CA Prop. 8 shot down

[WinterBorn]

Let the queers start their own schools. I pay taxes for mine.

They pay taxes as well. In fact, since they do not get the tax breaks for being married, they pay MORE taxes than you do.

So they get to teach in public schools and send their kids to public schools.


But tell us, what is it that you think gay teachers are going to do? Teach kids to be gay?

 

[poet]

They pay taxes as well. In fact, since they do not get the tax breaks for being married, they pay MORE taxes than you do.

So they get to teach in public schools and send their kids to public schools.


But tell us, what is it that you think gay teachers are going to do? Teach kids to be gay?

Uh, just like there have always been gays, in all walks of life, and for the most part, they don't bring their sexuality into the workplace, or school, or military. He is simply scared to death of gays....which usually means there is something there there.

 

[The Dude]

A Jesus freak who likes weed, rare. You do have the right to work against gay teachers. We have one here in Covington. I'm immature enough to beat the shit out of you while your doing it.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, I never sat down and analyzed it. I saw a picture of a naked woman and immediately got a hard on and felt funny all over. I was about 9. I don't know how you equate that to "hate".

In other words, you saw a naked woman's body and were aroused. It was beyond your control. It was something you were born with.



Thanks for helping prove our point.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I never said I had a right to be unoffended. I do have the right to determine who teaches my children.

Only if you can show that the teacher is not teaching to the standards set by the school; otherwise you have no say so.

 

[WinterBorn]

I don't believe queers should teach kids.

Why not?

 

[WinterBorn]

Is it biologically possible for me to impregnate a woman at age 9?

No it is probably not. But you admitted you were sexually arounsed. Which shows that children can be sexually aroused before they are able to procreate.

 

[WinterBorn]

I checked and it says males usually cannot ejaculate until age 13. So we are not born sexual.

Around that age, yes. That is when boys are able to procreate. Now go look up when they can be aroused and achieve erections. Because that is the sign of sexuality, not ejaculation.

 

[dixon76710]

First of all, I hope you understand that the gov't cannot base its laws or who gets benefits solely on the Holy Bible.

Second of all, the story of Adam and Eve, while beautiful, cannot be used in this argument. First, because it is a story and not the actual, physical truth. And second, because they were not even the only people in the biblical story at the time. Even the bible does not claim that everyone is descended from Adam and Eve.

But they all are descended from exclusively heterosexual couplings, and never from homosexual couplings. Religion, law, culture and tradition have always encouraged heterosexual couples to marry because heterosexual couplings frequently lead to procreation. I suspect, if homosexual sex also lead to procreation, a similiar or the same tradition would have evolved for homosexuals.

And even though there is no longer the need to multiply to the extent there was when the bible was written, the benefit of children being born into homes with both their mother and father present to provide and care for them, and fewer born into the alternative of homes with one or none of their parents present, continues. Children tend to do better when they have the benefit of both their mother and father present to provide and care for them. Thus the encouragement of heterosexual couples to marry. Simply having homosexual parents doesnt present the same advantage of biological parents.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

But they all are descended from exclusively heterosexual couplings, and never from homosexual couplings. Religion, law, culture and tradition have always encouraged heterosexual couples to marry because heterosexual couplings frequently lead to procreation. I suspect, if homosexual sex also lead to procreation, a similiar or the same tradition would have evolved for homosexuals.

And even though there is no longer the need to multiply to the extent there was when the bible was written, the benefit of children being born into homes with both their mother and father present to provide and care for them, and fewer born into the alternative of homes with one or none of their parents present, continues. Children tend to do better when they have the benefit of both their mother and father present to provide and care for them. Thus the encouragement of heterosexual couples to marry. Simply having homosexual parents doesnt present the same advantage of biological parents.

"Simply having homosexual parents doesnt present the same advantage of biological parents."
Why not?

 

[Phantasmal]

But they all are descended from exclusively heterosexual couplings, and never from homosexual couplings. Religion, law, culture and tradition have always encouraged heterosexual couples to marry because heterosexual couplings frequently lead to procreation. I suspect, if homosexual sex also lead to procreation, a similiar or the same tradition would have evolved for homosexuals.

And even though there is no longer the need to multiply to the extent there was when the bible was written, the benefit of children being born into homes with both their mother and father present to provide and care for them, and fewer born into the alternative of homes with one or none of their parents present, continues. Children tend to do better when they have the benefit of both their mother and father present to provide and care for them. Thus the encouragement of heterosexual couples to marry. Simply having homosexual parents doesnt present the same advantage of biological parents.

Children thrive where there is love.

 

[WinterBorn]

. Simply having homosexual parents doesnt present the same advantage of biological parents.

Lets focus on that supposition, since it is the basis for your argument.

Do you have any evidence that gay parents would not present the same advantages as straight parents? Or that adoptive parents offer less advantages than biological ones?

 

[dixon76710]

I checked and it says males usually cannot ejaculate until age 13. So we are not born sexual.

I have memories of my sexual attraction to my bed sheets back to 3 or 4 yrs old. Especially when they had that freshly washed, line dried, soft feeling. A compulsive linensexual from a very early age. And orgasms dont require ejaculation.

 

[The Dude]

Children thrive where there is love.

Alias was raised in a jail

 

[dixon76710]

Lets focus on that supposition, since it is the basis for your argument.

Do you have any evidence that gay parents would not present the same advantages as straight parents? Or that adoptive parents offer less advantages than biological ones?

No, re read my posts. No where will you see any mention of "straight parents". The preference is for biological parents. NOT, because biological parents are presumably "straight parents", but instead because they are biological parents.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, re read my posts. No where will you see any mention of "straight parents". The preference is for biological parents. NOT, because biological parents are presumably "straight parents", but instead because they are biological parents.

Ok, then answer only one of the two questions I asked.

Do you have any evidence that adoptive parents offer less advantages than biological parents?

 

[dixon76710]

I disagree. No respect for queers. No one should be mistreated, but no respect for sexual deviants. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Show respect for Christians. Call it whatever you want to call it, but don't call it marriage.

Im an atheist and still agree in that the respect is due the nuclear family, mothers and fathers providing and caring for the children they have created, as opposed to the alternative of only one or none doing so. This government encouragement and subsidizing of "gay marriage" is nothing more than an attempt to mainstream homosexuality. Win more respect from the rest of society for homosexuals and dignity for themselves. Not a proper role of government, encouraging behavior so that those who engage in that behavior can feel better about doing so.

 

[WinterBorn]

Im an atheist and still agree in that the respect is due the nuclear family, mothers and fathers providing and caring for the children they have created, as opposed to the alternative of only one or none doing so. This government encouragement and subsidizing of "gay marriage" is nothing more than an attempt to mainstream homosexuality. Win more respect from the rest of society for homosexuals and dignity for themselves. Not a proper role of government, encouraging behavior so that those who engage in that behavior can feel better about doing so.

Since almost all of your arguments involve the children, why not allow gays with children to marry? And remove the benefits given to married couples unless they have children they are supporting?

 

[dixon76710]

Ok, then answer only one of the two questions I asked.

Do you have any evidence that adoptive parents offer less advantages than biological parents?

???? Uuuuuhhh no, but any two consenting adults could adopt a child. Not sure of what you think this does for the arguments, advocating for gay marriage. Heterosexual sex has a natural tendency to lead to procreation. Homosexual sex has no tendency to lead to adoption.

 

[dixon76710]

Since almost all of your arguments involve the children, why not allow gays with children to marry?

What does them being "gay" have to do with anything? Single mother and grandmother down the street from me have been raising 3 kids together for years. What possible justification could there be for denying this couple with children the rights of marriage while extending them to two lesbians with a kid? What justification could there be for this special treatment because two people happen to rub genitals.
Rational argument can be made that any two consenting adults should be able to receive the rights of marriage but I cant imagine any rational argument that only sexual couples should be able to do so.