• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does Same Sex Marriage promote family?

Yes or No?

  • Total voters
    58
Does regular marriage promote family? Half of marriages end in divorce, there's plenty of domestic abuse in this country, and infidelity probably runs rampant. Are we really promoting family with any of it?
 
Does SSM Promote family? Of course it does.

It allows more people to form one.
 
I voted no, just to skew the poll even further and piss off the pro-SSMers. I don't care whether gays get married or not, it's really none of my freakin business. However, if they do get married, I would encourage them to adopt instead of doing the surrogacy/invitro/sperm donor thingy. If you want a bio kid, do it the way nature intended and mate with someone of the opposite sex.
 
Your Star said:
Yes or no, and explain your answer.

I say yes,
Click to expand...

I agree, at least to a similar extent that marriage as it stands now promotes family...IE it creates incentive for a stablizing family unit to be formed. Doesn't garauntee it, but does help it.

SSM promotes family just like opposite sex marriage.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It most assuredly does not promote it "just like" opposite sex marriage. The fact that the two that are married can not on average create said family singularly through their own primary actions and means makes it not "just like" opposite sex marriage. That doesn't mean it can't promote family. However, you do your side a disservice with such hyperbole.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
No, you're a "strictly legal contracted" woman. And she's not your 'wife', she's your "partner". This is the vocabulary your side has presented, and is one way we know that pro-SSM is not about the family. You're about just whatever feels good, whatever that may be. In your case, specifically, at best you're the broken watch.
Click to expand...

And you would be wrong. I am married and was married in South Afrika where in fact same sex marriage is legal. So though she was a partner she is now my wife. I am about whatever feels good that's true and caviar and champagne for brekfast feels good and tastes good as well. What I have is a happy marriage. I have lovely children. I have a lovely home and live the way that I like. When you say partner you think of relationships that are in the US in most of the states and that will eventually change. Love will not be derailed by bigotry and in the end same sex marriage will be legal in the US. You may even get a same sex couple whow is married living next door to you. Lucky you. It will bring up the value of the neighborhood.
 
With the divorce rate being what it is between heterosexuals I would say that that union is not about promoting family. I think it is about promoting broken family and single parent children, It promotes promiscuity under the guise of being a legitimate relationship.
 
Jerry said:
GLBT is all about Equality®, not family.
Click to expand...

If that is the case, then why do most of the same sex couples who do get married have children or seek to adopt children?

Jerry, the only consistent argument you have ever provided against same sex marriage is that you don't like that gay rights advocates often justify it with a call for equality. It isn't just about equal individuals, its also about equal families.

Jerry, not every gay rights advocate is a secular humanist. That might be hard for you to believe, but it is true.
 
Last edited:
OscarB63 said:
I voted no, just to skew the poll even further and piss off the pro-SSMers. I don't care whether gays get married or not, it's really none of my freakin business. However, if they do get married, I would encourage them to adopt instead of doing the surrogacy/invitro/sperm donor thingy. If you want a bio kid, do it the way nature intended and mate with someone of the opposite sex.
Click to expand...

Skew it Further?

Your vote now makes it 15 for and 4 against.
 
CriticalThought said:
If that is the case, then why do most of the same sex couples who do get married have children or seek to adopt children?

Jerry, the only consistent argument you have ever provided against same sex marriage is that you don't like that gay rights advocates often justify it with a call for equality. It isn't just about equal individuals, its also about equal families.
Click to expand...

link please.
 
OscarB63 said:
I voted no, just to skew the poll even further and piss off the pro-SSMers. I don't care whether gays get married or not, it's really none of my freakin business. However, if they do get married, I would encourage them to adopt instead of doing the surrogacy/invitro/sperm donor thingy. If you want a bio kid, do it the way nature intended and mate with someone of the opposite sex.
Click to expand...

... this is ridiculous on so many levels. You do know straights adopt, artificially insaminate and donate sperm too right? Straights go against 'the way of nature' just as much if not more than gays do.
 
Hatuey said:
... this is ridiculous on so many levels. You do know straights adopt, artificially insaminate and donate sperm too right? Straights go against 'the way of nature' just as much if not more than gays do.
Click to expand...

bolded, yes I have adopted two myself. and FWIW, straights go against "the way of nature" when they are physically incapable of reproducing DUE TO DEFECT. now...if you are willing to conceed that homosexuals are defective...then your point might have some merit. otherwise....not so much.
 
OscarB63 said:
bolded, yes I have adopted two myself. and FWIW, straights go against "the way of nature" when they are physically incapable of reproducing DUE TO DEFECT. now...if you are willing to conceed that homosexuals are defective...then your point might have some merit. otherwise....not so much.
Click to expand...

Homosexuals are certainly biologically defective in the sense that they are not inclined to procreate. Of course, that doesn't mean they are defective as people.
 
I am a strong supporter of SSM. But does it promote family? I think not. That's not to say that they can't or shouldn't raise children. But given the impossibility for the two participants in the marriage to procreate by themselves, I wouldn't think it promotes family. At the same time, I don't think it negatively affects family either. It certainly progresses the idea of what a family is though. But it doesn't give more support to family life or less support to family life.
 
CriticalThought said:
Anecdotal evidence.

Conservatives use it all the time in this debate, so allow me the same privilege.
Click to expand...

and they get called out on it and ridiculed all the time too. so meh....sauce for the goose, Mr. Savik.
 
CriticalThought said:
Homosexuals are certainly biologically defective in the sense that they are not inclined to procreate. Of course, that doesn't mean they are defective as people.
Click to expand...

never said they were.
 
OscarB63 said:
bolded, yes I have adopted two myself. and FWIW, straights go against "the way of nature" when they are physically incapable of reproducing DUE TO DEFECT. now...if you are willing to conceed that homosexuals are defective...then your point might have some merit. otherwise....not so much.
Click to expand...

This is not even remotely accurate. Straights adopt for all kinds of reasons. On this board alone there are 3-4 posters who have both biological children and have adopted kids in other countries. ****, I myself have a biological child and I'm considering adopting one from Eastern Europe.
 
OscarB63 said:
bolded, yes I have adopted two myself. and FWIW, straights go against "the way of nature" when they are physically incapable of reproducing DUE TO DEFECT. now...if you are willing to conceed that homosexuals are defective...then your point might have some merit. otherwise....not so much.
Click to expand...

Huh? Due to Defect? Only due to defect?

I've known of people who adopt for reasons that have nothing to do with being physically incapable of reproducing.
 
OscarB63 said:
and they get called out on it and ridiculed all the time too. so meh....sauce for the goose, Mr. Savik.
Click to expand...

I don't know of any statistic that measures that but I can tell you from personal experience that same sex couples who marry are several times more likely to have children or seek to adopt children. Do you have differing experience?

OscarB63 said:
never said they were.
Click to expand...

I think you were trying to insinuate they were.
 
Zyphlin said:
Huh? Due to Defect? Only due to defect?

I've known of people who adopt for reasons that have nothing to do with being physically incapable of reproducing.
Click to expand...

please point out where I said "only"

strawman....

I adopted two kids and have two bio kids. my reason was because they had crackheads for mothers and no one of their own race would adopt them. we had them as foster kids for so long they kinda grew on us and just became a natural part of the family.

so yes, there are people who adopt for many reasons. but I would wager that the majority of couples adopt because they are unable to have kids on their own.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
I don't know of any statistic that measures that but I can tell you from personal experience that same sex couples who marry are several times more likely to have children or seek to adopt children. Do you have differing experience?
Click to expand...

more likely than who??? same sex couple who are not married? well duh. or hetero couples?



I think you were trying to insinuate they were.
Click to expand...

I think your natural tendancy to over react and kneejerk has you looking for and seeing offense where none is intended.
 
OscarB63 said:
more likely than who??? same sex couple who are not married? well duh.
Click to expand...

Thanks for agreeing with me. That was the point. Same sex marriage promotes family.

I think your natural tendancy to over react and kneejerk has you looking for and seeing offense where none is intended.
Click to expand...

I think you deliberately chose the word "defective" to try to garner that reaction from people. It didn't work with me since I responded in the affirmative and simply called you out on it.
 
OscarB63 said:
please point out where I said "only"

strawman....
Click to expand...

If you're saying that heteros adopt when they are defective and then ask to concede that homosexuals who do the same are doing so for the same reason, you're clearly suggesting that being defective is the only reason to adopt. You're looking mighty dishonest kid.
 
OscarB63 said:
please point out where I said "only"

strawman....
Click to expand...

Point out where you said "some"

You simply said that straights do it due to physical defect. I pointed out that's not always the case, as your post suggests by indicating what "straights" do not what "some straights" do.

I adopted two kids and have two bio kids. my reason was because they had crackheads for mothers and no one of their own race would adopt them. we had them as foster kids for so long they kinda grew on us and just became a natural part of the family.
Click to expand...

So you "went against the way of nature"?
 
CriticalThought said:
Thanks for agreeing with me. That was the point. Same sex marriage promotes family.
Click to expand...

stupid point. that's like saying hungry people tend to eat more than non-hungry people. therefore hungry people promote eating.



I think you deliberately chose the word "defective" to try to garner that reaction from people. It didn't work with me since I responded in the affirmative and simply called you out on it.
Click to expand...

again, you are just looking for something to get butthurt over. get over yourself. not everyone/thing is out to offend you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom