Trump criticizes SC decision on homosexual "marriage" promises to appoint judges that will overturn!

[Silhouette]

This fails as a post hoc fallacy – there is no 'evidence' that same-sex couples accessing marriage contract law they're eligible to participate in 'contributes' to divorce, or any other 'social ill...'

That's a lie. We have thousands of studies about the woes of particularly boys being raised without fathers... and this study: PRINCE'S TRUST 2010 YOUTH INDEX SURVEY and these accounts: ‘Quartet of Truth’: Adult children of gay parents testify against same-sex ‘marriage’ at 5th Circuit

Quit lying!

The Prince Trust Study never so much as mentions mothers, fathers, same sex parents, same sex marriage, gays nor measures the effects of any kind of parenting.

Which you know. But really hope we don't.

Next fallacy please.

Actually I encourage people to read the 2010 Prince's Trust Survey to test whether or not the conclusions from it support what I said. Absolutely folks. Knock yourselves out. Would you like me to re-include the link in my signature Skylar?

Edit: Done, just for you Sky-Sky..

 

[mdk]

This fails as a post hoc fallacy – there is no 'evidence' that same-sex couples accessing marriage contract law they're eligible to participate in 'contributes' to divorce, or any other 'social ill...'

That's a lie. We have thousands of studies about the woes of particularly boys being raised without fathers... and this study: PRINCE'S TRUST 2010 YOUTH INDEX SURVEY and these accounts: ‘Quartet of Truth’: Adult children of gay parents testify against same-sex ‘marriage’ at 5th Circuit

Quit lying!

The Prince Trust Study never so much as mentions mothers, fathers, same sex parents, same sex marriage, gays nor measures the effects of any kind of parenting.

Which you know. But really hope we don't.

Next fallacy please.

Actually I encourage people to read the 2010 Prince's Trust Survey to test whether or not the conclusions from it support what I said. Absolutely folks. Knock yourselves out. Would you like me to re-include the link in my signature Skylar?

Edit: Done, just for you Sky-Sky..

If I were you, I wouldn't encourage anyone to read this study b/c it only exposes the delusional lengths you'll go to smear gay people and their families.

 

[Skylar]

This fails as a post hoc fallacy – there is no 'evidence' that same-sex couples accessing marriage contract law they're eligible to participate in 'contributes' to divorce, or any other 'social ill...'

That's a lie. We have thousands of studies about the woes of particularly boys being raised without fathers... and this study: PRINCE'S TRUST 2010 YOUTH INDEX SURVEY and these accounts: ‘Quartet of Truth’: Adult children of gay parents testify against same-sex ‘marriage’ at 5th Circuit

Quit lying!

The Prince Trust Study never so much as mentions mothers, fathers, same sex parents, same sex marriage, gays nor measures the effects of any kind of parenting.

Which you know. But really hope we don't.

Next fallacy please.

Actually I encourage people to read the 2010 Prince's Trust Survey to test whether or not the conclusions from it support what I said. Absolutely folks. Knock yourselves out. Would you like me to re-include the link in my signature Skylar?

And where, pray tell, is there any mentions of mothers, fathers, or the measurement of any kind of parenting in the Prince Trust, Silly?

Just quote where they are mentioned.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This fails as a post hoc fallacy – there is no 'evidence' that same-sex couples accessing marriage contract law they're eligible to participate in 'contributes' to divorce, or any other 'social ill...'

That's a lie. We have thousands of studies about the woes of particularly boys being raised without fathers... and this study: PRINCE'S TRUST 2010 YOUTH INDEX SURVEY and these accounts: ‘Quartet of Truth’: Adult children of gay parents testify against same-sex ‘marriage’ at 5th Circuit

Quit lying!

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

 

[Silhouette]

Your welcome. Any other requests for links in my signature guys?

 

[mdk]

And where, pray tell, is there any mentions of mothers, fathers, or the measurement of any kind of parenting in the Prince Trust, Silly?

Just quote where they are mentioned.

This is all the proof you need:

 

[mdk]

our welcome. Any other requests for links in my signature guys?

Will this suffice? lol

 

[Skylar]

Your welcome. Any other requests for links in my signature guys?

That's 'You're'. And yes.

Record-High 60% of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Record-High 60% of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Feel free to add that one.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't want him appointing justices to overturn cases. I don't trust that he won't just appoint whoever pays him the most.

I want justices to uphold the constitution. Cruz and Rubio are far more likely to do that.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Perhaps the word should be "Discrimination" rather than bigotry. As bigotry leads to discrimination and there is a difference with a distinction.. The act of discrimination is illegal, but the despicable quality of bigotry is a state of mind.

People discriminate against or for behaviors every day of the week. If you don't believe me, check the penal codes of your state. So, discriminating against gay lifestyles is not the same as discriminating against something static and inborn like race or gender. It may not be illegal to do gay things, but it isn't illegal to be bulimic either. One would be kind to a bulimic but never promote it as "a wholly acceptable alternate way of eating". Because it isn't.

Beng a happy mosexual is an immutable trait. Like complexion, height, eye color or race, homosexuality is not a choice made on a whim as you may believe. It is as inborn and immutable as any other trait mentioned above.

Why do people so often seem assured that sexuality is either entirely a choice or entirely biological/genetic? For that matter, why do people so often seem assured that sexuality is a 2 or 3 point measure with heterosexuality on one end, homosexuality on the other, and perhaps bisexuality in the center, rather than a sliding scale?

I was not aware that definitive proof of how human sexuality is determined had been discovered.

Well, there was the Swiss study a couple of years ago that showed that the brains of lesbians and the brains of straight males are remarkably similar, as are the brain structure of gay males being remarkably similar to straight females. According to them, there is a strong possibility that sexuality is determined by brain structure, which does mean that you were born that way.

Here's some links...............

Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex

Gay Men, Straight Women Have Similar Brains

Oh yeah, the first link is from a science journal, and the second one is National Geographic, so, it's actual links to real science, not some blog.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Since the sixties [marriage has] been pretty much a meaningless institution...
Marry who ever and whatever anyone wants.

And that's the problem.

No, marriage is not, and never will be a “meaningless institution”. Marriage, between a man and a woman, and family, based on that marriage, will always be an essential foundation of any successful society.

Since the 1960s, the wrong-wing movement has been trying to make marriage irrelevant and meaningless, without concern or awareness of what this would do to society. Even now,as the destructive results are clear and undeniable, liberals continue to deny them, and continue to attack marriage and family in new ways. “Same sex ‘marriage’” is just one of the most recent among many such attacks.

 

[Montrovant]

Perhaps the word should be "Discrimination" rather than bigotry. As bigotry leads to discrimination and there is a difference with a distinction.. The act of discrimination is illegal, but the despicable quality of bigotry is a state of mind.

People discriminate against or for behaviors every day of the week. If you don't believe me, check the penal codes of your state. So, discriminating against gay lifestyles is not the same as discriminating against something static and inborn like race or gender. It may not be illegal to do gay things, but it isn't illegal to be bulimic either. One would be kind to a bulimic but never promote it as "a wholly acceptable alternate way of eating". Because it isn't.

Beng a happy mosexual is an immutable trait. Like complexion, height, eye color or race, homosexuality is not a choice made on a whim as you may believe. It is as inborn and immutable as any other trait mentioned above.

Why do people so often seem assured that sexuality is either entirely a choice or entirely biological/genetic? For that matter, why do people so often seem assured that sexuality is a 2 or 3 point measure with heterosexuality on one end, homosexuality on the other, and perhaps bisexuality in the center, rather than a sliding scale?

I was not aware that definitive proof of how human sexuality is determined had been discovered.

Well, there was the Swiss study a couple of years ago that showed that the brains of lesbians and the brains of straight males are remarkably similar, as are the brain structure of gay males being remarkably similar to straight females. According to them, there is a strong possibility that sexuality is determined by brain structure, which does mean that you were born that way.

Here's some links...............

Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex

Gay Men, Straight Women Have Similar Brains

Oh yeah, the first link is from a science journal, and the second one is National Geographic, so, it's actual links to real science, not some blog.

That is far from definitive proof, nor does it seem to explain bisexuality.

And my issue is not with the idea that homosexuality might be hard-wired, but in the surety people feel in that idea or it's opposite. I also, as I said, take issue with the idea that sexuality is an either/or proposition. I find the argument that sexuality works on a sliding scale far more compelling.