Conservative State Challenge: "The Child-Protective/Fiscal-Future Marriage Act"

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

That dog won't hunt, Sil. Those are non-starters. We were both abused. You need to get over it, because abuse has been shown to occur at about the same incident rate by heteros and homos. Devote your energy and passion into good parenting causes for all children.

That's exactly what I am doing. There is no pain of child abuse worse than psychological. Bruises heal. Internal pain does not. The kids writing the amicus briefs who were raised in gay homes said "we experience psychological pain of deprivation as a result". Nobody listened to them. Will you advocate duct taping the mouths of children who are in psychological pain?

Sil, you don't give a shit about chidlren. You care only about hurting gays and lesbians. As denying marriage to same sex parents doensn't mean that their children have opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that they never have marri3ed parents.

Which hurts those children and helps no child. Your proposal does nothing you're demanding be done.

I ask again, are you insisting that gays and lesbians shouldn't be allowed to raise their own children? Because that seems to be what you're arguing.

What do you mean, "their own" children? It takes two human beings to create one child and they can't be the same sex. So are we talking about sperm banks? Surrogacy? It's all different flavors of the same immoral scheme to raise a child while deliberately depriving them of a mother and a father. There is no clearer example of selfishness than to put one's whims above the needs and rights of children. You people are just evil.

 

[Skylar]

That dog won't hunt, Sil. Those are non-starters. We were both abused. You need to get over it, because abuse has been shown to occur at about the same incident rate by heteros and homos. Devote your energy and passion into good parenting causes for all children.

That's exactly what I am doing. There is no pain of child abuse worse than psychological. Bruises heal. Internal pain does not. The kids writing the amicus briefs who were raised in gay homes said "we experience psychological pain of deprivation as a result". Nobody listened to them. Will you advocate duct taping the mouths of children who are in psychological pain?

Sil, you don't give a shit about chidlren. You care only about hurting gays and lesbians. As denying marriage to same sex parents doensn't mean that their children have opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that they never have marri3ed parents.

Which hurts those children and helps no child. Your proposal does nothing you're demanding be done.

I ask again, are you insisting that gays and lesbians shouldn't be allowed to raise their own children? Because that seems to be what you're arguing.

What do you mean, "their own" children? It takes two human beings to create one child and they can't be the same sex.

Adoption or surrogacy obviously. With one biological parent and one adoptive parent. Or two adoptive parents. As is done all the time for straight couples when one of the two is incapable of siring/giving birth to a child.

Both same sex parents are recognized as the parents of these children by the law. As they do for anyone else who uses adoption and surrogacy. And of course, as they are recognized by the child. The child doesn't give a shit about your politics or your religion. They love their parents.

Now....are you advocating taking the children of same sex parents away from their parents?

Its such a simple question. Your ilk are clearly insinuating it. And you won't answer my direct question. Why is that?

 

[Silhouette]

Nothing you've demanded in any way effects the 'problem' you believe exists. Making your 'solution' irrelevant to the problem. It would be like smearing a car with vicks vapor rub to fix a flat tire. Nothing you've proposed solves any 'problem' you've alleged.

The only way your reasoning works...is if you're demanding that same sex parents have their children taken from them.

Nope. The problem of kids not having a mother and father in their home IS SOLVED BY WHO THE STATE INCENTIVIZES When money is dangled in front of people, they tend to do the things required in order to get to it. No mother and father for kids in the home as married? No tax breaks. See how solving that problem works?

When we talk about incentives instead of mandates, nobody loses their kids. I understand you being the King of hyperbole and drawing false conclusions helps you milk sympathy. But that buck stops here.

What the Court did in Spring and in June this year was to hold a hearing that resulted in the fed forcing states to incentivize homes without a mother or father to kids...ie: they forced states to incentivize their own financial doom, since the Prince's Trust Survey, the largest of its kind, found that young adult men who grew up without a father and young adult women who grew up without a mother are statistically depressed, suicidal, addicted to drugs and indigent. And all that was decided without any legal representation for children or guardians ad litem to the Hearing upon which the complete revision of the marriage contract was Heard and argued. You can't leave one vital party to a contract out of the discussion and ratification of its complete overhaul.

Suppose there's case law about that Skylar?

Clearly it isn't being solved...The majority of children not having a mother or a father are:
a) children being raised by single parents, whose mother or father has abandoned them and b) children abandoned by both parents.
The so-called incentives you keep claiming are for some purpose do not work- since there are more single parent households than ever.
Denying a gay couple marriage gives no child two opposite gender parents.
Denying a gay couple marriage benefits no child.
Denying a gay couple who are parents marriage harms their children- by denying them married parents.

Why would states want to entice, create or assent to conditions which would create more motherless daughters and fatherless sons? Saying everything you just said does not erase one iota of the FACT that children thrive best and are the most productive young adults when they are raised in a home with both a mother and a father. Denying a gay couple marriage is not an assault on gays. It is instead an affirmation of the third party to the contract, the legally-dominant one and what they need from that contract: both a mother and father. This isn't a whim of theirs. This is what they NEED..

 

[JakeStarkey]

The only "immoral scheme' is that of those who tried and failed to prevent marriage equality. And perhaps Syriusly reads Sil's long confused screeds. I don't, and I am sure almost no one else reads them.

 

[EverCurious]

Did you know that an estimated 650,000 men died in the Civil War?

I wonder how many kids were raised by only a mother and what kind of "mental damage" was done to those children.

 

[JakeStarkey]

evercurious, don't do that: Sil's head will explode.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

Calling a union between two men or between two women a “marriage” does not make a marriage; it only makes a sick mockery of a marriage.

And allowing children to be adopted into this mockery certainly guarantees that they will never be raised under a genuine marriage, with a mother and a father.

You cannot defend this sickness, and then honestly deny that you are in favor of abusing and neglecting children; nor can you credibly claim any concern for the well-being of the next generation or of the society in which they will live.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

Calling a union between two men or between two women a “marriage” does not make a marriage; it only makes a sick mockery of a marriage.

And allowing children to be adopted into this mockery certainly guarantees that they will never be raised under a genuine marriage, with a mother and a father.

You cannot defend this sickness, and then honestly deny that you are in favor of abusing and neglecting children; nor can you credibly claim any concern for the well-being of the next generation or of the society in which they will live.

You sound as stupid as Dallin Oaks.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You sound as stupid as Dallin Oaks.

I know you intended that to be an insult, but coming from someone who would insult me alongside Dallin Oaks, in such a manner as to suggest that I am anywhere near an equal to him, is not something that I can take as anything other than a great compliment.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You sound as stupid as Dallin Oaks.

I know you intended that to be an insult, but coming from someone who would insult me alongside Dallin Oaks, in such a manner as to suggest that I am anywhere near an equal to him, is not something that I can take as anything other than a great compliment.

Yep, you can be as foolish as that silly son of a gun. I have met him. What an arrogant dope. We told him no on something he wanted and he was not happy. The decision went against him.

Bob, you are smart to be reading me instead of pretending to have me on ignore. Do not let anyone else make your life's choices for you. Be your on free agent.

 

[Silhouette]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

Calling a union between two men or between two women a “marriage” does not make a marriage; it only makes a sick mockery of a marriage....And allowing children to be adopted into this mockery certainly guarantees that they will never be raised under a genuine marriage, with a mother and a father....You cannot defend this sickness, and then honestly deny that you are in favor of abusing and neglecting children; nor can you credibly claim any concern for the well-being of the next generation or of the society in which they will live.

Yep.

 

[Syriusly]

That dog won't hunt, Sil. Those are non-starters. We were both abused. You need to get over it, because abuse has been shown to occur at about the same incident rate by heteros and homos. Devote your energy and passion into good parenting causes for all children.

That's exactly what I am doing. There is no pain of child abuse worse than psychological. Bruises heal. Internal pain does not. The kids writing the amicus briefs who were raised in gay homes said "we experience psychological pain of deprivation as a result". Nobody listened to them. Will you advocate duct taping the mouths of children who are in psychological pain?

Sil, you don't give a shit about chidlren. You care only about hurting gays and lesbians. As denying marriage to same sex parents doensn't mean that their children have opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that they never have marri3ed parents.

Which hurts those children and helps no child. Your proposal does nothing you're demanding be done.

I ask again, are you insisting that gays and lesbians shouldn't be allowed to raise their own children? Because that seems to be what you're arguing.

What do you mean, "their own" children? It takes two human beings to create one child and they can't be the same sex. So are we talking about sperm banks? Surrogacy? It's all different flavors of the same immoral scheme to raise a child while deliberately depriving them of a mother and a father. There is no clearer example of selfishness than to put one's whims above the needs and rights of children. You people are just evil.

Here is a photo of Bob and Dolores Hope with their own children.

All adopted.

Please tell me you aren't one of those people who tells adoptive parents that they aren't 'real parents' or that its too bad that they can't have 'real children'?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

Calling a union between two men or between two women a “marriage” does not make a marriage; it only makes a sick mockery of a marriage....And allowing children to be adopted into this mockery certainly guarantees that they will never be raised under a genuine marriage, with a mother and a father....You cannot defend this sickness, and then honestly deny that you are in favor of abusing and neglecting children; nor can you credibly claim any concern for the well-being of the next generation or of the society in which they will live.

Yep.

Nope.

 

[Syriusly]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

Calling a union between two men or between two women a “marriage” does not make a marriage; it only makes a sick mockery of a marriage..

I have been married for 20 years- and unlike that conservative Icon Donald Trump- I have been married to the same woman the entire time. Talk about mockery of marriage- Donald Trump- Ronald Reagan- Newt Gingrich- all Conservatives who divorced and remarried.

My marriage is not hurt by Donald Trump marrying over and over again- why would my marriage be harmed by two men or two women who want to be married together- once?

 

[Syriusly]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

And allowing children to be adopted into this mockery certainly guarantees that they will never be raised under a genuine marriage, with a mother and a father..

Since the children who truly NEED to be adopted have almost always been abandoned by their biological mother and father- and since at any time there are 100,000 children awaiting adoption- and 33,000 of those children will wait 3 or more years to be adopted- why the hell are you suddenly so ******* concerned about the adoption of children?

33,000 children waiting 3 or more years to be adopted- hetero parents aren't stepping up to adopt them- who are you to tell these kids that its better that they wait in foster care for years at a time for a family that actually wants them?

Who are you to tell kids its better for them to age out of the system and be kicked out onto the streets- rather than be adopted by a family that wants them?

You know- a family like this one?

 

[Syriusly]

Denying marriage to same sex parents merely guarantees that these children will never have married parents. Which hurts these children by the 10s of thousands and helps no one.

You cannot defend this sickness, and then honestly deny that you are in favor of abusing and neglecting children; nor can you credibly claim any concern for the well-being of the next generation or of the society in which they will live.

Tell me how you defend abandoning children to be aged out of the system rather than let them be adopted by parents who want them- who happen to be gay?

 

[Syriusly]

Nothing you've demanded in any way effects the 'problem' you believe exists. Making your 'solution' irrelevant to the problem. It would be like smearing a car with vicks vapor rub to fix a flat tire. Nothing you've proposed solves any 'problem' you've alleged.

The only way your reasoning works...is if you're demanding that same sex parents have their children taken from them.

Nope. The problem of kids not having a mother and father in their home IS SOLVED BY WHO THE STATE INCENTIVIZES When money is dangled in front of people, they tend to do the things required in order to get to it. No mother and father for kids in the home as married? No tax breaks. See how solving that problem works?

When we talk about incentives instead of mandates, nobody loses their kids. I understand you being the King of hyperbole and drawing false conclusions helps you milk sympathy. But that buck stops here.

What the Court did in Spring and in June this year was to hold a hearing that resulted in the fed forcing states to incentivize homes without a mother or father to kids...ie: they forced states to incentivize their own financial doom, since the Prince's Trust Survey, the largest of its kind, found that young adult men who grew up without a father and young adult women who grew up without a mother are statistically depressed, suicidal, addicted to drugs and indigent. And all that was decided without any legal representation for children or guardians ad litem to the Hearing upon which the complete revision of the marriage contract was Heard and argued. You can't leave one vital party to a contract out of the discussion and ratification of its complete overhaul.

Suppose there's case law about that Skylar?

Clearly it isn't being solved...The majority of children not having a mother or a father are:
a) children being raised by single parents, whose mother or father has abandoned them and b) children abandoned by both parents.
The so-called incentives you keep claiming are for some purpose do not work- since there are more single parent households than ever.
Denying a gay couple marriage gives no child two opposite gender parents.
Denying a gay couple marriage benefits no child.
Denying a gay couple who are parents marriage harms their children- by denying them married parents.

Why would states want to entice, create or assent to conditions which would create more motherless daughters and fatherless sons? Saying everything you just said does not erase one iota of the FACT that children thrive best and are the most productive young adults when they are raised in a home with both a mother and a father. Denying a gay couple marriage is not an assault on gays. It is instead an affirmation of the third party to the contract, the legally-dominant one and what they need from that contract: both a mother and father. This isn't a whim of theirs. This is what they NEED..

As you ignore everything I posted

Clearly it isn't being solved...The majority of children not having a mother or a father are:
a) children being raised by single parents, whose mother or father has abandoned them and b) children abandoned by both parents.
The so-called incentives you keep claiming are for some purpose do not work- since there are more single parent households than ever.
Denying a gay couple marriage gives no child two opposite gender parents.
Denying a gay couple marriage benefits no child.
Denying a gay couple who are parents marriage harms their children- by denying them married parents

 

[Syriusly]

Nothing you've demanded in any way effects the 'problem' you believe exists. Making your 'solution' irrelevant to the problem. It would be like smearing a car with vicks vapor rub to fix a flat tire. Nothing you've proposed solves any 'problem' you've alleged.

The only way your reasoning works...is if you're demanding that same sex parents have their children taken from them.

Nope. The problem of kids not having a mother and father in their home IS SOLVED BY WHO THE STATE INCENTIVIZES When money is dangled in front of people,..

How is it solved when there are more parents with single parents than ever?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Clearly it isn't being solved...The majority of children not having a mother or a father are:
a) children being raised by single parents, whose mother or father has abandoned them and b) children abandoned by both parents.
The so-called incentives you keep claiming are for some purpose do not work- since there are more single parent households than ever.
Denying a gay couple marriage gives no child two opposite gender parents.
Denying a gay couple marriage benefits no child.
Denying a gay couple who are parents marriage harms their children- by denying them married parents

The problem is the abandonment of basic standards of morality and decency, and disregard for the responsibilities that apply to marriage, childbearing, and family.

Like a standard cliché of wrong-wing ideology, you propose to treat this disease with ever greater doses of exactly the same poison that is causing it in the first place. More moral decay and degradation is not a remedy for the problems that are already being caused by moral decay and degradation.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

That dog won't hunt, Sil. Those are non-starters. We were both abused. You need to get over it, because abuse has been shown to occur at about the same incident rate by heteros and homos. Devote your energy and passion into good parenting causes for all children.

That's exactly what I am doing. There is no pain of child abuse worse than psychological. Bruises heal. Internal pain does not. The kids writing the amicus briefs who were raised in gay homes said "we experience psychological pain of deprivation as a result". Nobody listened to them. Will you advocate duct taping the mouths of children who are in psychological pain?

Sil, you don't give a shit about chidlren. You care only about hurting gays and lesbians. As denying marriage to same sex parents doensn't mean that their children have opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that they never have marri3ed parents.

Which hurts those children and helps no child. Your proposal does nothing you're demanding be done.

I ask again, are you insisting that gays and lesbians shouldn't be allowed to raise their own children? Because that seems to be what you're arguing.

What do you mean, "their own" children? It takes two human beings to create one child and they can't be the same sex. So are we talking about sperm banks? Surrogacy? It's all different flavors of the same immoral scheme to raise a child while deliberately depriving them of a mother and a father. There is no clearer example of selfishness than to put one's whims above the needs and rights of children. You people are just evil.

Here is a photo of Bob and Dolores Hope with their own children.

View attachment 50631

All adopted.

Please tell me you aren't one of those people who tells adoptive parents that they aren't 'real parents' or that its too bad that they can't have 'real children'?

Adoptive mother father couples are real parents. All other combinations are just sick people sucking an innocent child into their demonic delusions.