Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[kaz]

So your relationship with your mother and father was exactly the same, they were genderless automatons to you. Liar, you don't believe that, you know what you are saying is ridiculous

There is no educated proof of what you are claiming, it is your opinion.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

So your relationship with your mother and father was exactly the same, they were genderless automatons to you. Liar, you don't believe that, you know what you are saying is ridiculous

There is no educated proof of what you are claiming, it is your opinion.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

I am not hiding anywhere, I have a life.And I am waiting for you to show me some proof of what you are saying. Some kids get fucked up by their parents. Studies show that well adjusted kids come from happy, well adjusted families.

You are completely hiding, you keep ignoring the question. As a witness that you are wrong, I called you to the stand. So you say your parents were sexless automatons to you, all you needed was two people to blow your nose and potty train you. You had exactly the same relationship with each. You didn't do different things with your female mother and male father, you didn't talk to them about different things. You just need two. They were the same. That was your experience growing up. One apparently isn't enough to do the job, three isn't required. Two sexless automatons, that was your relationship with your parents. That is what you are arguing. Answer the question

Your reading comprehension is horrible.

Mine is? LOL. How would you know that since you are providing no answer to the question to read.

Look, dumb ass, you said two parents is ideal. Sex doesn't matter. Man/woman, two men, two women. The human race didn't evolve that way, it evolved with man/woman as the norm. Men and women are different. Your view that people who evolved that way don't need a parental relationship with both is frankly a hoot given the cow you have over fundamentalists who deny evolution. Liberalism is a religion.

So answer the question. Is that your experience? All you needed was baby sitters? You needed two, one wasn't enough, but having a parental relationship with each sex had nothing to do with your development? My question is actually pretty simple and clear. Man up, Darlene

 

[Syriusly]

It is fun watching Kaz rant.

Just to recap once again:

Kaz is married and enjoys getting his bennies for being married.
Kaz has no problem with every gay person in America paying for his marriage bennies.
But Kaz does not want to have to pay marriage bennies to any gay couple- no matter what.

Kaz has his- and doesn't want to share. Kaz is fine with forcing gay couples to pay for his marriage- but is against his having to pay for a gay couples marriage.

And that is really all we need to know about Kaz.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Your argument, if you can call it that fails miserably. You are so pathetic that you are hardly worth another key stroke. You thread is a sick joke without a punch line. I feel like I’m drowning in a sea stupidity and monkeys dressed as lifeguards are throwing me anvils.

You feel that way a lot in life, don't you? That's why you need government to solve your problems for you, you aren't capable of doing it on your own. In your case, I bless your liberalness, it's the best shot you have at life. It takes a total and complete loser to be such a waste that government runs your life better than you do. And you are just that loser. However, your recognition of that does actually make your liberalness rational

Neither government or anything else can solve your problems.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

In the Irish referendum on gay marriage the No side was trying these scare tactics and the psychologists and other experts came out and disputed what they had to say. Children are better off and more well adjusted with two parents, does not matter the sex. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. You are just making things up to support your argument, there is nothing to back it up. You are a failure.

So your relationship with your mother and father was exactly the same, they were genderless automatons to you. Liar, you don't believe that, you know what you are saying is ridiculous

There is no educated proof of what you are claiming, it is your opinion.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

In the Irish referendum on gay marriage the No side was trying these scare tactics and the psychologists and other experts came out and disputed what they had to say. Children are better off and more well adjusted with two parents, does not matter the sex. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. You are just making things up to support your argument, there is nothing to back it up. You are a failure.

So your relationship with your mother and father was exactly the same, they were genderless automatons to you. Liar, you don't believe that, you know what you are saying is ridiculous

There is no educated proof of what you are claiming, it is your opinion.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

I am not hiding anywhere, I have a life.And I am waiting for you to show me some proof of what you are saying. Some kids get fucked up by their parents. Studies show that well adjusted kids come from happy, well adjusted families.

You are completely hiding, you keep ignoring the question. As a witness that you are wrong, I called you to the stand. So you say your parents were sexless automatons to you, all you needed was two people to blow your nose and potty train you. You had exactly the same relationship with each. You didn't do different things with your female mother and male father, you didn't talk to them about different things. You just need two. They were the same. That was your experience growing up. One apparently isn't enough to do the job, three isn't required. Two sexless automatons, that was your relationship with your parents. That is what you are arguing. Answer the question

I have said this all before but apparently some people are too obtuse to understand it or they are so blinded by their bigotry that they are in denial of reality. I’m going to dumb it down real good for you….

1. The premise of this thread, that same sex marriage is a burden on the taxpayers is proven horseshit
   
   
2. The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit.
   
   
3. The conclusion , that because of 1 and/or 2 above, -even if in any way true which they are not - gays should not be allowed to marry, is a non sequitur. The premise(s) do not support the conclusion. Because:
   
   
4. You do not put a price tag on human rights. Even the most ardent opponents of same sex marriage were smart enough not to touch that dumb ass idea
   
   
5. As far as children go, there will always be children living in non-traditional settings without having both a mother and a father. Allowing same sex marriage is not going to change that.
   
   
6. There are already hundreds of thousands of children-some estimates top 2 million- already living with a gay parent or couple. Prohibiting marriage is not going to change that either because gay people have been having children or raising them long before marriage was a possibility.
   
   
7. Those children are put at a financial, legal and social disadvantage. The children become the collateral damage perpetrated by those who insist on discriminating against the parents. For all your bloviating about the children, it is clear that you don’t give a shit about them and just want to punish the gay parents. It is the height of hypocrisy.
   

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

 

[NoNukes]

There is no educated proof of what you are claiming, it is your opinion.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

There is no educated proof of what you are claiming, it is your opinion.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

I am not hiding anywhere, I have a life.And I am waiting for you to show me some proof of what you are saying. Some kids get fucked up by their parents. Studies show that well adjusted kids come from happy, well adjusted families.

You are completely hiding, you keep ignoring the question. As a witness that you are wrong, I called you to the stand. So you say your parents were sexless automatons to you, all you needed was two people to blow your nose and potty train you. You had exactly the same relationship with each. You didn't do different things with your female mother and male father, you didn't talk to them about different things. You just need two. They were the same. That was your experience growing up. One apparently isn't enough to do the job, three isn't required. Two sexless automatons, that was your relationship with your parents. That is what you are arguing. Answer the question

Your reading comprehension is horrible.

Mine is? LOL. How would you know that since you are providing no answer to the question to read.

Look, dumb ass, you said two parents is ideal. Sex doesn't matter. Man/woman, two men, two women. The human race didn't evolve that way, it evolved with man/woman as the norm. Men and women are different. Your view that people who evolved that way don't need a parental relationship with both is frankly a hoot given the cow you have over fundamentalists who deny evolution. Liberalism is a religion.

So answer the question. Is that your experience? All you needed was baby sitters? You needed two, one wasn't enough, but having a parental relationship with each sex had nothing to do with your development? My question is actually pretty simple and clear. Man up, Darlene

I said that it is better to grow up in a happy family, and the sex of the parents does not matter. There is no evidence to dispute this.

 

[kaz]

Your argument, if you can call it that fails miserably. You are so pathetic that you are hardly worth another key stroke. You thread is a sick joke without a punch line. I feel like I’m drowning in a sea stupidity and monkeys dressed as lifeguards are throwing me anvils.

You feel that way a lot in life, don't you? That's why you need government to solve your problems for you, you aren't capable of doing it on your own. In your case, I bless your liberalness, it's the best shot you have at life. It takes a total and complete loser to be such a waste that government runs your life better than you do. And you are just that loser. However, your recognition of that does actually make your liberalness rational

Neither government or anything else can solve your problems.

Um...I'm against government doing that, try to keep up

 

[kaz]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Your argument, if you can call it that fails miserably. You are so pathetic that you are hardly worth another key stroke. You thread is a sick joke without a punch line. I feel like I’m drowning in a sea stupidity and monkeys dressed as lifeguards are throwing me anvils.

You feel that way a lot in life, don't you? That's why you need government to solve your problems for you, you aren't capable of doing it on your own. In your case, I bless your liberalness, it's the best shot you have at life. It takes a total and complete loser to be such a waste that government runs your life better than you do. And you are just that loser. However, your recognition of that does actually make your liberalness rational

Neither government or anything else can solve your problems.

Um...I'm against government doing that, try to keep up

This is not about the size of government or what it does or does no do. All you're doing is throwing whatever inane bovine excrement that you can come up with at the wall and hope that something sticks

Apparently you are not even going to try to deal with the 7 points of fact that I posted above in 3604.

 

[kaz]

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

Then why are you hiding under the sofa?

So you got nothing different from your relationship with your mother and father. They were genderless automatons to you. Another mother doing what your father did would have been the same. Another father doing what your mother did would be the same. You actually believe that.

I am not hiding anywhere, I have a life.And I am waiting for you to show me some proof of what you are saying. Some kids get fucked up by their parents. Studies show that well adjusted kids come from happy, well adjusted families.

You are completely hiding, you keep ignoring the question. As a witness that you are wrong, I called you to the stand. So you say your parents were sexless automatons to you, all you needed was two people to blow your nose and potty train you. You had exactly the same relationship with each. You didn't do different things with your female mother and male father, you didn't talk to them about different things. You just need two. They were the same. That was your experience growing up. One apparently isn't enough to do the job, three isn't required. Two sexless automatons, that was your relationship with your parents. That is what you are arguing. Answer the question

Your reading comprehension is horrible.

Mine is? LOL. How would you know that since you are providing no answer to the question to read.

Look, dumb ass, you said two parents is ideal. Sex doesn't matter. Man/woman, two men, two women. The human race didn't evolve that way, it evolved with man/woman as the norm. Men and women are different. Your view that people who evolved that way don't need a parental relationship with both is frankly a hoot given the cow you have over fundamentalists who deny evolution. Liberalism is a religion.

So answer the question. Is that your experience? All you needed was baby sitters? You needed two, one wasn't enough, but having a parental relationship with each sex had nothing to do with your development? My question is actually pretty simple and clear. Man up, Darlene

I said that it is better to grow up in a happy family, and the sex of the parents does not matter. There is no evidence to dispute this.

Then why are you too dickless to answer the question? What about it disturbs you so much that you keep hiding behind the couch every time I ask it? Maybe even you know you're full of shit? Here you go again, the question you keep hiding from:

"Is that your experience? All you needed was baby sitters? You needed two, one wasn't enough, but having a parental relationship with each sex had nothing to do with your development? My question is actually pretty simple and clear. Man up, Darlene"

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

Holly Shit! This nonsensical, emotional rant devoid of all facts, logic and reason is supposed to be in response the actual facts that I laid out. Now I know for sure what I'm dealing with here as if I didn't know before. You just can't deal with reality. My work is done here.

 

[kaz]

Your argument, if you can call it that fails miserably. You are so pathetic that you are hardly worth another key stroke. You thread is a sick joke without a punch line. I feel like I’m drowning in a sea stupidity and monkeys dressed as lifeguards are throwing me anvils.

You feel that way a lot in life, don't you? That's why you need government to solve your problems for you, you aren't capable of doing it on your own. In your case, I bless your liberalness, it's the best shot you have at life. It takes a total and complete loser to be such a waste that government runs your life better than you do. And you are just that loser. However, your recognition of that does actually make your liberalness rational

Neither government or anything else can solve your problems.

Um...I'm against government doing that, try to keep up

This is not about the size of government or what it does or does no do. All you're doing is throwing whatever inane bovine excrement that you can come up with at the wall and hope that something sticks

Apparently you are not even going to try to deal with the 7 points of fact that I posted above in 3604.

What an idiot, I responded to the posts in order

 

[kaz]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

Holly Shit! This nonsensical, emotional rant devoid of all facts, logic and reason is supposed to be in response the actual facts that I laid out. Now I know for sure what I'm dealing with here as if I didn't know before. You just can't deal with reality. My work is done here.

Gotcha, all she wants to do is dance...



How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved. Is that your experience? Your parents were sexless automatons who could have been replaced by anyone? You didn't have or observe in the world around you any difference in how children relate to men and women? Evolving from a single cell to learning to be in a world of men and women, parents don't matter other than taking care of their physical needs? That is what you are claiming, so is that your experience?

Also, again, why two? If it's just division of work and one kid needs two, don't 12 kids need more than two to be ideal? How do you not grasp those questions?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

Holly Shit! This nonsensical, emotional rant devoid of all facts, logic and reason is supposed to be in response the actual facts that I laid out. Now I know for sure what I'm dealing with here as if I didn't know before. You just can't deal with reality. My work is done here.

Gotcha, all she wants to do is dance...



How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved. Is that your experience? Your parents were sexless automatons who could have been replaced by anyone? You didn't have or observe in the world around you any difference in how children relate to men and women? Evolving from a single cell to learning to be in a world of men and women, parents don't matter other than taking care of their physical needs? That is what you are claiming, so is that your experience?

Also, again, why two? If it's just division of work and one kid needs two, don't 12 kids need more than two to be ideal? How do you not grasp those questions?

Putting aside the fact that the effects of gay parenting is irrelevant to the issue of same sex marriage for reasons that I explained above, you might want to try to digest this:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct at Columbia Law School has collected on one website the abstracts of all peer-reviewed studies that have addressed this question since 1980 so that anyone can examine the research directly, and not rely on talking heads or potential groupthink. Even when we might not agree with a study’s conclusions—with how a researcher interpreted the data—we still included it if it went through peer review and was relevant to the topic at hand. Peer review, of course, isn’t perfect, but it’s one of the best ways the world has to ensure that research conclusions are at least the product of good-faith efforts to get at the truth.

The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution.


Even the notion that you try to put forth that there are no good studies is wrong...the studies, while not perfect do give us a very good idea on the conclusions and that is that gay homes are not better nor worse.

Here is a link to all the studies
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

And this

The Australian Study of Child Health in Same-Sex Families is the world’s largest attempt to study how children raised by same-sex couples compare to children raised by heterosexual couples. According to a preliminary report on the study of 500 children across the country of Australia, these young people are not only thriving, but also have higher rates of family cohesion than other families:

An interim report found there was no statistical difference between children of same-sex couples and the rest of the population on indicators including self-esteem, emotional behaviour and the amount of time spent with parents.

However, children of same-sex couples scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion, measuring how well a family gets along. World s Largest Study Of Same-Sex Parenting Finds That Children Are Thriving ThinkProgress

Want more?

Children raised by same-sex couples appear to do as well as those raised by parents of both sexes, suggests an international research review that challenges the long-ingrained belief that children need male and female parents for healthy adjustment.

"It's more about the quality of the parenting than the gender of the parents," says Judith Stacey of New York University, co-author of the comprehensive review. It will be published Friday in the Journal of Marriage and Family. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-21-parentgender21_ST_N.htm

A sampling of recent studies of same-sex parenting: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_pare2.htm

What do you have chief?



I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

Holly Shit! This nonsensical, emotional rant devoid of all facts, logic and reason is supposed to be in response the actual facts that I laid out. Now I know for sure what I'm dealing with here as if I didn't know before. You just can't deal with reality. My work is done here.

Gotcha, all she wants to do is dance...



How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved. Is that your experience? Your parents were sexless automatons who could have been replaced by anyone? You didn't have or observe in the world around you any difference in how children relate to men and women? Evolving from a single cell to learning to be in a world of men and women, parents don't matter other than taking care of their physical needs? That is what you are claiming, so is that your experience?

Also, again, why two? If it's just division of work and one kid needs two, don't 12 kids need more than two to be ideal? How do you not grasp those questions?

If children need a mother and a father and you oppose gay marriage because of that would you also:

1. A ban on adoption by all single people-gay and straight.
   
   
2. A ban on divorce by any couple who has a child under a certain age, say ten
   
   
3. The removal of any children under 5 years of currently residing with a single parent-gay or straight to be placed with a male-female adoptive couple.
   
   
4. The imposition of stiff civil and possibly criminal penalties for any woman who has a child outside of marriage
   
   
5. Free and available no questions asked abortion and contraception for every woman who is not married to a man
   

I am being completely serious here. It’s just common sense. Any one of these measures would go a lot farther towards ensuring that all children have a mom and a dad, than banning same sex marriage. In fact, the only thing that banning same sex marriage will do as far as kid are concerned is to ensure that FEWER have two legal parents and the security of having married parents. Now, tell us more about how concerned you are about the children.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

\


Children are Also Victims When Gay and Lesbian Parents and Potential Parents are Discriminated Against by the Progressive Patriot June 7th 2015


I am decidedly weary people of who use children and child rearing issues as pawns in the failed attempts to derail same sex marriage and opposing adoption. Those children, who more than anything, need a stable, secure and loving home have a major stake in the issue.

Yet, there are those who persist in claiming that children need a mother and a father to the exclusion of all other considerations in order to assail same sex marriage. They will point to bogus and faulty studies that purportedly show that the developmental and emotional outcomes for children of same sex couples is inferior to that of other children. My purpose here to not to debunk those studies-I have done that elsewhere- but rather to address the fact that regardless of what studies show, it is ludicrous and logically fallacious - a non sequitur because there is a disconnect between the faulty premise that gay parenting results in outcomes that are inferior to opposite sex parenting, and the conclusion that gay people should not be permitted to marry.

Even if the outcomes for children raised in same sex household were in fact different than other children Consider this: If we are to base our policies as to who can marry on who does the best jobs with children, perhaps we should be taking a hard look at certain socio-economic or ethnic groups who produce children who’s development and wellbeing can be contrasted to that of other groups. Maybe we should look at inner city vs. suburban parenting outcomes to set marriage policy? Is anyone willing to go there?

And how about this: It is known that Asian American children tend to be higher achievers than others, so maybe should prohibit marriage in order to discourage child rearing by white Americans whose children might not do as well.

The fact is that there are a couple of million kids already in the care of gay people and couples. Many are the biological children of a gay person. Those children can benefit greatly if their parent is able to marry and the non-biological parent is able to adopt as a second parent. There are many economic, legal and social benefits to doing so. Not allowing the adults to marry only serves to punish those children and place them at a disadvantage.

In some cases gay people adopt children through agencies. Yes, the idea that gay people can adopt has been way out ahead of gay marriage. My home state of New Jersey has been allowing joint adoption by same sex couples since 1997, the first state to do so. These are children who had NO parents until these gay folks stepped up. Maybe someone would like to compare the long term outcomes for children who grow up as wards of the state with those raised by same sex couples. Gay people can and will adopt children regardless of whether or not the parent(s) can marry so why deprive the children the advantages-discussed above- of having married parent


Lastly, the smallest number of children who are in the care of gay and lesbian parents are those who were conceived with the use of surrogacy, or artificial insemination. These are children who, arguably would not have been born at all. While there are those who may believe that their souls might have otherwise been born into some what some believe more advantageous environment, we really don’t know how that works. What we do know is that those children are real, and once again, those children will benefit from having married parents.


So, I ask. What do we do, even if the highly questionable assertion that gay parenting is inferior is correct? Do we discourage or even prohibit gays from having children in their care? Or do we adapt policies to support them and maximize their ability to care for those children? Do we enact complex policies regarding which groups will be encouraged and which will be discouraged from having children based on some measure of their parenting ability which will, most assuredly be disputed. Or, do we treat everyone equally, and provide them with maximum support, so as they can be the best possible parents in whatever circumstances they find themselves .

In closing, I submit to you that yes, it is possible that there may be some unknown number of additional children living with gay parents as the result of same sex marriage. Some will adopt and some will have children with medical/ scientific intervention. But those children, like countless others in the care of gay couples, will have two legal parents who are married. A tremendous advantage. And those adopted children had no parents and the ones who were conceived with help, would not have been born at all.

 

[kaz]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

Holly Shit! This nonsensical, emotional rant devoid of all facts, logic and reason is supposed to be in response the actual facts that I laid out. Now I know for sure what I'm dealing with here as if I didn't know before. You just can't deal with reality. My work is done here.

Gotcha, all she wants to do is dance...



How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved. Is that your experience? Your parents were sexless automatons who could have been replaced by anyone? You didn't have or observe in the world around you any difference in how children relate to men and women? Evolving from a single cell to learning to be in a world of men and women, parents don't matter other than taking care of their physical needs? That is what you are claiming, so is that your experience?

Also, again, why two? If it's just division of work and one kid needs two, don't 12 kids need more than two to be ideal? How do you not grasp those questions?

Putting aside the fact that the effects of gay parenting is irrelevant to the issue of same sex marriage for reasons that I explained above, you might want to try to digest this:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct at Columbia Law School has collected on one website the abstracts of all peer-reviewed studies that have addressed this question since 1980 so that anyone can examine the research directly, and not rely on talking heads or potential groupthink. Even when we might not agree with a study’s conclusions—with how a researcher interpreted the data—we still included it if it went through peer review and was relevant to the topic at hand. Peer review, of course, isn’t perfect, but it’s one of the best ways the world has to ensure that research conclusions are at least the product of good-faith efforts to get at the truth.

The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution.


Even the notion that you try to put forth that there are no good studies is wrong...the studies, while not perfect do give us a very good idea on the conclusions and that is that gay homes are not better nor worse.

Here is a link to all the studies
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

And this

The Australian Study of Child Health in Same-Sex Families is the world’s largest attempt to study how children raised by same-sex couples compare to children raised by heterosexual couples. According to a preliminary report on the study of 500 children across the country of Australia, these young people are not only thriving, but also have higher rates of family cohesion than other families:

An interim report found there was no statistical difference between children of same-sex couples and the rest of the population on indicators including self-esteem, emotional behaviour and the amount of time spent with parents.

However, children of same-sex couples scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion, measuring how well a family gets along. World s Largest Study Of Same-Sex Parenting Finds That Children Are Thriving ThinkProgress

Want more?

Children raised by same-sex couples appear to do as well as those raised by parents of both sexes, suggests an international research review that challenges the long-ingrained belief that children need male and female parents for healthy adjustment.

"It's more about the quality of the parenting than the gender of the parents," says Judith Stacey of New York University, co-author of the comprehensive review. It will be published Friday in the Journal of Marriage and Family. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-21-parentgender21_ST_N.htm

A sampling of recent studies of same-sex parenting: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_pare2.htm

What do you have chief?



I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Yes, Holmes. I do have a question. What if you answer my question, which was to you, not Judith Stacey.

"How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved. Is that your experience? Your parents were sexless automatons who could have been replaced by anyone? You didn't have or observe in the world around you any difference in how children relate to men and women? Evolving from a single cell to learning to be in a world of men and women, parents don't matter other than taking care of their physical needs? That is what you are claiming, so is that your experience?

Also, again, why two? If it's just division of work and one kid needs two, don't 12 kids need more than two to be ideal? How do you not grasp those questions?"

 

[kaz]

If children need a mother and a father and you oppose gay marriage because of that would you also:

A ban on adoption by all single people-gay and straight.

Leftsts love banning things, don't you? First of all, private adoptions are none of the government's business. As for public adoptions, I would provide children first to all qualified man/woman couples. Then if there are more children I would open it up to gays and singles after that

A ban on divorce by any couple who has a child under a certain age, say ten

This is too delusional to respond to

The removal of any children under 5 years of currently residing with a single parent-gay or straight to be placed with a male-female adoptive couple.

You're a whack job

The imposition of stiff civil and possibly criminal penalties for any woman who has a child outside of marriage

Yeah, more government power, that's what libertarians want

Free and available no questions asked abortion and contraception for every woman who is not married to a man

You're ridiculous

I am being completely serious here. It’s just common sense. Any one of these measures would go a lot farther towards ensuring that all children have a mom and a dad, than banning same sex marriage. In fact, the only thing that banning same sex marriage will do as far as kid are concerned is to ensure that FEWER have two legal parents and the security of having married parents. Now, tell us more about how concerned you are about the children.

Leftist authoritarianism, this is what it looks like. I argue ideal and you turn it into gestapo and call yourself "serious"

 

[kaz]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

\


Children are Also Victims When Gay and Lesbian Parents and Potential Parents are Discriminated Against by the Progressive Patriot June 7th 2015


I am decidedly weary people of who use children and child rearing issues as pawns in the failed attempts to derail same sex marriage and opposing adoption. Those children, who more than anything, need a stable, secure and loving home have a major stake in the issue.

Yet, there are those who persist in claiming that children need a mother and a father to the exclusion of all other considerations in order to assail same sex marriage. They will point to bogus and faulty studies that purportedly show that the developmental and emotional outcomes for children of same sex couples is inferior to that of other children. My purpose here to not to debunk those studies-I have done that elsewhere- but rather to address the fact that regardless of what studies show, it is ludicrous and logically fallacious - a non sequitur because there is a disconnect between the faulty premise that gay parenting results in outcomes that are inferior to opposite sex parenting, and the conclusion that gay people should not be permitted to marry.

Even if the outcomes for children raised in same sex household were in fact different than other children Consider this: If we are to base our policies as to who can marry on who does the best jobs with children, perhaps we should be taking a hard look at certain socio-economic or ethnic groups who produce children who’s development and wellbeing can be contrasted to that of other groups. Maybe we should look at inner city vs. suburban parenting outcomes to set marriage policy? Is anyone willing to go there?

And how about this: It is known that Asian American children tend to be higher achievers than others, so maybe should prohibit marriage in order to discourage child rearing by white Americans whose children might not do as well.

The fact is that there are a couple of million kids already in the care of gay people and couples. Many are the biological children of a gay person. Those children can benefit greatly if their parent is able to marry and the non-biological parent is able to adopt as a second parent. There are many economic, legal and social benefits to doing so. Not allowing the adults to marry only serves to punish those children and place them at a disadvantage.

In some cases gay people adopt children through agencies. Yes, the idea that gay people can adopt has been way out ahead of gay marriage. My home state of New Jersey has been allowing joint adoption by same sex couples since 1997, the first state to do so. These are children who had NO parents until these gay folks stepped up. Maybe someone would like to compare the long term outcomes for children who grow up as wards of the state with those raised by same sex couples. Gay people can and will adopt children regardless of whether or not the parent(s) can marry so why deprive the children the advantages-discussed above- of having married parent


Lastly, the smallest number of children who are in the care of gay and lesbian parents are those who were conceived with the use of surrogacy, or artificial insemination. These are children who, arguably would not have been born at all. While there are those who may believe that their souls might have otherwise been born into some what some believe more advantageous environment, we really don’t know how that works. What we do know is that those children are real, and once again, those children will benefit from having married parents.


So, I ask. What do we do, even if the highly questionable assertion that gay parenting is inferior is correct? Do we discourage or even prohibit gays from having children in their care? Or do we adapt policies to support them and maximize their ability to care for those children? Do we enact complex policies regarding which groups will be encouraged and which will be discouraged from having children based on some measure of their parenting ability which will, most assuredly be disputed. Or, do we treat everyone equally, and provide them with maximum support, so as they can be the best possible parents in whatever circumstances they find themselves .

In closing, I submit to you that yes, it is possible that there may be some unknown number of additional children living with gay parents as the result of same sex marriage. Some will adopt and some will have children with medical/ scientific intervention. But those children, like countless others in the care of gay couples, will have two legal parents who are married. A tremendous advantage. And those adopted children had no parents and the ones who were conceived with help, would not have been born at all.

You have my name in there above, but these quotes are all from you so I'm not sure what you're addressing exactly. Just like to hear yourself talk?

Here's a thought, man up to my question:

"How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved. Is that your experience? Your parents were sexless automatons who could have been replaced by anyone? You didn't have or observe in the world around you any difference in how children relate to men and women? Evolving from a single cell to learning to be in a world of men and women, parents don't matter other than taking care of their physical needs? That is what you are claiming, so is that your experience?

Also, again, why two? If it's just division of work and one kid needs two, don't 12 kids need more than two to be ideal? How do you not grasp those questions?"

 

[NoNukes]

I am not hiding anywhere, I have a life.And I am waiting for you to show me some proof of what you are saying. Some kids get fucked up by their parents. Studies show that well adjusted kids come from happy, well adjusted families.

You are completely hiding, you keep ignoring the question. As a witness that you are wrong, I called you to the stand. So you say your parents were sexless automatons to you, all you needed was two people to blow your nose and potty train you. You had exactly the same relationship with each. You didn't do different things with your female mother and male father, you didn't talk to them about different things. You just need two. They were the same. That was your experience growing up. One apparently isn't enough to do the job, three isn't required. Two sexless automatons, that was your relationship with your parents. That is what you are arguing. Answer the question

Your reading comprehension is horrible.

Mine is? LOL. How would you know that since you are providing no answer to the question to read.

Look, dumb ass, you said two parents is ideal. Sex doesn't matter. Man/woman, two men, two women. The human race didn't evolve that way, it evolved with man/woman as the norm. Men and women are different. Your view that people who evolved that way don't need a parental relationship with both is frankly a hoot given the cow you have over fundamentalists who deny evolution. Liberalism is a religion.

So answer the question. Is that your experience? All you needed was baby sitters? You needed two, one wasn't enough, but having a parental relationship with each sex had nothing to do with your development? My question is actually pretty simple and clear. Man up, Darlene

I said that it is better to grow up in a happy family, and the sex of the parents does not matter. There is no evidence to dispute this.

Then why are you too dickless to answer the question? What about it disturbs you so much that you keep hiding behind the couch every time I ask it? Maybe even you know you're full of shit? Here you go again, the question you keep hiding from:

"Is that your experience? All you needed was baby sitters? You needed two, one wasn't enough, but having a parental relationship with each sex had nothing to do with your development? My question is actually pretty simple and clear. Man up, Darlene"

You are really insecure about your masculinity.

It is possible that one is better off with parents of different sexes, but there are no studies backing this up. How ******* thick are you? My brother and I were very independent, and our parents did not have a lot of influence on us. Probably the opposite. I cannot say that, from my experience, I think that how I was raised was better than if I had been raised by parents of the same sex.

 

[Syriusly]

Anyone who cannot understand this has got to be dumber than dirt. I challenge you to refute a single point that I’ve made here.

"The second premise that has emerged, that children being raised by gay couples are at a disadvantage is also debunked horseshit"

This always cracks me up. With evolution, liberals love to mock the religious nuts who deny obvious science. Why would God make the world in 6,000 years then make it appear as if it was billions of years old and place things like dinosaur bones. I agree, they have turned their brain off for their religion, I don't believe God want people to turn their brains off.

But then, the self professed party of logic and science looks at a world with men and women who have clearly different personalities and parenting roles and decides that gender doesn't matter in parenting. Even without all the studies of the roles of mothers and fathers in child rearing, all you have to do is look around you and observe, you grew up in a world with mothers and fathers all around you and the clear role they play in their kids lives, which are clearly not the same as men and women are not the same.

But suddenly now your religion kicks in and your mind clicks off. Gays are a pet liberal cause, so nope you say, parents are just sexless automatons who wipe kids noses and potty train them. In developing from a glitter in their parents eyes to a full grown adult in a world filled with men and women, it makes no difference if you have a parental relationship with each of the two sexes. They are glorified babysitters.

Then further demonstrating your liberal religious fervor, you double down on stupidity and declare the magic number is two. In your genderless parental ideology, why is two perfect for all since parenting to you is just division of labor? One kid? Twelve? If you believed your own crap, if two parents is perfect for one kid and they are dividing labor, obviously more than two would be ideal for twelve kids.

Also, your contention that tax breaks like lower marginal rates and exemption from the death tax is just so you, stupidity personified. But there is no reasoning with you religious whack jobs

Holly Shit! This nonsensical, emotional rant devoid of all facts, logic and reason is supposed to be in response the actual facts that I laid out. Now I know for sure what I'm dealing with here as if I didn't know before. You just can't deal with reality. My work is done here.

How is my question in any possible way unclear? It's a world filled with men and women. Yet you claim children don't need a parental relationship with one of each even though that's how we evolved

Frankly no- its not how 'we evolved'.

There is no way for us to know whether our distant ancestors had mother/father family units- or were more like chimps(groups with no monogamy) or gorillas(male dominated with harems).

And throughout our history children have regularly been raised without one parent or another. And they continue to have children nonetheless.

Evolution really doesn't seem to care whether a father or mother is present throughout a child's life.

Now in a modern society- I think that among the ideals I would strive for is a 'mother and father'- but as a society we do not require that. Otherwise we would not allow married parents to divorce. Among the other ideals are 'two parents' and 'sufficient income' and 'parents who know how to parent'.

But we do not require that parents be perfect- and kids are resilient. I know boys raised by single moms who turned out great. I know kids raised by their biological mom and dad that are a mess(because mom and dad were a mess).

As a parent myself- what I ask for- and hope for- are parents who will try to be good parents.