Anti-Gay Marriage

[eclipse]

Right, right. My mistake. They think that no child should be raised by 2 moms or dads. In other words, they're not okay with children being exposed to homosexuality at a young age(which would increase the chances of the child growing up to be accepting of homosexuality). Amazing.

I'd MUCH rather have two same-sex parents who attempt to raise their child to be a decent human being than two parents who are opposite sexes and make no attempt to raise their child well.

[deleted35362]

Yeah, totally. And there's the issue of single parents. If they're using the logic that "every child deserves a father and mother", then why don't they have a movement against single parents raising kids?

Because it's a bad idea!

[dondon151]

But like I said, marriage was never arranged with procreation as its driving purpose, and is by no means efficient for it. In that extreme scenario (and like rehab mentioned, with even a premise full of holes) even the modern traditional marriage would be discouraged, since just fucking as many women as you can would be the best thing you can do for humanity if it is indeed that desperate.

this is quite false for precisely the reason that i wrote in the post above yours.

humans require a huge amount of parental investment to bring children to adulthood. the primary purpose of marriage is not specifically to churn out children, but to promote monogamy. monogamy in turn is effective at securing the parental care that human children need. yes, you're probably going to point out cases where monogamous relationships yield terrible parents, but these individual cases don't constitute a sufficient counterargument.

quite truthfully, monogamy probably evolved because the humans who practiced it were more fit than the humans who "fucked as many women as you could" and didn't give two shits afterwards. therefore, marriage is more effective at maintaining a human population, even if it produces fewer people (since without the evolution of monogamy, humans were probably more likely to die more frequently in childhood and kill each other in adulthood).

Edited May 12, 2013 by dondon151

[shadykid]

and it's official now, Minnesota Senate passes the bill!

now just for the governor signature

(cue the twitter shitstorm redux)

Edited May 13, 2013 by shadykid

[I.M. Gei]

...and Governor Dayton has pledged to sign it tomorrow night.

Incoming Twitter schadenfreude!

[FrostyFireMage]

It'll be good when the old-fashioned fossils step down from leadership positions so that younger and more open-minded people can update society to present-day standards.

[Espinosa]

It'll be good when the old-fashioned fossils step down from leadership positions so that younger and more open-minded people can update society to present-day standards.

That's what we thought a century back. We got Lenin and Hitler instead.

[dondon151]

yeah but lenin died too, so that's not really a counterargument.

[shadykid]

That's what we thought a century back. We got Lenin and Hitler instead.

what was the point of this post

[Anouleth]

what was the point of this post

We should never ever change our leaders, because the new ones might turn out to be bloodthirsty dictators?

[Esau of Isaac]

what was the point of this post

Probably to suggest that being hopeful of political leadership is flawed in itself

[peener weener]

>lenin

>bad

[Espinosa]

sure dude

[shadykid]

well this is interesting:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/14/3397093/brazilian-must-register-gay-unions.html

(technically not final yet, as it could be appealed)

Edited May 14, 2013 by shadykid

[Green Poet]

yeah but lenin died too, so that's not really a counterargument.

I think the statement does stand; all leaders die.

[I.M. Gei]

as in Lenin died before he could really do anything meaningful, and we all know Stalin ran Trotsky out of the country not long after Lenin's death

e. and Dayton signed the bill, Minnesota's officially the 12th state to allow gay marriage

Edited May 14, 2013 by Black★Rock Shooter

[Espinosa]

Lenin did have more than enough time to create all manner of havoc and lay foundation for his followers to continue the destruction, much to everyone's chagrin.

My point was that the collective awaiting a saviour with progressive and newfangled views is historically known to breed monstrosity. You'd also be surprised that the young generation barely fulfills the expectations of 'open-mindedness' (a buzzword that conceals a concept we wrongly agree to be good) and whatever else.

[Dwalin2010]

I usually prefer just reading, not posting in this kind of debates, but what I read today on another forum really shocked me:

http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2012/10/30/why_a_good_person_can_vote_against_samesex_marriage/page/full

--This year Harvard University appointed its first permanent director of bisexual, gay, lesbian, transgender, and queer student life. The individual, Vanidy Bailey, has asked that he/she never be referred to as he or she, male or female. Harvard has agreed.

--In 2010 eHarmony, for years the country's largest online dating service, was sued for only matching men and women. Its lack of same-sex matchmaking meant that it violated anti-discrimination laws in some states. As a result, eHarmony was forced to begin a same-sex online service.

--Each year more and more American high schools elect girls as homecoming kings and boys as homecoming queens. Students have been taught to regard restricting kings to males or queens to females as (gender-based) discrimination.

--When you sign up for the new social networking site, Google Plus, you are asked to identify your gender. Three choices are offered: Male, Female, Other.

--Catholic Charities, which operates the oldest ongoing adoption services in America, has had to end its adoption work in Illinois, Massachusetts and Washington, DC because the governments there regard placing children with married man-woman couples before same-sex couples as discriminatory.

Increasingly, even the mother-father ideal is being shattered in this battle to render male-female distinction insignificant.

--The socialist French government has just announced that in the future no government issued document will be allowed to use the words "mother" or "father." Only the gender-neutral term "parent" will be acceptable in France.

--And in Rhode Island this year, one school district cancelled its father-daughter dance after the ACLU threatened to sue the district for gender discrimination. Only parent-child events, not father-daughter dances or mother-son ballgames, will be allowed.

This isn't fight for equality anymore, it's something else. I am for equality, but not for revenge when the formerly offended side (homosexuals) try to push the other (heterosexuals) into positions they themselves were before.

[I.M. Gei]

Hahahahahahahaha holy shit, kid, unless homosexuals are now suddenly passing laws stating that a man cannot marry a woman or going out and beating straight couples on the street or killing straight people for being straight, you're in no position to say that "the formerly offended side (homosexuals) try to push the other (heterosexuals) into positions they themselves were before."

You need to understand this, you are so far away from reality and isolated from what you are talking about. You're protected, sheltered and privileged and enjoying respect that you do not deserve.

[Dwalin2010]

You need to understand this, you are so far away from reality and isolated from what you are talking about. You're protected, sheltered and privileged and enjoying respect that you do not deserve.

Are personal attacks that necessary? To make it clear, I am not against homosexuals themselves, but very much against people who just pretend to defend their rights, while in fact are just using it as an excuse for being rude and arrogant to others.

[Nanami Touko]

I'm not seeing the problem? That whole article keeps spewing that gender is "the most important distinction regarding human beings' personal identity." I'm sorry, what? And then there's "gender confusion and the loss of motherhood and fatherhood as values, just to cite two obvious consequences." And you expect us to take this article seriously?

Since when was being male or female the most important distinction to one's personal identity? Since when did people look deep into themselves and say "I am who I am because I am a man/woman"? Last I checked, we are who we are because of how we act, what we do, and our qualities. Tell me the last time you sincerely cared about being male. (or female, your gender isn't listed on the site).

As for motherhood and fatherhood as values. PFFT. Since when did having both parents matter? Did you know that George Washington's father died at 11, and he was raised by a single parent? I guess he's screwed up. He didn't have both parents. How terrible. Thomas Jefferson lost his father at 14, and was raised by his mother. Andrew Jackson and Bill Clinton never had father figures in their lives, and yet no one screamed at them about it. I'd bet money that there are single parent kids who would love to have either two fathers or two mothers, just to have another parental figure in the house. Kids don't care about their parents' gender. All kids want is to be loved. So why does anyone else have a say in this matter?

As for gender confusion, that's a load of shit, and it seems to me like it's a subtle stab at trans people. I honestly can't wait for the day that gender doesn't matter anymore, and people are simply regarded for who they are, not what junk they have.

Are personal attacks that necessary? To make it clear, I am not against homosexuals themselves, but very much against people who just pretend to defend their rights, while in fact are just using it as an excuse for being rude and arrogant to others.

I enjoy how you didn't address what he said and just told him to stop being a big meanie. And that's great. I'm glad you are. Why did you link that article, then? It sort of has nothing in it relating to people pretending to care for rights while being assholes.

if you didn't notice, the only bigot in that article is the guy who wrote it. If you look at the exampes he cited, you'll see he even lovingly took the time to shove in some negative word play in there, saying eharmony was "forced" to start a same sex dating service, and how father mother ideals are being "shattered". This whole article reeks of bias and slight homophobia.

[I.M. Gei]

Man, a particular gem from that article:

And it will mean that teachers and other adults who ask little boys and girls who they would like to marry, will, in order to be in sync with the morality of our times, have to make it clear that it might be a someone of the same sex. "Will you marry a boy or a girl?" will be the only non-bigoted way to ask a young person about their marital plans.

OH NOOOOOOO, THE HORROR! War on gender!

Edited May 16, 2013 by Black★Rock Shooter

[Nanami Touko]

Man, a particular gem from that article:

OH NOOOOOOO, THE HORROR! War on gender!

WHOA NO WAY YOU'RE TELLING ME PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE TO ASK KIDS... IF THEY WANT TO MARRY SOMEONE OF THEIR GENDER?!?!?!

HOW TERRIBLE.

[Dwalin2010]

Kids don't care about their parents' gender.

Can you REALLY speak for all kids in the world?

As for the rest, I read it, be sure of it, but answering it in any way apart from agreeing with you 100% will obviously be useless. Why do people always go on the offensive? It only casts a shadow on the ideals they root for. If I was aggressive in name of something, you could rightly call me an arrogant [censored]. Calm debates simply don't exist anymore, as it seems.

[Nanami Touko]

Can you REALLY speak for all kids in the world?

As for the rest, I read it, be sure of it, but answering it in any way apart from agreeing with you 100% will obviously be useless. Why do people always go on the offensive? It only casts a shadow on the ideals they root for. If I was aggressive in name of something, you could rightly call me an arrogant [censored]. Calm debates simply don't exist anymore, as it seems.

No, I really can't, but tell me the last time you heard a child saying they wanted a mother and a father, sincerely, and I'll think about changing my way of thinking around that.

What did you honestly expect to get when you linked an article that was fairly biased against homosexuality, and then claimed that homosexuals were shoving heterosexuals into their place? BRS up there is right, if you honestly think that, then you're terribly sheltered.

Feel free to respond to what I said with how you feel, and I'll respond to what you say calmly. Since it seems you can't handle someone being upset at what you've said.

I'll humor you.