Gay Marriage Is About to Be Legal in Alabama

[elektra]

Why would exclude Homosexuals? To protect children from being adopted by Homosexuals.

Gays and lesbians are already having kids. Depriving gays and lesbians of marriage doesn't magically prevent their children from being raised by same sex parents. It only guarantees that those children will never have married parents. So the entire basis of your reasoning is blithering nonsense.

And that's before we get to your claims of 'protecting children' from their own parents.

Having kids and adopting orphans are two completely different things.

Orphans life is tragic enough, without Homosexuals forcing Orphans into a Homosexual lifestyle.

Contrary to what you believe, it is not natural to enter through the exit for the bodies waste, most children will find that a bit repulsive. At the very least, bringing them into the Homosexual lifestyle is abuse.

 

[Skylar]

Why would exclude Homosexuals? To protect children from being adopted by Homosexuals.

Gays and lesbians are already having kids. Depriving gays and lesbians of marriage doesn't magically prevent their children from being raised by same sex parents. It only guarantees that those children will never have married parents. So the entire basis of your reasoning is blithering nonsense.

And that's before we get to your claims of 'protecting children' from their own parents.

Having kids and adopting orphans are two completely different things.

Not to the kids it isn't.

Orphans life is tragic enough, without Homosexuals forcing Orphans into a Homosexual lifestyle.

With the 'homosexual lifestyle' being everyday life. Going to school plays. Having lunch. Attending birthday parties. Going to the occasional funeral. Doing laundry. While gay.

Where does the 'abuse' part come in?

Worse, your reasoning is utterly irrelevant to gay marriage. As gays can adopt anyway. They can have kids anyway. So denying marriage to gays and lesbians doesn't ensure their children aren't raised by gays and lesbians. It only guarantees that these children will never have married parents.

Which helps no one.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The two homos are NOT the parents.

Says you. As I said, by any rational standard, the people that raise a child are the child's parents. Adoptive parents who raise children they never sired nor bore are those children's parents.

You disagree. So what?

Marriage was intended as an aid in procreation as I pointed out in my post's last line.

Whatever it was 'intended' as, its not longer about procreation. There are millions of people that get married and never have kids. There are millions of people that can't have kids that are allowed to remain married. Infertile couples can marry just as easily as the fertile ones. Nor is there any law in any state that requires that a couple be able to have children before they can marry.

Demonstrating elegantly that there is obviously a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children or the ability to have them. So your basis of excluding gays is non-existent.

As for kids being raised in non-nuclear families and the social ills that have increased with the increased incidence of that condition, you need to pay attention and progress a little. Your thinking is out of date.

The studies I'm citing are as current as last month. And the overwhelming consensus of these studies is that children raised by same sex parents are fine.

Ignore as you will. Just don't expect the courts to.

Increased incidence of unstructured families leads to social demise. Look at the crime and failing schools. No studies necessary.
And you're just rationalizing your way all the way back to my original question; why should the rest of us be coerced by the government to subsidize male-on-male buttfucking?
And why should children be denied the natural right to be raised by their actual parents?

 

[Skylar]

The two homos are NOT the parents.

Says you. As I said, by any rational standard, the people that raise a child are the child's parents. Adoptive parents who raise children they never sired nor bore are those children's parents.

You disagree. So what?

Marriage was intended as an aid in procreation as I pointed out in my post's last line.

Whatever it was 'intended' as, its not longer about procreation. There are millions of people that get married and never have kids. There are millions of people that can't have kids that are allowed to remain married. Infertile couples can marry just as easily as the fertile ones. Nor is there any law in any state that requires that a couple be able to have children before they can marry.

Demonstrating elegantly that there is obviously a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children or the ability to have them. So your basis of excluding gays is non-existent.

As for kids being raised in non-nuclear families and the social ills that have increased with the increased incidence of that condition, you need to pay attention and progress a little. Your thinking is out of date.

The studies I'm citing are as current as last month. And the overwhelming consensus of these studies is that children raised by same sex parents are fine.

Ignore as you will. Just don't expect the courts to.

Increased incidence of unstructured families leads to social demise. Look at the crime and failing schools. No studies necessary.

You cited 'empiracal demonstration' as your standard. When your claims are empiraclly tested and found to be blithering idiocy, you ignore your own standard.

Children of gays and lesbians are fine. That you refuse to accept this is meaningless. As you're nobody in this equation.

And you're just rationalizing your way all the way back to my original question; why should the rest of us be coerced by the government to subsidize male-on-male buttfucking?

Marriage isn't about sex. So the entire premise of your question is invalid.

We've been through this. If you're just going to ignore any answer to your question, why bother asking it? The only difference between not asking and asking and ignoring is that your ignorance is willful in the latter instance.

And why should children be denied the natural right to be raised by their actual parents?

Who says they are? If a straight couple goes to a sperm bank for IVF, do you rant about how their child will be deprived of its natural rights?

Of course not.

If a straight couple adopts an child, do you rant about their child will be deprived of its natural rights?

Again, no.

You only have an issue when the parents are gay or lesbian. Demonstrating you could give a shit about children or their natural rights. Children are nothing but a horse for your ride in your argument against gays. Which is quite awful.

 

[elektra]

Why would exclude Homosexuals? To protect children from being adopted by Homosexuals.

Gays and lesbians are already having kids. Depriving gays and lesbians of marriage doesn't magically prevent their children from being raised by same sex parents. It only guarantees that those children will never have married parents. So the entire basis of your reasoning is blithering nonsense.

And that's before we get to your claims of 'protecting children' from their own parents.

Having kids and adopting orphans are two completely different things.

Not to the kids it isn't.

Orphans life is tragic enough, without Homosexuals forcing Orphans into a Homosexual lifestyle.

With the 'homosexual lifestyle' being everyday life. Going to school plays. Having lunch. Attending birthday parties. Going to the occasional funeral. Doing laundry. While gay.

Where does the 'abuse' part come in?

Worse, your reasoning is utterly irrelevant to gay marriage. As gays can adopt anyway. They can have kids anyway. So denying marriage to gays and lesbians doesn't ensure their children aren't raised by gays and lesbians. It only guarantees that these children will never have married parents.

Which helps no one.

The Abuse comes in when you force a Child into a Homosexual Lifestyle, regardless of what you think, the majority of people reject the Homosexual Lifestyle.

Homosexuals only think of themselves, Homosexuals do not like what the World thinks of their sexual proclivities, hence the Homosexual agenda is to teach the Children its okay.

Politically this is about the Democrats dividing the nation, destroying the Republicans, and having complete dictatorial power over lives.

If more people realized that Children are forced into Homosexual Lifestyles, we would see a huge outcry. Sadly though, CNN and all the other Democrat controlled media refuse to report the news.

 

[Skylar]

Why would exclude Homosexuals? To protect children from being adopted by Homosexuals.

Gays and lesbians are already having kids. Depriving gays and lesbians of marriage doesn't magically prevent their children from being raised by same sex parents. It only guarantees that those children will never have married parents. So the entire basis of your reasoning is blithering nonsense.

And that's before we get to your claims of 'protecting children' from their own parents.

Having kids and adopting orphans are two completely different things.

Not to the kids it isn't.

Orphans life is tragic enough, without Homosexuals forcing Orphans into a Homosexual lifestyle.

With the 'homosexual lifestyle' being everyday life. Going to school plays. Having lunch. Attending birthday parties. Going to the occasional funeral. Doing laundry. While gay.

Where does the 'abuse' part come in?

Worse, your reasoning is utterly irrelevant to gay marriage. As gays can adopt anyway. They can have kids anyway. So denying marriage to gays and lesbians doesn't ensure their children aren't raised by gays and lesbians. It only guarantees that these children will never have married parents.

Which helps no one.

The Abuse comes in when you force a Child into a Homosexual Lifestyle, regardless of what you think, the majority of people reject the Homosexual Lifestyle.

With the 'homosexual lifestyle' being everyday life. Going to work. Having dinner with friends. Washing your clothes. Going for a jog. Attending a birthday party. While gay.

How is that abuse?

You're simply restating your premise. You're not establishing it as valid. When your evidence and your conclusion are the same thing, that's a circular argument.

Homosexuals only think of themselves, Homosexuals do not like what the World thinks of their sexual proclivities, hence the Homosexual agenda is to teach the Children its okay.

Says you, claiming to speak for all gay people. And you're nobody in that equation. You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

While the gays and lesbians that are living their lives do. Making them infinitely better sources on their motivations than you will ever be.

Politically this is about the Democrats dividing the nation, destroying the Republicans, and having complete dictatorial power over lives.

Given that a solid majority supports gay marriage, with support outpacing opposition by 12 to 19 points *and growing*, its clear that the nation has picked a side. And you're not on it.

 

[elektra]

Children, life is about children, if there is one thing that mankind has discovered, its that life is about making life. We are not perfect, hence we have a bit of rampant homosexuality running amok. They have discovered power and money operating as advocates within our Society as dictated by the Courts and the Government.

Children who are Orphaned do not need nor desire Homosexual Parents, most adopted are so young they do not even know what Homosexuality is, yet they are forced into the Homosexual lifestyle.

The highest suicide rates of children are those who are in foster care and have been adopted.

The Homosexuals will never admit to the harm and tragedy that is the burden they put on the Souls of our children. They will never admit the suffering, even if they do a "study", they find the children do suffer, but the analysis is its the heterosexuals of society's fault that children adopted into Homosexuality suffer, and all they need to do is spend more money to re-educate the Heterosexuals.

Its all pretty messed up, Judges, Politicians, Homosexual adults deciding what is best for Heterosexual children.

 

[Skylar]

Children, life is about children, if there is one thing that mankind has discovered, its that life is about making life. We are not perfect, hence we have a bit of rampant homosexuality running amok. They have discovered power and money operating as advocates within our Society as dictated by the Courts and the Government.

Children who are Orphaned do not need nor desire Homosexual Parents, most adopted are so young they do not even know what Homosexuality is, yet they are forced into the Homosexual lifestyle.

The highest suicide rates of children are those who are in foster care and have been adopted.

The Homosexuals will never admit to the harm and tragedy that is the burden they put on the Souls of our children. They will never admit the suffering, even if they do a "study", they find the children do suffer, but the analysis is its the heterosexuals of society's fault that children adopted into Homosexuality suffer, and all they need to do is spend more money to re-educate the Heterosexuals.

Its all pretty messed up, Judges, Politicians, Homosexual adults deciding what is best for Heterosexual children.

And what does any of your elaborate monologue of personal opinion have to do with gay marriage?

 

[elektra]

They ask how is their lifestyle abuse, while leaving out all the details that make them homosexual.

It is through our ignorance that Homosexuals force themselves upon Orphaned children.

Is it the fact that they do not care enough to conceive as man and woman, that we see they have zero consideration for children.

 

[elektra]

Children, life is about children, if there is one thing that mankind has discovered, its that life is about making life. We are not perfect, hence we have a bit of rampant homosexuality running amok. They have discovered power and money operating as advocates within our Society as dictated by the Courts and the Government.

Children who are Orphaned do not need nor desire Homosexual Parents, most adopted are so young they do not even know what Homosexuality is, yet they are forced into the Homosexual lifestyle.

The highest suicide rates of children are those who are in foster care and have been adopted.

The Homosexuals will never admit to the harm and tragedy that is the burden they put on the Souls of our children. They will never admit the suffering, even if they do a "study", they find the children do suffer, but the analysis is its the heterosexuals of society's fault that children adopted into Homosexuality suffer, and all they need to do is spend more money to re-educate the Heterosexuals.

Its all pretty messed up, Judges, Politicians, Homosexual adults deciding what is best for Heterosexual children.

And what does any of your elaborate monologue of personal opinion have to do with gay marriage?

My personal opinion happens to be the opinion of 99% of Americans. My personal opinion happens to be the opinion of all Children.

 

[Skylar]

They ask how is their lifestyle abuse, while leaving out all the details that make them homosexual.

And how do those details make going to a school play abuse? Or playing a round of golf? Or making dinner?

You're simply using our conclusion as evidence of your conclusion. Which is circular nonsense.

It is through our ignorance that Homosexuals force themselves upon Orphaned children.

Gays and lesbians don't 'force' themselves on orphaned kids any more than straight couples do. Rendering yet another ring in your circular argument invalid.

Is it the fact that they do not care enough to conceive as man and woman, that we see they have zero consideration for children.

By that logic, all adoptive parents would have zero consideration for children. Which is obviously nonsense.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The two homos are NOT the parents.

Says you. As I said, by any rational standard, the people that raise a child are the child's parents. Adoptive parents who raise children they never sired nor bore are those children's parents.

You disagree. So what?

Marriage was intended as an aid in procreation as I pointed out in my post's last line.

Whatever it was 'intended' as, its not longer about procreation. There are millions of people that get married and never have kids. There are millions of people that can't have kids that are allowed to remain married. Infertile couples can marry just as easily as the fertile ones. Nor is there any law in any state that requires that a couple be able to have children before they can marry.

Demonstrating elegantly that there is obviously a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children or the ability to have them. So your basis of excluding gays is non-existent.

As for kids being raised in non-nuclear families and the social ills that have increased with the increased incidence of that condition, you need to pay attention and progress a little. Your thinking is out of date.

The studies I'm citing are as current as last month. And the overwhelming consensus of these studies is that children raised by same sex parents are fine.

Ignore as you will. Just don't expect the courts to.

Increased incidence of unstructured families leads to social demise. Look at the crime and failing schools. No studies necessary.

You cited 'empiracal demonstration' as your standard. When your claims are empiraclly tested and found to be blithering idiocy, you ignore your own standard.

Children of gays and lesbians are fine. That you refuse to accept this is meaningless. As you're nobody in this equation.

And you're just rationalizing your way all the way back to my original question; why should the rest of us be coerced by the government to subsidize male-on-male buttfucking?

Marriage isn't about sex. So the entire premise of your question is invalid.

We've been through this. If you're just going to ignore any answer to your question, why bother asking it? The only difference between not asking and asking and ignoring is that your ignorance is willful in the latter instance.

And why should children be denied the natural right to be raised by their actual parents?

Who says they are? If a straight couple goes to a sperm bank for IVF, do you rant about how their child will be deprived of its natural rights?

Of course not.

If a straight couple adopts an child, do you rant about their child will be deprived of its natural rights?

Again, no.

You only have an issue when the parents are gay or lesbian. Demonstrating you could give a shit about children or their natural rights. Children are nothing but a horse for your ride in your argument against gays. Which is quite awful.

No, I also object to those who 'choose' to raise children as single parents. The empirical data demonstrates clearly that kids need to be raised by a mother and a father, not one or two of either but one of each, preferably those two specific people who actually create the kid.
Pay attention and move forward.

 

[Skylar]

Children, life is about children, if there is one thing that mankind has discovered, its that life is about making life. We are not perfect, hence we have a bit of rampant homosexuality running amok. They have discovered power and money operating as advocates within our Society as dictated by the Courts and the Government.

Children who are Orphaned do not need nor desire Homosexual Parents, most adopted are so young they do not even know what Homosexuality is, yet they are forced into the Homosexual lifestyle.

The highest suicide rates of children are those who are in foster care and have been adopted.

The Homosexuals will never admit to the harm and tragedy that is the burden they put on the Souls of our children. They will never admit the suffering, even if they do a "study", they find the children do suffer, but the analysis is its the heterosexuals of society's fault that children adopted into Homosexuality suffer, and all they need to do is spend more money to re-educate the Heterosexuals.

Its all pretty messed up, Judges, Politicians, Homosexual adults deciding what is best for Heterosexual children.

And what does any of your elaborate monologue of personal opinion have to do with gay marriage?

My personal opinion happens to be the opinion of 99% of Americans. My personal opinion happens to be the opinion of all Children.

Then why do 55% support gay marriage?

And given that 1.5 to 3% of the population is gay or lesbian, I think you're gonna have a hard time reaching your 99%. I'm neither, and I still think you're completely full of shit. As would most people I know. Making your 99% an even more mythical estimate.

As for your opinion being the opinion of all children.....um, that's clearly nonsense. You don't speak for any child. You speak for yourself.

 

[elektra]

And so the lies continue, pure denial. The homosexuals will talk about playgrounds, miniature golf, plays and theater. While carefully not mentioning a thing about their Homosexual lifestyle, it is only in a world of censorship and denial that they can promote homosexuality.

They will ask how is abuse, to take a heterosexual child who is orphaned, and force them into a homosexual lifestyle. While ignoring the fact that a child who is orphaned if asked, will either state they want to stay in safety of the orphanage with like orphans that they made friends with through the common tragedy that made them orphans or they would like a mom and dad.

Ask any child, if they want a mother and father, and it will never occur to them to say, "no, I want two homosexual fathers".

This is not a matter of debate or compromise.

Orphaned children suffer, more than anyone can imagine, nothing is more tragic than losing mom and dad, forcing them into the homosexual lifestyle, is simply sick abuse.

 

[Skylar]

No, I also object to those who 'choose' to raise children as single parents.

Well since gay marriage and single parenthood have less than nothing to do with each other......you've kinda painted yourself into a corner on this one.

You've claimed that a child has a natural right to be raised by its actual parents. But you don't object to straight adoptive parents, or an infertile straight couple using a sperm donor to IVF up a kid. Demonstrating your 'natural right to be raised by its actual parents' claim to be irrelevant to you.

The empirical data demonstrates clearly that kids need to be raised by a mother and a father, not one or two of either but one of each, preferably those two specific people who actually create the kid.

A dozen or so studies show that children of same sex parents are fine. And you ignore them.

So what? Its not like anything changes just because you close your eyes.

Pay attention and move forward.

I do and I am. Which is why I'm supporting gay rights. And take a private delight in every state where gay marriage is recognized. I dig liberty and equality.

They should start handing out marriage licences in Alabama in about........6 hours.

 

[elektra]

Of course, they will make the claim that a majority of Americans want Homosexual marriage, while at the same time refusing to ask those polled if as a three year old would they have chosen to have two Homosexual men as parents.

 

[Skylar]

And so the lies continue, pure denial.

More accurately, I won't accept your premise without evidence. And you're using your conclusion to prove your conclusion. Which is a fallacy of logic called a 'circular argument'.

I don't accept you as speaking for 99% of the population. I don't accept you as speaking for all children.

And without my acceptance, you've really got nothing to work with. As you citing you demonstrates nothing but your personal opinion.

They will ask how is abuse, to take a heterosexual child who is orphaned, and force them into a homosexual lifestyle. While ignoring the fact that a child who is orphaned if asked, will either state they want to stay in safety of the orphanage with like orphans that they made friends with through the common tragedy that made them orphans or they would like a mom and dad.

Ask any child, if they want a mother and father, and it will never occur to them to say, "no, I want two homosexual fathers".

If a child is asked if they want to remain at the orphanage or go with two loving parents.....I'd argue most would pick the parents. Regardless of the gender make up.

This is not a matter of debate or compromise.

Actually, your conclusions are extremely debatable. As they're wholy opinion. You can't actually connect your claims to reality. You can't even describe what abuse you're referring to. Let alone factually establish it exists. You simply imagine it must be so. And then insist that you imagination is beyond debate.

Um, no. It isn't.

 

[Skylar]

Of course, they will make the claim that a majority of Americans want Homosexual marriage, while at the same time refusing to ask those polled if as a three year old would they have chosen to have two Homosexual men as parents.

You do realize that you're pulling your entire argument sideways out of your ass at this point?

As you're literally quoting your imagination as your only source.

Well, I'm off to bed. I'll check in tomorrow to see what more fallacies of logic you've chosen to base your arguments on.

 

[elektra]

And so the lies continue, pure denial.

If a child is asked if they want to remain at the orphanage or go with two loving parents.....I'd argue most would pick the parents. Regardless of the gender make up.

And here is the answer, the Homosexuals must and will lie to the Child.
The Homosexuals will deny the truth to the child.

The question will never be, "Johnny, do you want two Homosexual parents?"

They must hide the truth. As I said, they lie and deny who they are to advance and force themselves upon Children.

Skylar gives us an example of this.

 

[Political Junky]

The answer is that is regulating marriage. You don't like it, don't marry someone who looks like you.

You didn't answer my question. You just made a detached comment. Why should the public be forced to subsidize male-on-male buttfucking?

Marriage isn't about sex. As demonstrated by all the infertile and childless folks that are allowed to marry or remain married.

So the entire premise of your argument is invalid. A classic 'when did you stop beating your wife' question.

Then how can homosexual marriage be defined as homosexual marriage if it isn't about homosexuality? Root word, sex.

Its same sex marriage. With sex being a biological designation.

You mean gender. Two male friends who don't have sex with each other don't count as homosexual couple in order to qualify as a homosexual married couple. So it is the sex that makes the determination. Why should everyone be forced by the government to subsidize male-on-male buttfucking?

How do you subsidize it, do you know what subsidize means?