Page 57 of 123 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967107 ... LastLast
Results 561 to 570 of 1229

Thread: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

  1. #561
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by head of joaquin View Post
    You're about 50 years behind the time.

    Studies indicate that there is a genetic component to sexual orientation.

    Studies indicate that gays have always propagated, just at a lower rate.

    The theory is that sexual orientation involves lots of genes, and in some combinations they result in alpha males, which tend to be bad fathers (so there is evolutionary pressure limiting that combination), in others they result in less aggressive males, which tend to make better fathers (and hence are favored genetically), and in other combinations they result in gay males (which like alpha male combination are limited, in this case due to lower reproductive rates). That's why the components that result in homosexual orientation remain in the gene pool. They have survival value in various combinations.

    Your simplistic view is passee.

    LOL..^^^ Oh my??

    First of all a theory requires that it be testable. None of your theory is testable, or if so please indicate how one would go about it. Secondly, the prevailing wisdom among the current crop of social scientists is that, the reason the gay gene has managed to stick around so long is that it is recessive. Again, these are just hypothesis, and until we find that gene or genes all of it will remain speculation. You should stick to politics, HOJ, you're clearly not adept at speaking about the science involved with sexuality, and genetics.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  2. #562
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:34 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,292

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    LOL..^^^ Oh my??

    First of all a theory requires that it be testable. None of your theory is testable, or if so please indicate how one would go about it. Secondly, the prevailing wisdom among the current crop of social scientists is that, the reason the gay gene has managed to stick around so long is that it is recessive. Again, these are just hypothesis, and until we find that gene or genes all of it will remain speculation. You should stick to politics, HOJ, you're clearly not adept at speaking about the science involved with sexuality, and genetics.


    Tim-
    I did a paper in college on the Gay Gene. I used a database of monozygotic (identical) twins. Monozygotic twins share the same DNA. No correllation between same DNA and homosexuality. Just a note.

    I read a terrific cartoon on BARTCOP.COM today. A caricature of Scalia and his cohorts of the radical right. Scalia is saying, "Now, this would be just fine if it was a marriage between two Corporations of the same sex." Think Citizens United.

  3. #563
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Last Seen
    09-18-16 @ 03:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,029

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    All this vitriol aimed at Scalia is hilarious. If the question of harm wasn't a valid question, then prey tell why are all the studies done in the last 10 years attempting to answer the very same question, in regards to homosexual parenting.


    Tim-
    It wasn't valid because adoption is a judicial proceeding which always looks to the best interest of the child in question. That's true whatever the proposed adopting parents are gay or staight. So he was just trying to inflame the issue.

    Children don't get adopted in the aggregate, so even if there were studies that showed that children in the aggregate are worse off with gay parents (and there are no such valid studies), it would have no impact on adoption, since the question the judge faces in an adoption proceeding is what is in the best interest of the particula child at issue. If a particular couple, gay or straight, isn't right for a proposed adoptee, the judge won't allow the adoption.

    What are you and Scalia missing?

  4. #564
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Last Seen
    09-18-16 @ 03:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,029

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    LOL..^^^ Oh my??

    First of all a theory requires that it be testable. None of your theory is testable, or if so please indicate how one would go about it. Secondly, the prevailing wisdom among the current crop of social scientists is that, the reason the gay gene has managed to stick around so long is that it is recessive. Again, these are just hypothesis, and until we find that gene or genes all of it will remain speculation. You should stick to politics, HOJ, you're clearly not adept at speaking about the science involved with sexuality, and genetics.


    Tim-
    Oh god, knownothingism and antievolutionary claptrap.

    Everything in this theory is testable. It's just a very complex system. There seems to be a genetic component in sexual orientation and an epigentic component. But all the studies are ambiguous. That's not a verifiability issue. It's just an issue of how complex human sexuality is. Get used to it.

  5. #565
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    What's it like to live hundreds of years in the past?
    You're just dodging now because you don't really have an argument. You're all emotion.

    What gives gays the special right to change the definition of marriage from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ? over any other sexual interest group? If marriage is a "civil right" then why would other sexual interest groups be excluded? Wouldn't that be discriminating against their "civil rights"?

  6. #566
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    You're just dodging now because you don't really have an argument. You're all emotion.
    That you think that what gay people 'do' is icky, and ramble on about definitions, is where all the 'emotion' can be found. That you do not believe in the Constitution and put forth lame arguments says all that anyone needs to know about your stance.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  7. #567
    Black Is Smart
    Van Basten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    The New New Frontier
    Last Seen
    11-06-17 @ 07:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    4,661

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Regardless, Scalia's far more entertaining than the other justices.
    "We have more responsibility than power, I think. The newspaper can create great controversies, stir up arguments within the community or discussion, can throw light on injustices....just as it can do the opposite. It can hide things and be a great power for evil." -- Rupert Murdoch, 1968

  8. #568
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    That you think that what gay people 'do' is icky, and ramble on about definitions, is where all the 'emotion' can be found. That you do not believe in the Constitution and put forth lame arguments says all that anyone needs to know about your stance.
    When did I saw what gay people do is "icky"? Quote it

    Do you believe marriage is a civil right? If so, who is excluded?

    What writing from The Founders can you find where they express specific support for Gay Marriage? Where is gay marriage mentioned in The Constitution. Care to source that?

  9. #569
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post

    Do you believe marriage is a civil right? If so, who is excluded?

    If the government recognizes the joining of two adults, and gives those two adults special privileges, then the government needs to recognize all such bindings of two adults otherwise it is institutional discrimination.

    This is where you all on the right look just as foolish as the left does on the 'gun control' issue...
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  10. #570
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    If the government recognizes the joining of two adults, and gives those two adults special privileges, then the government needs to recognize all such bindings of two adults otherwise it is institutional discrimination.

    This is where you all on the right look just as foolish as the left does on the 'gun control' issue...
    No Government has ever recognized marriage as being anything other than man + woman ever. Someone actually tried to use Nero as an example of when it was acceptable.

    Why limit it to only 2 adults? What if other sexual interest groups also want a right to those benefits? Is marriage just about people receiving benefits now? If so, wouldn't it be discrimination to exclude other sexual interest groups their "civil right" to those benefits?

    I'll ask again but I know it's pointless because you can't answer. You are nothing more than emotion.

    What gives gay the special right to change the definition of marriage from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ? at the exclusion of ALL other sexual interest groups?

Posting Permissions

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