Page 19 of 45 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 443

Thread: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

  1. #181
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    The data was beyond self selected. Some of the authors of the books he used INTENTIONALLY chose to use gay parents of gay kids in order to round off their books and include useful information. I think it is pretty easy to make it look like gay parents raise gay kids when you sample books where authors intentionally chose to find and include gay parents of gay kids. What I struggle to understand is why you didn't exercise the basic critical thinking skills to question the validity of his methods before citing him. It seems to me you liked his conclusion because it supported your political agenda and you don't actually care whether it was a legitimate study.
    Prove it.

  2. #182
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Jredbaron96 View Post

    Appeal to tradition is a logical fallacy. Try again.
    And you have a better appeal, do you?

    What is known and what is the unknown?

    We know about traditional marriage [thousands of years of knowledge and practice], what happens generally with intact two parent, man and woman, marriages over the long term... that is tradition, we can and have studied it. We know it has provided the basic blocks upon which we build the strong societal foundations that we, as a nation, desire to encourage and provide for our posterity, for the the long term health of our society/nation.

    This forced upon Russian Roulette experimentation is not something we must do. And that is just what this is, experimentation, a gamble so that we may please a certain minority, 2-4%, while risking the whole, 100%. Seems a little selfish, maybe? The fact that the LBGT movement is not tolerant of just being tolerated [ which in history would be HUGE], they want everyone to condone, to support and ultimately promote something that others do not think right ...nor natural... or whatever their private reasoning, and certainly do not want, as has been stated previously, this forced acceptance shoved down their, our and our children's throats.

    Simple as that.

  3. #183
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Are you kidding? That is horribly historically inaccurate which is pretty bad given that most of those bans occurred only a decade ago. A little history lesson on this issue is apparently needed.

    1972: Baker v. Nelson the Supreme Court dismissed a case seeking SSM in Minnesota setting the first court precedent on the issue.
    1996: Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Bill Clinton.
    2002: The first Federal Marriage Amendment was proposed by a Democratic Representative.
    2003: Lawrence v. Texas the Supreme Court strikes down sodomy laws.
    2003: Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled the right to marry should be extended to same sex couples.
    2004: Same sex marriage becomes legal in Massachusetts, the first state to legalize it.
    2004: President George W. Bush makes same sex marriage a major part of his election campaign and after winning the GOP pushes ballot questions to ban same sex marriage and civil unions in over 25 states over the nest few years.

    Basically, as a reaction to the sodomy laws being overturned, an inability to pass a federal marriage amendment, and the MA Supreme Court ruling in favor of SSM, your side pushed bans on civil unions and same sex marriage in each state across the country. I didn't ask for marriage, the overreaction was entirely on your side and now that SSM is gaining ground, your side is frantically accusing us of being uncompromising. If from the BEGINNING your side had made any push to compromise with civil unions, then the current debate likely would not be occurring at all, but your side decided to use the government to FORCE a particular social view of the majority at that time and as a result your side became the one that became seen as limiting freedom. Now even the most stout conservatives have trouble reconciling the bedrock principle of individual freedom with their reactionary and completely UNCOMPRISING push to deny same sex couples any legal recognition or rights.

    If you want to be a historical revisionist and pretend that isn't the case in some clearly prejudiced, baseless, and ignorant attempt to blame the gay rights movement for the current state of affairs, then feel free. That is your own animosity, not HISTORICAL FACT.
    Disingenuous to say the least. Your timeline ignores everything from 1972 to 1996. Are you seriously trying to get folks to believe that in that interim gay marriage wasn't sought almost continuously? And when you couldn't get it through the political process you headed for the courts. When the courts turned you down, did you stop trying to co-opt marriage - no, you just spun the issue slightly, tried a different tack and hit the courts up again. The death of a thousand cuts.

    We "force" the majority social view in virtually every law we make. We decide what is acceptable behavior and to what degree by our society's standards.

    Believing in individual freedom does NOT mean anything that pops into your head goes.

  4. #184
    Finite and Precious
    Jredbaron96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    With you.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,881
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    And you have a better appeal, do you?
    No, I'm not stupid enough to use logical fallacies for my arguments.

    What is known and what is the unknown?

    We know about traditional marriage [thousands of years of knowledge and practice], what happens generally with intact two parent, man and woman, marriages over the long term... that is tradition, we can and have studied it. We know it has provided the basic blocks upon which we build the strong societal foundations that we, as a nation, desire to encourage and provide for our posterity, for the the long term health of our society/nation.
    The divorce rate for straight couples is 50%. you don't have a lot to show for.

    This forced upon Russian Roulette experimentation is not something we must do. And that is just what this is, experimentation, a gamble so that we may please a certain minority, 2-4%, while risking the whole, 100%. Seems a little selfish, maybe? The fact that the LBGT movement is not tolerant of just being tolerated [ which in history would be HUGE], they want everyone to condone, to support and ultimately promote something that others do not think right ...nor natural... or whatever their private reasoning, and certainly do not want, as has been stated previously, this forced acceptance shoved down their, our and our children's throats.
    Nothing is being 'risked for'.

    Simple as that.
    Not even close.
    "Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough."
    -FDR

  5. #185
    Finite and Precious
    Jredbaron96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    With you.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,881
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    How old were most of the children in question?
    I don't know.



    Two studies. The study I mentioned was fact-checking what an earlier study had claimed.
    Was the other study the one in the original post I replied to?


    Irrelevant. It is common for academic studies to utilize pre-existing data.
    When using it as comparison to their own findings, yes. Not what Shumme did.



    If a demonstratable connection between being raised in a homosexual household and turning to homosexuality later in life can be shown, then homosexual adoption is essentially a form of recruitment into the homosexual lifestyle.
    Even if Shumme's report is to believed, the amount of children that identified as gay was still the minority. Homosexual adoption is not recruitment, and I cannot believe I actually just had to state that.


    It is an abnormal state of affairs practiced by 2-4% of any given nation's population at most. That is, by definition, " deviant."
    How do you define "abnormal"? And even so, that does not make it a lifestyle.

    Your P.C. semantics can go fly a kite.
    Your right wing memes can **** off.


    Young men raised in single mother households often exhibit behavioral problems later in life due to the lack of a father figure.
    Okay.

    You claimed that this would not be the case in a same-sex lesbian household because one of the mothers there would take on a "fatherly" role.
    Only if it was proven that a couple must exhibit both a mother/father figure in order to function safely, which is dubious as best. I would need to see just how Lesbian and gay couples interact with their children before making a definite claim.

    A large number of single mothers also live with their own mothers, essentially rendering the environment a de facto same sex two parent household.
    Incorrect. The relationship bewteen a married couple and their children is innately different than a mother/grandmother-to-child relationship.



    Provide specific data which shows that a lesbian can effectively serve as a father figure,
    Not my main point.

    I can show you data showing that gays can raise children as effectively as straights. It will not be the first time, but I'm willing to do it again.


    "A handful of children have been raised by gay couples and turned out to be sort of 'okay' (with a strong chance of turning to homosexuality themselves)." Isn't really cutting it.
    Neither it making the same ****ing vague claims of this inablilty for gays to properly raise children.

    American plantation slavery was a relatively new phenomena. It dated back no further than the 16th century.

    It was also an economic institution, not a "value."
    I did not say 'plantation slavery', I said slavery.





    Yes, it is.
    No, it is not. Being gay does not lend itself to a specific lifestyle. Homosexuality is an orientation.





    Liberal social values have proven themselves to be unproductive and even harmful to society in general on more occasions than I care to count.
    Liberal social policies led to women voting, end of child labor, and the ending of sodomy laws. Try again.
    "Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough."
    -FDR

  6. #186
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) no, SOME of tham are using violence to fight against equality, thats bigotry and moronic. Please note than and normal protesting would be fine with me whether i agreed or not but i would still judge them as thats my right too,
    2.) preservation of what they believe is not needed, they are still free to not participate in gay marriage. What they believe in is not being changed or forced on them.
    as for the rest yes they have that right, just as i have the right to judge them.
    People had the right to fight against equal rights for minorities and woman too. They were also bigots if they were trying to stop them then too. Also ain if they did it peaceful that would be fine. sp,e are not.

    3.) i agree and you realize that you just called the violent protester insane right? but somehow bigots and moron you deem harsh?

    4.) yes they do, and if they are against equal rights or against a race, gender or sexuality AND they want to stop others from having those rights, not just have feeling its wrong that doesnt change the fact they are bigots

    5.) child abuser are CRIMINALS and RAPIST and they have VICTIUMS and they INFRINGE on RIGHTS of others. Example fails
    6.) see above

    7.) these examples show how severely uneducated you are on the issues and understanding of rights, freedoms and liberties.

    comparing equal rights to rapist and killers is nonsensical and very telling about you ability to be honest and objective and it lets us know where your failed presentations of reality are.

    paris aside here in america i would defend ones freedom to PREACH, TEACH, BELIEVE, FEEL, THINK, SAY etc that gay is wrong, gross a sin whatever. But as soon as they try to STOP their fellow americans from having equal rights its hypocritical, bigoted and moronic.

    you are free to disagree though
    1. Where is your dreaded INEQUALITY?

    2. They do not need a continuing society? Liberal polices in Europe and their impact is being shown to us in real time. The disintegration of the stable traditional family [which is what we are really talkng about here as well ], the promotion of zero population growth aided by abortion policy/practices, the social welfare policies [ which also allow and promote single parent families to the detriment of those families ], now the promotion of couples who cannot independently reproduce themselves, much less achieve zero they go into the negative... I mean it just goes on and on... and we can see it from over here...
    How is it not being forced on them, they were not asked... there was no vote by the People... it is forced...

    And again, this false equivalency with the Civil Rights of minorities and women... it simply IS NOT THE SAME.

    3. Agreed on the one point. And no, I did not just call a violent protestor insane. Violent protests are situational... some may be sane, we fought a violent Revolution so that we could found this fine country. Was that insane? NO. That is why I place the qualifier generally. I am not into violence, at the same time I understand that a police FORCE is often needed, a strong military is a requirement to deter our enemies and, if necessary to violently fight and beat them. Agreed?

    5. Homosexuality used to be illegal, not that long ago, so the criminality argument fails for you, right? All that would have to happen is get enough people in congress to pass the right laws and Bam! No more child molesters because it is legal [ Sounds similar, taking out the criminality part, to what the legislators just did in France, passing a law without allowing a vote by the people on such an important societal changing matter, right? So after they pass that law allowing relations between a 9 year old and an adult man, whose rights are then being infringed? So, double fail there AJ.
    7. Don't attempt to label me and how educated I am. I have two degrees, history and poly sci, teach history and economics, have taught American Government, Civics, Law, World History, etc....have more than the equivalent of a minor in English, attended Harvard [ could only afford one semester ] and the best school in the South East [ all at my own expense, not rich here and no desire to be so ] have traveled most of Western Europe by bicycle, North, Central and South America [at my own expense ], have more books in my private library just on politics and history than most people will ever read in five lifetimes...

    So why not just prove your points, don't label, let others decide who is and isn't educated on the issues....makes you look bad except to those who already agree, called confirmation bias, by the way.

    Comparing principles gets to the bone, buddy... not just your surface stuff like maybe, don't know yet, like maybe you are used to putting out there. The principle either stands up under close scrutiny...or like yours, it does not.

    Lets just explore what you were saying, minority right and equality... you were imprecise in your language, do not blame me and would expect you to catch me if similarly imprecise, minorities include ALL MINORITIES my fellow citizen.

    THE BIGGEST FAILURE SO FAR IS TO PROVE THAT ANYBODY IS BEING DEPRIVED OF EQUAL RIGHTS... need to work on that AJ

  7. #187
    controlled chaos
    Gaugingcatenate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in the mountains of Panama
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,159

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    again more opinion
    and i would defend you right to have it
    Thank you, as I would defend yours, because without those conditions, neither of us can speak our minds.

    Right now, though, I would rather you show me the error of my ways ...if you can.

  8. #188
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    Prove it.
    Schumm's analysis uses 10 samples, most of which are literary books on gay parenting, and at least one of which the author, Abigail Garner, purposely selected HALF the contents to be about gay parents with straight kids and HALF to be about gay parents with gay kids. He uses those samples to argue that gays have a disproportionate number of gay youth. As such, it is false even at face value. That was a criticism back when Cameron did the original analysis and one he intentionally did not mitigate despite the author herself reporting her book was not a representative sample in a radio interview with Cameron.

    Box Turtle Bulletin “Children of Homosexuals” Researcher More Apt To Ape Paul Cameron

    Do you really think authors of gay parenting books are working hard to make their books statistically representative of the gay parenting population?
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 04-27-13 at 07:55 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  9. #189
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Disingenuous to say the least. Your timeline ignores everything from 1972 to 1996. Are you seriously trying to get folks to believe that in that interim gay marriage wasn't sought almost continuously? And when you couldn't get it through the political process you headed for the courts. When the courts turned you down, did you stop trying to co-opt marriage - no, you just spun the issue slightly, tried a different tack and hit the courts up again. The death of a thousand cuts.

    We "force" the majority social view in virtually every law we make. We decide what is acceptable behavior and to what degree by our society's standards.

    Believing in individual freedom does NOT mean anything that pops into your head goes.
    Yes, gay rights advocates have fought for same sex marriage AND civil unions since the 1970s. It wasn't until Lawreence v. Texas that it was even possible to consider same sex marriage as a realistic possibility because of the number of states that had anti sodomy laws. Even though those laws were declared unconstitutional, they are still being repealed state by state today. It is not fair to ague that every gay person or supporter of gay rights had a "marriage or nothing" mentality about it. We are also talking about the span of 1 year, from 2003 to 2004.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 04-27-13 at 08:07 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  10. #190
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,817

    Re: Paris Riots After Gay Marriage Vote

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaugingcatenate View Post
    1. Where is your dreaded INEQUALITY?

    2. They do not need a continuing society? Liberal polices in Europe and their impact is being shown to us in real time. The disintegration of the stable traditional family [which is what we are really talkng about here as well ], the promotion of zero population growth aided by abortion policy/practices, the social welfare policies [ which also allow and promote single parent families to the detriment of those families ], now the promotion of couples who cannot independently reproduce themselves, much less achieve zero they go into the negative... I mean it just goes on and on... and we can see it from over here...
    How is it not being forced on them, they were not asked... there was no vote by the People... it is forced...

    2a.)And again, this false equivalency with the Civil Rights of minorities and women... it simply IS NOT THE SAME.

    3. Agreed on the one point. And no, I did not just call a violent protestor insane. Violent protests are situational... some may be sane, we fought a violent Revolution so that we could found this fine country. Was that insane? NO. That is why I place the qualifier generally. I am not into violence, at the same time I understand that a police FORCE is often needed, a strong military is a requirement to deter our enemies and, if necessary to violently fight and beat them. Agreed?

    5. Homosexuality used to be illegal, not that long ago, so the criminality argument fails for you, right?
    5a.)All that would have to happen is get enough people in congress to pass the right laws and Bam! No more child molesters because it is legal
    5b.)[ Sounds similar, taking out the criminality part, to what the legislators just did in France, passing a law without allowing a vote by the people on such an important societal changing matter, right?
    5c.) So after they pass that law allowing relations between a 9 year old and an adult man, whose rights are then being infringed? So, double fail there AJ.
    7. Don't attempt to label me and how educated I am. I have two degrees, history and poly sci, teach history and economics, have taught American Government, Civics, Law, World History, etc....have more than the equivalent of a minor in English, attended Harvard [ could only afford one semester ] and the best school in the South East [ all at my own expense, not rich here and no desire to be so ] have traveled most of Western Europe by bicycle, North, Central and South America [at my own expense ], have more books in my private library just on politics and history than most people will ever read in five lifetimes...

    So why not just prove your points, don't label, let others decide who is and isn't educated on the issues....makes you look bad except to those who already agree, called confirmation bias, by the way.

    Comparing principles gets to the bone, buddy... not just your surface stuff like maybe, don't know yet, like maybe you are used to putting out there. The principle either stands up under close scrutiny...or like yours, it does not.

    8.)Lets just explore what you were saying, minority right and equality... you were imprecise in your language, do not blame me and would expect you to catch me if similarly imprecise, minorities include ALL MINORITIES my fellow citizen.

    THE BIGGEST FAILURE SO FAR IS TO PROVE THAT ANYBODY IS BEING DEPRIVED OF EQUAL RIGHTS... need to work on that AJ
    1.) right to marriage some state supreme courts in the US have already decided when put to the task LMAO
    yes i knew this thread is about paris, and as their government ruled.

    2.) no because its not under attack nor is it in danger of being not preserved. From my understanding striaht marriage is still legal right? nobody is trying to take that away right? then its fine its not in danger and doesnt need preserved because it already exists LOL

    theres ZERO force because they dont have to participate in gay marriage LMAO assuming otherwise is just disingenuous.

    2a.) you are welcome to that opinion but you have not facts to support it and court ruling in the US already disagree with you

    3.) so make up your mind then LOL you made the statement not me LOL glad you clarified.

    5.) no it doesn't fail me because homosexuality is not illegal
    5a.) WRONG because you would have to strip away many rights to make rape legal LOL
    so no "bam" and whether legal or not a victim and force would still be present lol
    5b.) no it doesnt if you are an honest adult and understand reality, rights, freedoms liberties and what rape is, a minor is, force is lOL not even CLOSE to the same unless one is totally dishonest LOL
    5c.) see above no fail is present, you lose LOL
    7.) see another fail because i didnt label you on how uneducated you are in general so please stop lying, you could have 15 degress, on this topic you are uneducated, Im uneducated on many topics, brain surgery, engine rebuilding etc

    so let me know when your appeal to emotion rant and strawman is over LMAO tell me that cool line about who looks bad again? LMAO

    or continue to lie and make things up, the choose is yours really

    8.) nice try but this already failed when i said minorities i was talking about minorities and women was i not and the rights they already GAINED so it was obvious to honest people who i meant Nice back pedal though but it fails LMAO

    9.) 100% wrong because facts and state supreme court justices already disagree with you

    cool line though LOL
    my "work" is already done

    if you want an HONEST and OBJECTIVE conversation, because i can already tell after that loss if you even response its gong to be emotional ranting all over the place LOL, take deep breaths and feel free to ask me any questions you want. Ill gladly answer

    HONEST questions and i will gladly answer them, that way you wont have to assume and make stuff up about my stance.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

Page 19 of 45 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •