Page 64 of 123 FirstFirst ... 1454626364656674114 ... LastLast
Results 631 to 640 of 1229

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

  1. #631
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,271

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

    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    I don't really care what the justices of any stripe say on that....

    marriage, in many cultures, has not always been between a man and a woman
    .

    is it extremist to recognize facts?

    Is that right? Name these many cultures that allow marriage between something other than a male & female human.

  2. #632
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

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

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    Is that right? Name these many cultures that allow marriage between something other than a male & female human.
    look at my previous post which included links, and provided examples.
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  3. #633
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,271

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

    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    look at my previous post which included links, and provided examples.
    I did ... and I saw responses to it. I thought you had something more, um, persuasive.
    You have a peculiar list of cultures you want to emulate.

  4. #634
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,286

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    When has marriage ever meant something other than man + woman?
    Where's my link? Where's your proof? You speak for all of mankind do you? Wow, that's enormous pressure. How do you do it?

    Someone forgot to send your memo to Europe. Same sex marriage is legal in many countries there. And has been for some time.

  5. #635
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,286

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    As far as I'm concerned Marriage = Man + Woman
    And you're wrong. Numerous states have already disagreed with your intolerant views.

  6. #636
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,286

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Nigeria? Really? You've got to be kidding me

    .
    You said all of mankind. Do we need to quote you?

  7. #637
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,286

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

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    Is that right? Name these many cultures that allow marriage between something other than a male & female human.

    Really? Please come out of your cave into the light of day.


    Currently 22 of the 51 countries in Europe recognize some type of same-sex unions, among them a majority of members of the European Union. Eight European countries legally recognize same-sex marriage, namely Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. An additional fourteen have a form of civil union or unregistered cohabitation. San Marino only allows immigration and cohabitation of a citizen's partner. Several countries are currently considering same-sex union recognition.
    Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Same-sex marriage is legally recognized in several jurisdictions within the United States. As of January 2013, nine states—Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington—as well as the District of Columbia and three Native American tribes[1]—have legalized same-sex marriage, representing 15.7% of the U.S. population. In addition, Rhode Island recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions,[2][3] and California, which briefly granted same-sex marriages in 2008, now recognizes them on a conditional basis.[4]
    Same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  8. #638
    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 marywollstonecraft View Post
    I don't really care what the justices of any stripe say on that....

    marriage, in many cultures, has not always been between a man and a woman.

    is it extremist to recognize facts?
    Not "many cultures". That's a lie. Marriage has always had one meaning to 99.99999999999999% of all human beings who ever lived. Ever. Even the liberal justices on the supreme court recognize this. You are the extremist here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    That's not what I said, nor does that have anything to do with socialism. I said that there are no special rights being handed out, or that gays are alone in demanding equality of marriage. I want the right to marry a consenting adult of either sex, regardless of whether or not I intend to use it. But I certainly didn't advocate removing the requirement for consent for marriage, so the idea that anyone can marry "whatever" they want is certainly outside the scope of what I was talking about. But you're not suffering from a grievous mental deficiency, so you already knew that. So why not get off the slippery slope and talk about what we're talking about, the right of consenting adults to marry one another.
    Yes gays are being given the special right to change the definition of what marriage is from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?

    Why do only gays get this special right on not any other sexual interest group? If "Marriage is a Civil Right" who gets excluded? Do you believe marriage is a "Civil Right"?

    Gays are not a separate species. Whatever genetic factors produce homosexuality are not possessed exclusively by homosexuals. For all we know, it might be a side effect of some other beneficial mutation. That homosexuals do not have children with each other is immaterial to a small propensity for homosexuality to be a part of what makes us human. What makes an individual survive and reproduce is not always beneficial to the species as a whole. Effectively mixing a portion out of the gene pool (though plenty of gay men and women had children with heterosexuals throughout history, and continue to do so now, also through new technologies that remove the need for heterosexual sex for them to procreate) in exchange for other benefits could be helpful to the survival of the species.
    Gays cannot procreate through gay sex

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Bronson, do try debating what I said. I know that it would be far easier for you to debate what you WANT me to have said, but challenge yourself. I said that procreation is not a determinant to the ability to marry after YOU commented on procreation. Stick to the topic.
    Nobody ever said you have to procreate when you get married, but women or men who are infertile have still been able to get married because that union still fit within the definition of what marriage is. Gays are demanding the special right to change the definition of what marriage is. Stick to the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    1) Your argument is an appeal to tradition logical fallacy and is therefore invalid.
    2) If other groups want to redefine marriage, let them try. This discussion is about SSM. Your red herrings are irrelevant.
    3) Marriage is NOT about bringing children as I have proven. Procreation is not a requirement for marriage.

    So, your entire post has been reduced to rubble. What new irrelevancies are you going to post now?
    1) Rubbish.
    2) Let them try? So anything goes right? I thought marriage was a "civil right". You would discriminate against other people who want to change the definition of marriage to fit their needs?
    3) Marriage as an institution has ALWAYS been about children. Even if infertile couples can't make a baby, that union was still man + woman and those people didn't try and change the definition of what marriage means. Marriage however has always had specific social and economic purposes that do have to do with spawning new taxpayers.

    There are literally 5 posters right now who can't even get their narrative straight. It's pure emotion with the Left.

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    Where's my link? Where's your proof? You speak for all of mankind do you? Wow, that's enormous pressure. How do you do it?

    Someone forgot to send your memo to Europe. Same sex marriage is legal in many countries there. And has been for some time.
    Even the liberal justices on the Supreme Court recognized marriage has always meant man + ?. You can try and make a morally relative argument about "spirit brothers" or something, but it's ludicrous to try. Someone even went as far as to mention Nero. It's not my problem if you a radical extremist who is trying to shape reality around your emotions and not the other way around.

    So just to make sure we are ALL on the same page

    1) Is Marriage a "Civil Right"? Still waiting for the definitive answer on this one. Been pages of hand wringing, name calling, and dancing around the question. Quite hilarious.

    2) If gays get the special right to change the definition of marriage to fit their needs, what other sexual interest groups get the same "right" and which ones don't?

    I'd like to condense all the raging and histrionics to these 2 particular points. Thanks

  9. #639
    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 Top Cat View Post
    You said all of mankind. Do we need to quote you?
    Are you claiming that even the liberal justices on the supreme court are wrong?

  10. #640
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,286

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

    Still no link? Shocking I tell you.

Posting Permissions

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