The numbers at the following site show somewhere near a 50% divorce rate state by state. Of course, the people getting divorced in a particular year are not the same ones who got married that year. And, even 50% is not most, so you win that argument. I would like to see total marriages and the divorce numbers from that data, but I can't find the information in that format right now.
Still, there is a high rate of divorce that kids of heterosexuals have to deal with.
Descriminating marriage for interracial couples is exactly like this. You cannot control your race nor can you control your gender. Saying homosexuals have an equal right to marry is like saying "black people have an equal right to marry the same race, just like white people have the same right to marry the same race, etc."
Seperate but equal is not equal.
Last edited by Unrein; 12-14-08 at 09:43 PM.
Would you call these families 'non traditional'? How about abnormal? Unnatural? Most people would slap you if you stated that their family was not a 'traditional' one - because as I said, there are so many different families that there is no such thing as a 'traditional' family.
Most people I know would slap you if you suggested their family was a 'traditional' one.Most people would slap you if you stated that their family was not a 'traditional' one...
Traditional does not equal good, normal, natural, or anything of the sort.
It equals "conservative", and I doubt it sounds appealing to anyone but conservatives.
It's become a catchphrase appropriated by the radical Christian Right.
"Traditional Family" "Traditional Family Values". Etc.
It means males are heads of household, females don't work outside the home, and any contraception other than the notoriously ineffective "rhythm method" is taboo.
Who the hell wants to be "traditional"?
It's teh suck, if you ask me.
Parenthood should naturally be beneficial to the well being of the parents, but this must be a decidedly secondary concern.
Very few people would slap me, as I am a rather large, and often unpleasant man.
Are they like you?Most people I know would slap you if you suggested their family was a 'traditional' one.
It means it has existed in a society for some time, this means it will tend to be part of the fabric of society with its own functions and ideational factors. It may well have latent functions and likely be somewhat interdependent with over institutions, there could well be unintended consequences from its rash removal.Traditional does not equal good, normal, natural, or anything of the sort
A stable society should certainly feel the traditional has a moderate goodness or naturalness about it.
It sounds appealing to me and I'm not a conservative.It equals "conservative", and I doubt it sounds appealing to anyone but conservatives.
It is not to those who take their political principles from Enlightenment philosophes, Jacobins and Bolsheviks who hate it so much and wish to completely destroy it. Those who combine a morbid subjectivity and atomism and a wish to destroy anything traditional, settled, decent, sacred or old and with a paradoxical levelling and extreme egalitarianism, universalism and rationalism.
Last edited by Wessexman; 12-15-08 at 03:35 AM.
"It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke
The news article is OBVIOUSLY a LIE in how it is presented and so BIAS as to have NO VALUE for any opinion. The article states:
"Frank Gill and his partner rescued two abused brothers, now ages 4 and 8, from a Miami crack house. The foster parents provided a loving home that healed physical and emotional damage."
To take that as literally true, Gill and his partner are a licensed MD doctor and PhD child psychologist, who burst into a crack house on their own - kidnapping the two children. Then, from their home, the gay doctor performed surgeries and medical procedures while the gay child psychologist successful fully solved the children's psychological issues.
HOW ABSURD. Who "rescued" the children would have been the state/CPS and the evaluation of the foster parents is unsubstantiated in anyway and a declaration by an obviously grossly bias author.
I OPPOSE gay foster parents primarily because I don't want child stuck in the middle of rabid gay rights politics for which any consideration of placing or removing children with a gay couple would be amidst gay activists screaming that anyone who opposed the placement or supported removal is a homophobic bigot - and - like the article - willing to tell any lie to obtain their goal.
I support single parents being foster parents.
Last edited by Bonnie1988; 12-15-08 at 01:59 PM.
You are trying to continue to argue your position from a position that I find untenable, illogical. Comparing race with sexual orientation is not logical. Maybe I'll never find a point when I can find these two comparable.Descriminating marriage for interracial couples is exactly like this. You cannot control your race nor can you control your gender. Saying homosexuals have an equal right to marry is like saying "black people have an equal right to marry the same race, just like white people have the same right to marry the same race, etc."
Seperate but equal is not equal.