nature so therefore it would not have much say on the matter. See how that works?

Are homo sapiens heterosexual by nature?

Is it really that hard to believe that both exist in nature?

Nature has gays in it so I guess Neil just doesn't like gays

You didn't answer the question.

Dante is not on trial

Awwww, poor baby.