Alabama SC orders judges to stop issuing homosexuals "marriage" licenses.

[Silhouette]

Marriage does benefit children. The courts go into elaborate detail of benefits withheld from children when marriage is denied their same sex parents...

Please list each and every type of marriage there could be legally if "marriage equality" becomes a mandate federally, and then list how each of these brand new types of marriages/social experiments would benefit any children involved in them...bearing in mind that there has been a very large survey done in recent years that shows a boy not having a father and a girl not having a mother is detrimental to them: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Let's see your list..?

 

[Skylar]

Marriage does benefit children. The courts go into elaborate detail of benefits withheld from children when marriage is denied their same sex parents...

Please list each and every type of marriage there could be legally if "marriage equality" becomes a mandate federally, and then list how each of these brand new types of marriages/social experiments would benefit any children involved in them...bearing in mind that there has been a very large survey done in recent years that shows a boy not having a father and a girl not having a mother is detrimental to them: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Let's see your list..?

Please explain how your 'list' is relevant to there being any benefits to children in denying marriage to same sex parents.

There is no relevance. You're offering us another red herring because you've painted yourself into a corner. The courts have already recognized the HARM caused to children of same sex parents when you deny their parents marriage. And you can present us with no benefits to these children in denying their same sex parents access to marriage.

So your proposal is all harm to these children but no benefit.

Why in the fuck would we *ever* do that?

 

[Skylar]

.bearing in mind that there has been a very large survey done in recent years that shows a boy not having a father and a girl not having a mother is detrimental to them: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The Prince Trust study doesn't say a thing about gays, gay marriage, same sex parenting, or measure the effects of any kind of parenting. It doesn't say anything about the effects of no mother or father.

You hallucinated all of that.

Nor would anything you hallucinated be effected by same sex marriage. As the gender of a child's parents have nothing to do with whether those parents are allowed to married.

 

[Preacher]

Alabama federal judge declines to lift gay marriage order - Yahoo News
Just ignore her.

 

[danielpalos]

Are you as strongly opposed to heterosexuals who show 'little to no means to control deviant sexual impulses' having children? What constitutes uncontrolled deviant sexual impulses and who decides that?

More to the point, since nobody can predict with any accuracy at all what happens in adults' bedrooms, the reliable litmus where children are involved is does the inherent structure of a marriage benefit children? A so-called "gay marriage" guarantees to deprive sons of fathers and daughters of mothers. A hetero one does not do this.

That is the only difference between the two that can be spoken about with certainty.

Dudette, the "inherent structure" of marriage changed at Agincourt, when chivalry was defeated in favor of "common courtesy" and "natural rights" eventually for women.

In the good olde days, when real men really wore shining suits of armor and hired the noble Art of the chastity belt maker to prove they were really serious about practicing the Art of the Husbandman, because wo-men were the property of real men.

That was the structure of the family during real times of chivalry.

 

[Silhouette]

Alabama federal judge declines to lift gay marriage order - Yahoo News
Just ignore her.

Looks like an LGBT staged event to me...complete with "let's not make this about the structure of marriage as to kids "Bible thumper" in the backgroud of the photo". I see a boy child is involved. Is he one of the women's son? So the rogue judge is presiding over the institutiontalizing of depriving a boy of a father.

Nice. I hope she is fined and disciplined by the powers overseeing her in Alabama.

 

[danielpalos]

Our federal Congress is only delegated the social power to Tax, to pay the debts, and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States.

Not, any Thing and every Thing; as the right would have us believe.

 

[Skylar]

Alabama federal judge declines to lift gay marriage order - Yahoo News
Just ignore her.

Looks like an LGBT staged event to me...complete with "let's not make this about the structure of marriage as to kids "Bible thumper" in the backgroud of the photo".

Yeah, but you thought it looked like the courts were expressing their support for gay marriage bans when they granted the stay for Utah. So clearly what you think something 'looks like' doesn't amount to much.

I see a boy child is involved. Is he one of the women's son? So the rogue judge is presiding over the institutiontalizing of depriving a boy of a father.

How is the judge 'rogue'? Remember, just because you ignore constitutional guarantees doesn't mean that any judge is obligated to do the same.

Nice. I hope she is fined and disciplined by the powers overseeing her in Alabama.

I'm sure you do. Alas, its probably going to be judge Roy Moore that is against disciplined, just like he was in 2003 for the same shenanigans of ignoring a federal court order. Judge Moore became Mr. Moore when he was removed from office.

The judge that issued the court order that Moore ignored? Still on the bench.

 

[Skylar]

Oh, and Silo....how does denying marriage to same sex parents help their children?

And please be specific. So far, we have only severe and immediate legal harm caused by your proposals. Tell us about the benefits that balance out that extravagant harm to children.

 

[Silhouette]

Oh, and Silo....how does denying marriage to same sex parents help their children?

And please be specific. So far, we have only severe and immediate legal harm caused by your proposals. Tell us about the benefits that balance out that extravagant harm to children.

It "helps" their children in exactly the same way denying marriage "helps" children of single parents (monosexuals) and "helps" the children of polysexuals (polygamists) and children of incest.

Are you suggesting that in order to "help" children we should force states to incentivize any type of arrangement under the sun that children are caught up in "as married"? Or should we draw the line somewhere on behalf of children into the future?

Would that line include not depriving boys of a father or girls of a mother?

 

[Skylar]

It "helps" their children in exactly the same way denying marriage "helps" children of single parents (monosexuals) and "helps" the children of polysexuals (polygamists) and children of incest.

And what is that benefit? Be specific. Whenever I ask you how your proposal helps the children of same sex parents, you start babbling about anything BUT the children of same sex parents. And you never have an answer.

The reason you can't answer is simple: there is no benefit. Your proposal of denying marriage to same sex parents doesn't help their children in anyway. While your insistence that we deny marriage to same sex parents most definitely harms children, severely;

And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.....

.....DOMA also brings financial harm to children of same-sex couples. It raises the cost of health care for families by taxing health benefits provided by employers to their workers’ same-sex spouses.. And it denies or reduces benefits allowed to families upon the loss of a spous eand parent, benefits that are an integral part of family security"

The humiliation of these children, making it difficult for them to understand the closeness of their own families, financial harm, higher healthcare costs, a reduction in benefits, and the reduction in family security. These are the costs of your proposal for children.

And there are no benefits.

Why then would we *ever* do what you propose?

Would that line include not depriving boys of a father or girls of a mother?

And how does denying marriage to lesbian parents provide the child with a same sex parent?

It doesn't. Your 'solution' has nothing to do with your 'problem'. Like calling for a kidney transplant to treat a sprained ankle, it just doesn't make the slightest sense. And you know it. So do we. And so do the courts.

Which is why your ilk keep losing, your record currently 2 for 46.

 

[Silhouette]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

 

[Montrovant]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Only homosexuals can have children without being married. So whether or not they are married has no effect on the parental status of the children.

 

[Skylar]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

And if a lesbian couple has a child....how does denying that couple marriage help THEIR children?

Specifically.

You've been running from this question for weeks now. You have no answer, as their is no benefit. Which is exactly my point.

 

[Skylar]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Only homosexuals can have children without being married. So whether or not they are married has no effect on the parental status of the children.

Exactly. Denying lesbian parents marriage doesnt magically mean their children have a mother and a father.

Sil's 'solution' has nothing to do with his 'problem'. And makes as much sense as demanding a foot amputation to treat dandruff.

Sil....are you starting to see why your ilk have a comically bad record in court?

 

[danielpalos]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Life isn't fair, according to the right. Would having two fathers be preferable for income purposes?

 

[Silhouette]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Life isn't fair, according to the right. Would having two fathers be preferable for income purposes?

We have basically two types of harm that can come to children:

1. Physical harm

2. Psychological harm.

Both of those have different subcategories and #1 can definitely bleed over into #2. The worse type of damage of course is psychological. Physical wounds can heal within six weeks. Psychological wounds linger for years, decades...a lifetime. As such, psychological wounds get first attention when considering the new experiment on redacting the word "marriage": "how will this affect kids psychologically"? Finances can be remedied and even a poor family that has a functioning structure and love can be happy even in the poorest circumstances. Aboriginal tribes come to mind here. They frequently have very few personal possessions but the families are happy, they take care of their own and life is generally good.

A boy needs a father and a girl needs a mother. The neo-redaction experiment of marriage known as "same-sex marriage" deprives boys of fathers and girls of mothers in its very structural form. This has been shown to be detrimental to children. Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum So even a sub-moron could predict that gay marriage will harm at least 50% of the kids involved just by its physical structure, all other things being equal.

So, whatever financial advantage you could cite, it does not mitigate properly the psychological damage even such well-heeled kids would experience by being taught by daily structural example that "the other gender doesn't matter in a functioning adult world". At some point, that daily message is going to cause big problems. Serial killers are born fed on that fodder. When a category of human being "doesn't matter", watch out... The first thing violence does is thingify the victim. Then it strikes. All it needs is a trigger event.

 

[Skylar]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Life isn't fair, according to the right. Would having two fathers be preferable for income purposes?

We have basically two types of harm that can come to children:

1. Physical harm

2. Psychological harm.

Both of those have different subcategories and #1 can definitely bleed over into #2. The worse type of damage of course is psychological. Physical wounds can heal within six weeks. Psychological wounds linger for years, decades...a lifetime. As such, psychological wounds get first attention when considering the new experiment on redacting the word "marriage": "how will this affect kids psychologically"? Finances can be remedied and even a poor family that has a functioning structure and love can be happy even in the poorest circumstances. Aboriginal tribes come to mind here. They frequently have very few personal possessions but the families are happy, they take care of their own and life is generally good.

A boy needs a father and a girl needs a mother. The neo-redaction experiment of marriage known as "same-sex marriage" deprives boys of fathers and girls of mothers in its very structural form. This has been shown to be detrimental to children. Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum So even a sub-moron could predict that gay marriage will harm at least 50% of the kids involved just by its physical structure, all other things being equal.

So, whatever financial advantage you could cite, it does not mitigate properly the psychological damage even such well-heeled kids would experience by being taught by daily structural example that "the other gender doesn't matter in a functioning adult world". At some point, that daily message is going to cause big problems. Serial killers are born fed on that fodder. When a category of human being "doesn't matter", watch out... The first thing violence does is thingify the victim. Then it strikes. All it needs is a trigger event.

How does denying marriage to same sex parents solve any of the issues you've imagined for their children?

If you were to deny marriage to a lesbian couple with a child, does the child suddenly have opposite sex parents now? Of course not.

Your 'solution' has nothing to do with your 'problem'.

 

[Montrovant]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Life isn't fair, according to the right. Would having two fathers be preferable for income purposes?

We have basically two types of harm that can come to children:

1. Physical harm

2. Psychological harm.

Both of those have different subcategories and #1 can definitely bleed over into #2. The worse type of damage of course is psychological. Physical wounds can heal within six weeks. Psychological wounds linger for years, decades...a lifetime. As such, psychological wounds get first attention when considering the new experiment on redacting the word "marriage": "how will this affect kids psychologically"? Finances can be remedied and even a poor family that has a functioning structure and love can be happy even in the poorest circumstances. Aboriginal tribes come to mind here. They frequently have very few personal possessions but the families are happy, they take care of their own and life is generally good.

A boy needs a father and a girl needs a mother. The neo-redaction experiment of marriage known as "same-sex marriage" deprives boys of fathers and girls of mothers in its very structural form. This has been shown to be detrimental to children. Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum So even a sub-moron could predict that gay marriage will harm at least 50% of the kids involved just by its physical structure, all other things being equal.

So, whatever financial advantage you could cite, it does not mitigate properly the psychological damage even such well-heeled kids would experience by being taught by daily structural example that "the other gender doesn't matter in a functioning adult world". At some point, that daily message is going to cause big problems. Serial killers are born fed on that fodder. When a category of human being "doesn't matter", watch out... The first thing violence does is thingify the victim. Then it strikes. All it needs is a trigger event.

What kind of random, pulled out of your ass nonsense is this? "Physical wounds can heal within six weeks"? What on earth are you talking about? Sure, physical wounds can heal within six weeks.....or 3 weeks.....or a year.....or be permanent. How do you come up with this kind of ridiculousness, putting a timetable on undefined wounds?

Oh, and once again, the Prince's Trust Youth Index does not say what you claim it does, which has been shown to you over and over again. It does not specify parents, instead discussing positive same gender role models. That could be a parent, grandparent, brother, nanny, uncle, family friend, teacher, coach, etc. It also never mentions same sex marriage or homosexuality, nor does it give detail about what circumstances the children who didn't have positive same gender role models lived under.

Nice job tying serial killers to same sex parents. You truly are a disingenuous, lying nitwit.

 

[Skylar]

The benefit, very simply put Skylar, is that boys get fathers and girls get mothers 100% of the time in regular marriage. Redacted marriage (for homosexuals) boys get fathers and girls get mothers only 50% of the cases.

Life isn't fair, according to the right. Would having two fathers be preferable for income purposes?

We have basically two types of harm that can come to children:

1. Physical harm

2. Psychological harm.

Both of those have different subcategories and #1 can definitely bleed over into #2. The worse type of damage of course is psychological. Physical wounds can heal within six weeks. Psychological wounds linger for years, decades...a lifetime. As such, psychological wounds get first attention when considering the new experiment on redacting the word "marriage": "how will this affect kids psychologically"? Finances can be remedied and even a poor family that has a functioning structure and love can be happy even in the poorest circumstances. Aboriginal tribes come to mind here. They frequently have very few personal possessions but the families are happy, they take care of their own and life is generally good.

A boy needs a father and a girl needs a mother. The neo-redaction experiment of marriage known as "same-sex marriage" deprives boys of fathers and girls of mothers in its very structural form. This has been shown to be detrimental to children. Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum So even a sub-moron could predict that gay marriage will harm at least 50% of the kids involved just by its physical structure, all other things being equal.

So, whatever financial advantage you could cite, it does not mitigate properly the psychological damage even such well-heeled kids would experience by being taught by daily structural example that "the other gender doesn't matter in a functioning adult world". At some point, that daily message is going to cause big problems. Serial killers are born fed on that fodder. When a category of human being "doesn't matter", watch out... The first thing violence does is thingify the victim. Then it strikes. All it needs is a trigger event.

What kind of random, pulled out of your ass nonsense is this? "Physical wounds can heal within six weeks"? What on earth are you talking about? Sure, physical wounds can heal within six weeks.....or 3 weeks.....or a year.....or be permanent. How do you come up with this kind of ridiculousness, putting a timetable on undefined wounds?

What you're watching is Sil's slow construction of lies he's going to tell himself in June. And he just makes this shit up as he goes along.

Oh, and once again, the Prince's Trust Youth Index does not say what you claim it does, which has been shown to you over and over again. It does not specify parents, instead discussing positive same gender role models. That could be a parent, grandparent, brother, nanny, uncle, family friend, teacher, coach, etc. It also never mentions same sex marriage or homosexuality, nor does it give detail about what circumstances the children who didn't have positive same gender role models lived under.

Nice job tying serial killers to same sex parents. You truly are a disingenuous, lying nitwit.

Oh, its far worse than that. Sil can't even explain how denying same sex marriage would help their children.

Lets say you deny a lesbian couple marriage. Does their child now have opposite sex parents? Nope. So...what the fuck does denying marriage to same sex couples have with *anything* Sil is babbling about?

Not a damn thing. And Sil knows it.