View Poll Results: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

Voters
430. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    186 43.26%
  • Yes, explain

    244 56.74%
Page 57 of 192 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967107157 ... LastLast
Results 561 to 570 of 1915

Thread: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

  1. #561
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    See I included the "it's my understanding" so that it wouldn't sound like a claim. Oh well, I guess I need an English comp class.

    That's how I understood previous studies linked to in these discussions. I accept the fact that I'm likely not recalling the data accurately which is why I'm looking for clarification.
    Virtually every study in the last 25 years of children raised by same sex couples has found that they turn out no better or worse adjusted than those by opposite sex couples. That contradicts what one would expect with gender role development and so a hypothesis is that children develop their gender roles from observing more than just their immediate family, but also what they see from extended family, teachers, mentors, peers, etc. I don't know of any study which has actually explored the degree to which these extraneous influences contribute to a child's gender role development.

  2. #562
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    That has never been any part of my argument, ever.

    You believe that I'm making an argument from traditional authority. If that's how I'm coming across then I need to find another way to word my argument.
    That is how the quoted post came across to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I'll have to give it some thought, but from where I'm standing I'm making an empirical observation based on solid science. Every variation of marriage always serves the same purpose just like every variation of a funeral always serve the same purpose. This is not because "that's the way we've always don it", it's because this is what this activity is for.
    The problem with this statement is that it is no longer true, if it ever was fully, across-the-board true. Marriage in today's modern societies, from a legal standpoint, is about two people who wish to make each other legal family and take responsibility for each other financially and legally.

    One of the activities of a modern, legal marriage is to provide a stable home for raising children, but that is not the only purpose of marriage. If our laws reflected that it was the only purpose of marriage, then you would have a good argument, but that just isn't the case when you look at how our legal marriages work.

    Even before our modern societies though, marriages were used for many other things besides raising children. One of the most popular uses of marriage was for politics. Another was for gaining wealth and/or influence.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #563
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,506

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Blackdog, you just made a concession I don't think you intended to make by your request. You have just admitted that it is more important to a child's welfare that they have extended family involved in their life than it is that they are being raised by an opposite sex couple or same sex couple.
    You did not read Jerry's comment I think?

    Same sex couples when dealing with children use extended family to fill the gender gap in child rearing. Opposite sex couples do not have to do this. The extended family is not as important to child rearing as it would be or is for same sex couples.

    This is part of what makes heterosexual partnership in child rearing optimal compared to anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Think about it. If the variable that is most important is the degree of extended family involvement, then you just conceded the entire issue of the parenting ability of same sex couples.
    Look again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  4. #564
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    That is how the quoted post came across to me.



    The problem with this statement is that it is no longer true, if it ever was fully, across-the-board true. Marriage in today's modern societies, from a legal standpoint, is about two people who wish to make each other legal family and take responsibility for each other financially and legally.

    One of the activities of a modern, legal marriage is to provide a stable home for raising children, but that is not the only purpose of marriage. If our laws reflected that it was the only purpose of marriage, then you would have a good argument, but that just isn't the case when you look at how our legal marriages work.

    Even before our modern societies though, marriages were used for many other things besides raising children. One of the most popular uses of marriage was for politics. Another was for gaining wealth and/or influence.
    I don't give credence to what the law says marriage is because since we can make the law say whatever the hell we want, it doesn't have any real legitimacy in the face of how nature actually operates.

    You could make a law defining the pancreas as a skeletal structure and it would be just as true. Some things we don't get to decide. A foot is for standing on not because "that's the way we've always don it" but because that's what a foot is for. If you write a law stating the contrary then it's the law that's wrong.
    Last edited by Jerry; 05-06-10 at 04:50 PM.

  5. #565
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,506

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Wrong. He just may.
    Please explain how "just may" is optimal? It's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    A trusting relationship with one's parent can transcend the sex of that parent. If the child is not close to the parent of the same sex, they will not go to them. The relationship is key.
    Not in all cases and teenagers more often than not, will not fit into that mold.

    The relationship is key I agree. But your mother or mother is not going to be able to help you with certain problems or be a male role model and visa versa.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Naturalistic fallacies don't cut it.
    You mite as well say facts don't cut it.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Why provide incorrect information if it is not a jab? If it was accurate, I would accept that statement, but because it is not, it leads to questions about motivation.
    Just because you feel it is not accurate has nothing to do with my intentions. So far you have not shown it to be incorrect.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  6. #566
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    You did not read Jerry's comment I think?

    Same sex couples when dealing with children use extended family to fill the gender gap in child rearing. Opposite sex couples do not have to do this. The extended family is not as important to child rearing as it would be or is for same sex couples.
    Actually, you missed the point entirely. It isn't just extended family. Teachers, mentors, peers, etc. all play a part in a child's gender role development. There is no telling to what degree. There is no evidence to suggest that same sex couples are more reliant on extended family, only that they might get more out of an extended family. It is a degree of potential, not a degree of certainty. Jerry has been the first to concede that he has no evidence to support the assertion that same sex couples are more reliant on extended families than opposite sex couples would be. Furthermore, it is irrelevant. Having extended family involved is better for any child. Therefore, even if a same sex family was more reliant on extended family, it isn't to the detriment to the child, it is to the child's benefit.

    This is part of what makes heterosexual partnership in child rearing optimal compared to anything else.
    Wrong. All things being equal, this could be the case, but you have failed to consider an infinite number of variables. A heterosexual partnership could include the abuse, neglect, molestation, and even murder of a child. When it comes to considering the variables that are important for raising a child, the gender of the parents is so far down the list, it is almost irrelevant.

  7. #567
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    Same sex couples when dealing with children use extended family to fill the gender gap in child rearing. Opposite sex couples do not have to do this. The extended family is not as important to child rearing as it would be or is for same sex couples.
    As soon as there's a credible study concluding such, it will be a slam dunk. The religious opinion will be supported with good science and anti-theist trolls silenced.

    Until then it remains a weak spot.

  8. #568
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    As soon as there's a credible study concluding such, it will be a slam dunk. The religious opinion will be supported with good science and anti-theist trolls silenced.

    Until then it remains a weak spot.
    How is this a slam dunk? I'm not even sure why this is important. Wouldn't it be a good thing if gay couples were more reliant on their extended families than hetero families given that children raised within extended families almost always have a better outcome than those who aren't? If anything, it would be a benefit to a child to be raised by a same sex couple for this reason.

    Furthermore, assuming that it was some sort of deficit to same sex couples, why does it take any sort of precedence? Children learn gender roles from more than just their extended family. And isn't the actual parenting ability of a same sex couple more important? Are you going to start arguing that abusive heterosexual parents are superior to non abusive homosexual parents simply because the children in the former have more ready access to learning gender roles?

    All this would likely mean is that having an extended family would be taken into account when it comes to adoption or foster care. And guess what, it already is for both heterosexual and homosexual couples.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 05-06-10 at 05:00 PM.

  9. #569
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,506

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Actually, you missed the point entirely. It isn't just extended family. Teachers, mentors, peers, etc. all play a part in a child's gender role development. There is no telling to what degree. There is no evidence to suggest that same sex couples are more reliant on extended family, only that they might get more out of an extended family.
    The long history and success of the nuclear family begs to differ.

    I was talking about extended family only. So the rest is irrelevant as far as my comment goes.

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    It is a degree of potential, not a degree of certainty. Jerry has been the first to concede that he has no evidence to support the assertion that same sex couples are more reliant on extended families than opposite sex couples would be. Furthermore, it is irrelevant. Having extended family involved is better for any child. Therefore, even if a same sex family was more reliant on extended family, it isn't to the detriment to the child, it is to the child's benefit.
    You are offering nothing but speculation yourself? SO why does it give your opinion more weight than my own. It does not in reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Wrong. All things being equal, this could be the case, but you have failed to consider an infinite number of variables.
    This does not change the fact that the nuclear family is a success and has been for a very long time. The dynamic is excellent and optimal anything else is not, period.

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    A heterosexual partnership could include the abuse, neglect, molestation, and even murder of a child.
    These variables are completely irrelevant. We are talking optimal, not abusive. So gay couples can't be abusive? That is nothing but a red Herring fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    When it comes to considering the variables that are important for raising a child, the gender of the parents is so far down the list, it is almost irrelevant.
    In your opinion. History begs to differ.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  10. #570
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I don't give credence to what the law says marriage is because since we can make the law say whatever the hell we want, it doesn't have any real legitimacy in the face of how nature actually operates.

    You could make a law defining the pancreas as a skeletal structure and it would be just as true. Some things we don't get to decide. A foot is for standing on not because "that's the way we've always don it" but because that's what a foot is for. If you write a law stating the contrary then it's the law that's wrong.
    But what we are talking about is the legal marriage, which is the law that allows people to own a piece of paper that the government gives to them that says "we are family because we are married" and the government legally recognizes that couple as "married". Technically, any gay couple who wants to right now could exchange vows, agree to take legal and financial responsibility for each other through several legal documents, and call themselves "married". It just wouldn't be a legal marriage. They wouldn't legally be "family". And that is the issue.

    And a foot is always going to be foot, and be for standing on because it is a physical object that we can see and touch and know exactly what it is for, even if we change what we call a foot to calling it a skeft. Marriage is a concept, not a physical thing. Marriage can have many different uses and forms because it is not something that is tangent.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Posting Permissions

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