Does Same Sex Marriage promote family?

Temporal said:

It won't last though. Gays are already gaining rights bit by bit, starting with Don't Ask Don't Tell being tossed out. Once there is enough public support to challenge Equal Protection, it will be granted to everyone.

Click to expand...

Well, for me, I don't want the ability to marry a man. That's not my game.

Temporal said:

As with others, you have a difficult time opposing SSM without referencing other things that have nothing to do with it. In other words, there's nothing you can say about SSM itself that warrants stopping it.

Click to expand...

You're trying to change your argument. You presented the argument that SSM should be allowed 'for the sake of the children'. You need to demonstrate why no other union should be granted 'for the sake of the children'.

Temporal said:

Your arguments are all flawed in numerous ways anyway. Incest has demonstrable and unique, fatal problems that develop with multi-generational inbreeding. There is no getting around that. Mating with someone because they are a carrier of a diseased gene that may or may not express itself is entirely different than inbreeding, in which the two sets of similar DNA themselves are the problem, as they lack diversity.

Click to expand...

So you support banning marriage when inheritable genetic disorders are present?

Temporal said:

The polygamy argument has been debunked numerous times but you and people like you seem deafened to evidence.

Click to expand...

It's an integrity check on your argument, not evidence of anything. Why do you think you people keep bringing up mixed fabrics and shellfish to us?

Temporal said:

Modern child psychology has demonstrated repeatedly...

Click to expand...

Link or it demonstrates no such thing.

Temporal said:

There is not really more to debate.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry to see you leave the forum. Have a good one :2wave:

Yes you can choose to vote for or against it...

Click to expand...

Ahh so you're retracting your argument:

Temporal said:

I respect your culture and your upbringing, but that doesn't mean you own marriage as an institution or get to tell others that have a different culture from you that their traditions don't matter.

Click to expand...

Temporal said:

....and many people will make the wrong decision that isn't based on facts. The facts show that SSM is beneficial to same-sex couples with children, period. You cannot deny it.

Click to expand...

I never did :lol:

You just think I'm anti-SSM just because I can shoot down your cookie-cutter arguments eace

Temporal said:

The Bible was written by humans, not God. It isn't a factor in this discussion. Sorry bucko.

Click to expand...

Yes the Bible was written by humans. Everyone knows this. I mean the original scripts are in human handwriting, even.

Hey guess what? The Constitution and the Deceleration of Independence were written by humans, too...that doesn't make them any less valid.

Please keep in mind, however, that Pro-SSM brought the bible into this discussion. If you follow the track-backs, you'll see that religion, the church, and what the bible has to say was initiated by YourStar in post 124. It's been a part of this thread for a long time and is not simply excluded because you say so. YouStar has been caught in an integrity fault by cherry-picking scripture. Do you want to help her out or just abandon your fellow pro-SSM?

There's not much to stop the festering decadence in this country. I am against the sin of homosexuality, but I know that, as time wears on, people will only continue to beat down the "norms" of morality.

Those that don't believe will continue on their merry way. They believe so strongly that if something is harmless, that it is not a sin. That notion makes harmless perversion nonexistent to them. All I can do is wait and see what happens to everyone after this life. Then again, being more "open-minded", as liberals squawk, I know that there are many people who call themselves Christians that take pride in vanity, greed, and pride. But whatever; that's for another thread. I merely say that I see many perverse things not only from liberals and homosexuals, but also from Christians and conservative to "high-class" vain people.

Do not think I focalize on homosexuality.

Jerry said:

Our difference is whether or not SSM is against the rules of the God we both already agree exists, and yes that's easy to prove with a simple scriptural quote.

Click to expand...

Thank you! For all the "I would support same sex marriage if it was about family" bull that you pandered, I was wondering when you would get back to the religious zealotry that is actually behind this issue.

CriticalThought said:

Thank you! For all the "I would support same sex marriage if it was about family" bull that you pandered, I was wondering when you would get back to the religious zealotry that is actually behind this issue.

Click to expand...

I enjoy sampling various angles of debate, and in so doing I am forced to hid my religious zealotry. It's not always necessary for me to wear it in the open, especially while arguing the other side academically.

It's no secret that I hold fervor or tireless devotion for a person, cause, or ideal and determination in its furtherance; diligent enthusiasm and powerful interest in the Lord. In fact I don't know why anyone would ever truthfully deny being a zealot of their cause unless they had an integrity issue, or a simple lack of motivation.

Academics aside, yes I honestly would support SSM if it were principally about the family. But it's not, and every thread, post and argument on the "strictly legal contract", "right to contract" and "equal protection" are a witness. SSM barely regards the family as an after thought, searching for the rare exceptions in their ranks to drag before the public eye to support a hollow argument.

I know that SSM will be legalized eventually because I know that this Earth is ruled by Lucifer. It therefore follows that sin would be made acceptable.

Going back to silly games:

If other people's relationships don't affect me and are therefore non of my business, I accept that as true and agree. As I don't personally want the 'right' to marry a man for myself, I'll vote no on such legislation when I can; this is coming from a father who's children would benefit from such a marriage.

Yes I make that choice for myself based on personal religious conviction, but it's my life and my vote so as per the 1st amendment I'm free to choose. In fact, you're legally prevented from stopping me.

Your Star said:

Yes or no, and explain your answer.

I say yes, SSM promotes family just like opposite sex marriage.

Click to expand...

I'm going to try to set aside my dislike of SSM and consider the question.

According to various credible sources, LGBT persons typically account for 3-7% of the general population. How many of them would be intrested in SSM? How many of those will be intrested in adopting or otherwise having children?

I don't know the answers to those questions, but I assume each subset is smaller than the previous subset.

Let's say LGBT's are 5% of the population. Some of them are bi and married to the opposite sex already. Some of them aren't intrested in marriage at all.

Let's look at Massachusetts, which legalized SSM in 2004.

Some facts...

Same-sex marriage in the U.S. state of Massachusetts began on May 17, 2004,

Forty percent of the female couples had children in their homes. In the first year, more than 6,200 gay and lesbian couples were married due to pent-up demand, but that number fell to only 1,900 marriages in the second year. Out of the total of more than 8,100 marriages, 64% involve lesbian couples

Click to expand...

Same-sex marriage in Massachusetts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If that rate held true since 2005, then there should be currently a total of 17,600 SSM couples in Massachusetts today, roughly. 64% were lesbians, and 40% of that subset had children in the home... I have no stats on male homosexual couples having children, for Massachusetts.

Massachusetts had an estimated 2009 population of 6,593,587

Click to expand...

If we assume 3.5 persons per household (a reasonable median figure), Mass should have about
1,885,000 households. If 17,600 of them are SSM households, that is 0.9%.

We know that 64% are lesbian households, and that 40% of those have children involved. That's 0.2% of total households that we know are raising children, the traditional and societal purpose of "family".

0.2%

Even if we consider this a positive in itself, it obviously isn't going to have much impact on the societal need for families responsibly raising children, it would seem.

Goshin said:

I'm going to try to set aside my dislike of SSM and consider the question.

According to various credible sources, LGBT persons typically account for 3-7% of the general population. How many of them would be intrested in SSM? How many of those will be intrested in adopting or otherwise having children?

I don't know the answers to those questions, but I assume each subset is smaller than the previous subset.

Let's say LGBT's are 5% of the population. Some of them are bi and married to the opposite sex already. Some of them aren't intrested in marriage at all.

Let's look at Massachusetts, which legalized SSM in 2004.

Some facts...



Same-sex marriage in Massachusetts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If that rate held true since 2005, then there should be currently a total of 17,600 SSM couples in Massachusetts today, roughly. 64% were lesbians, and 40% of that subset had children in the home... I have no stats on male homosexual couples having children, for Massachusetts.



If we assume 3.5 persons per household (a reasonable median figure), Mass should have about
1,885,000 households. If 17,600 of them are SSM households, that is 0.9%.

We know that 64% are lesbian households, and that 40% of those have children involved. That's 0.2% of total households that we know are raising children, the traditional and societal purpose of "family".

0.2%

Even if we consider this a positive in itself, it obviously isn't going to have much impact on the societal need for families responsibly raising children, it would seem.

Click to expand...

Thumbs for number crunching and links. Good job.

What would the numbers look like if we accounted for the divorce rate?

Jerry said:

Thumbs for number crunching and links. Good job.

What would the numbers look like if we accounted for the divorce rate?

Click to expand...

Hard to say, I haven't come across any data on SSM divorce rates yet, as it is a relatively new thing.

Jerry said:

I enjoy sampling various angles of debate, and in so doing I am forced to hid my religious zealotry. It's not always necessary for me to wear it in the open, especially while arguing the other side academically.

It's no secret that I hold fervor or tireless devotion for a person, cause, or ideal and determination in its furtherance; diligent enthusiasm and powerful interest in the Lord. In fact I don't know why anyone would ever truthfully deny being a zealot of their cause unless they had an integrity issue, or a simple lack of motivation.

Academics aside, yes I honestly would support SSM if it were principally about the family. But it's not, and every thread, post and argument on the "strictly legal contract", "right to contract" and "equal protection" are a witness. SSM barely regards the family as an after thought, searching for the rare exceptions in their ranks to drag before the public eye to support a hollow argument.

I know that SSM will be legalized eventually because I know that this Earth is ruled by Lucifer. It therefore follows that sin would be made acceptable.

Click to expand...

Offtopic but curious do you consider Lucifer and Satan to be the same being?

Kali said:

Offtopic but curious do you consider Lucifer and Satan to be the same being?

Click to expand...

No.

"Satan" is more of a generic term used to describe just about any antagonistic Nephelim, whereas Lucifer is the name of a specific being. Some bible-thumper will say something like "abortion is the work of Satan", which is true in a general sense, but the name of the Nephilim which taught Man abortion is Kasayed; a Nephilim.

Jerry said:

I enjoy sampling various angles of debate, and in so doing I am forced to hid my religious zealotry. It's not always necessary for me to wear it in the open, especially while arguing the other side academically.

It's no secret that I hold fervor or tireless devotion for a person, cause, or ideal and determination in its furtherance; diligent enthusiasm and powerful interest in the Lord. In fact I don't know why anyone would ever truthfully deny being a zealot of their cause unless they had an integrity issue, or a simple lack of motivation.

Academics aside, yes I honestly would support SSM if it were principally about the family. But it's not, and every thread, post and argument on the "strictly legal contract", "right to contract" and "equal protection" are a witness. SSM barely regards the family as an after thought, searching for the rare exceptions in their ranks to drag before the public eye to support a hollow argument.

I know that SSM will be legalized eventually because I know that this Earth is ruled by Lucifer. It therefore follows that sin would be made acceptable.

Click to expand...

Interesting selective perception bias. I could do a case study on your particular brand of delusion.

CriticalThought said:

Interesting selective perception bias. I could do a case study on your particular brand of delusion.

Click to expand...

Oh where do we begin? Do you like a form or something I need to fill out?

You ar a bit obsessed with Divorce...latent issues?

Jerry said:

Thumbs for number crunching and links. Good job.

What would the numbers look like if we accounted for the divorce rate?

Click to expand...

Amazed said:

You ar a bit obsessed with Divorce...latent issues?

Click to expand...

Divorce is the only element of the legal institution of marriage which harems everyone else. It's divorce which raises the juvenile crime and teen pregnancy rates.

Hicup said:

Well, thanks for your stated opinion.

One might ask on another poll whether allowing homosexual marriage promotes marriage infidelity? I suspect the answer would be yes? Is a family still a family by your definition if a marriage is wrought with infidelity? Infidelity I might add that seems pervasive in the homosexual community, certainly more so percentage-wise than the heterosexual culture.. Add, domestic violence to the equation, and this whole idea of homosexuality promoting family seems to contradict itself, at least statistically when we look at the numbers compared to their heterosexual counter-parts. What about drug and alcohol abuse? Again, statistically more prevalent in homosexual communities, and individuals than in heterosexual circles. One has to ask themselves whether all of these tangible characteristics are really worth giving any weight to, when the question of promoting family enters into the equation.


Tim-

Click to expand...

I guess it really is easier to just say that homosexuals are more the more violent, drunk, high and cheating of the two orientations for some.


Well, thanks for your stated opinion.

Making you a Bible Thumper...

Jerry said:

The difference Your Star and I have is not whether or not the God we both already believe in exists. We already agree on that.

Our difference is whether or not SSM is against the rules of the God we both already agree exists, and yes that's easy to prove with a simple scriptural quote.

Click to expand...

Now Jerry......which Binle do you ascribe to??

I'm betting the New World Translation..



Mat 4:10 Then 5119 saith 3004 Jesus 2424 unto him 846, Get thee hence 5217 , Satan 4567: for 1063 it is written 1125 , Thou shalt worship 4352 the Lord 2962 thy 4675 God 2316, and 2532 him 846 only 3441 shalt thou serve 3000 .
Mat 12:26 And 2532 if 1487 Satan 4567 cast out 1544 Satan 4567, he is divided 3307 against 1909 himself 1438; how 4459 shall 2476 0 then 3767 his 846 kingdom 932 stand 2476 ?
Mat 16:23 But 1161 he turned 4762 , and said 2036 unto Peter 4074, Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: thou 1488 art 3754 an offence 4625 unto me 3450: for thou savourest 5426 not 3756 the things 3588 that be of God 2316, but 235 those that be of men 444.
Mar 1:13 And 2532 he was 2258 there 1563 in 1722 the wilderness 2048 forty 5062 days 2250, tempted 3985 of 5259 Satan 4567; and 2532 was 2258 with 3326 the wild beasts 2342; and 2532 the angels 32 ministered 1247 unto him 846.
Mar 3:23 And 2532 he called 4341 them 846 [unto him], and said 3004 unto them 846 in 1722 parables 3850, How 4459 can 1410 Satan 4567 cast out 1544 Satan 4567?
Mar 3:26 And 2532 if 1487 Satan 4567 rise up 450 against 1909 himself 1438, and 2532 be divided 3307 , he cannot 3756 1410 stand 2476 , but 235 hath 2192 an end 5056.
Mar 4:15 And 1161 these 3778 are they 1526 by 3844 the way side 3598, where 3699 the word 3056 is sown 4687 ; but 2532 when 3752 they have heard 191 , Satan 4567 cometh 2064 immediately 2112, and 2532 taketh away 142 the word 3056 that was sown 4687 in 1722 their 846 hearts 2588.
Mar 8:33 But 1161 when he had turned about 1994 and 2532 looked 1492 on his 846 disciples 3101, he rebuked 2008 Peter 4074, saying 3004 , Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: for 3754 thou savourest 5426 not 3756 the things that be of God 2316, but 235 the things that be of men 444.
Luk 4:8 And 2532 Jesus 2424 answered 611 and said 2036 unto him 846, Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: for 1063 it is written 1125 , Thou shalt worship 4352 the Lord 2962 thy 4675 God 2316, and 2532 him 846 only 3441 shalt thou serve 3000 .
Luk 10:18 And 1161 he said 2036 unto them 846, I beheld 2334 Satan 4567 as 5613 lightning 796 fall 4098 from 1537 heaven 3772.

Jerry said:

No.

"Satan" is more of a generic term used to describe just about any antagonistic Nephelim, whereas Lucifer is the name of a specific being. Some bible-thumper will say something like "abortion is the work of Satan", which is true in a general sense, but the name of the Nephilim which taught Man abortion is Kasayed; a Nephilim.

Click to expand...

Amazed said:

Making you a Bible Thumper...

Click to expand...

Jerry the Bible Thumper does not support same sex marriage. Who would have guessed?

Actually it depends on his mood I think.

Jerry fancies himself a world apart...a higher being...

CriticalThought said:

Jerry the Bible Thumper does not support same sex marriage. Who would have guessed?

Click to expand...

Amazed said:

Now Jerry......which Binle do you ascribe to??

I'm betting the New World Translation..



Mat 4:10 Then 5119 saith 3004 Jesus 2424 unto him 846, Get thee hence 5217 , Satan 4567: for 1063 it is written 1125 , Thou shalt worship 4352 the Lord 2962 thy 4675 God 2316, and 2532 him 846 only 3441 shalt thou serve 3000 .
Mat 12:26 And 2532 if 1487 Satan 4567 cast out 1544 Satan 4567, he is divided 3307 against 1909 himself 1438; how 4459 shall 2476 0 then 3767 his 846 kingdom 932 stand 2476 ?
Mat 16:23 But 1161 he turned 4762 , and said 2036 unto Peter 4074, Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: thou 1488 art 3754 an offence 4625 unto me 3450: for thou savourest 5426 not 3756 the things 3588 that be of God 2316, but 235 those that be of men 444.
Mar 1:13 And 2532 he was 2258 there 1563 in 1722 the wilderness 2048 forty 5062 days 2250, tempted 3985 of 5259 Satan 4567; and 2532 was 2258 with 3326 the wild beasts 2342; and 2532 the angels 32 ministered 1247 unto him 846.
Mar 3:23 And 2532 he called 4341 them 846 [unto him], and said 3004 unto them 846 in 1722 parables 3850, How 4459 can 1410 Satan 4567 cast out 1544 Satan 4567?
Mar 3:26 And 2532 if 1487 Satan 4567 rise up 450 against 1909 himself 1438, and 2532 be divided 3307 , he cannot 3756 1410 stand 2476 , but 235 hath 2192 an end 5056.
Mar 4:15 And 1161 these 3778 are they 1526 by 3844 the way side 3598, where 3699 the word 3056 is sown 4687 ; but 2532 when 3752 they have heard 191 , Satan 4567 cometh 2064 immediately 2112, and 2532 taketh away 142 the word 3056 that was sown 4687 in 1722 their 846 hearts 2588.
Mar 8:33 But 1161 when he had turned about 1994 and 2532 looked 1492 on his 846 disciples 3101, he rebuked 2008 Peter 4074, saying 3004 , Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: for 3754 thou savourest 5426 not 3756 the things that be of God 2316, but 235 the things that be of men 444.
Luk 4:8 And 2532 Jesus 2424 answered 611 and said 2036 unto him 846, Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: for 1063 it is written 1125 , Thou shalt worship 4352 the Lord 2962 thy 4675 God 2316, and 2532 him 846 only 3441 shalt thou serve 3000 .
Luk 10:18 And 1161 he said 2036 unto them 846, I beheld 2334 Satan 4567 as 5613 lightning 796 fall 4098 from 1537 heaven 3772.

Click to expand...

If you could perhaps remove all those numbers and provide some of your own content to supplement a quote I might know what your talking about and could reply.

And no I use the NIV simply because i don't understand old English.

Amazed said:

Now Jerry......which Binle do you ascribe to??

I'm betting the New World Translation..



Mat 4:10 Then 5119 saith 3004 Jesus 2424 unto him 846, Get thee hence 5217 , Satan 4567: for 1063 it is written 1125 , Thou shalt worship 4352 the Lord 2962 thy 4675 God 2316, and 2532 him 846 only 3441 shalt thou serve 3000 .
Mat 12:26 And 2532 if 1487 Satan 4567 cast out 1544 Satan 4567, he is divided 3307 against 1909 himself 1438; how 4459 shall 2476 0 then 3767 his 846 kingdom 932 stand 2476 ?
Mat 16:23 But 1161 he turned 4762 , and said 2036 unto Peter 4074, Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: thou 1488 art 3754 an offence 4625 unto me 3450: for thou savourest 5426 not 3756 the things 3588 that be of God 2316, but 235 those that be of men 444.
Mar 1:13 And 2532 he was 2258 there 1563 in 1722 the wilderness 2048 forty 5062 days 2250, tempted 3985 of 5259 Satan 4567; and 2532 was 2258 with 3326 the wild beasts 2342; and 2532 the angels 32 ministered 1247 unto him 846.
Mar 3:23 And 2532 he called 4341 them 846 [unto him], and said 3004 unto them 846 in 1722 parables 3850, How 4459 can 1410 Satan 4567 cast out 1544 Satan 4567?
Mar 3:26 And 2532 if 1487 Satan 4567 rise up 450 against 1909 himself 1438, and 2532 be divided 3307 , he cannot 3756 1410 stand 2476 , but 235 hath 2192 an end 5056.
Mar 4:15 And 1161 these 3778 are they 1526 by 3844 the way side 3598, where 3699 the word 3056 is sown 4687 ; but 2532 when 3752 they have heard 191 , Satan 4567 cometh 2064 immediately 2112, and 2532 taketh away 142 the word 3056 that was sown 4687 in 1722 their 846 hearts 2588.
Mar 8:33 But 1161 when he had turned about 1994 and 2532 looked 1492 on his 846 disciples 3101, he rebuked 2008 Peter 4074, saying 3004 , Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: for 3754 thou savourest 5426 not 3756 the things that be of God 2316, but 235 the things that be of men 444.
Luk 4:8 And 2532 Jesus 2424 answered 611 and said 2036 unto him 846, Get thee 5217 behind 3694 me 3450, Satan 4567: for 1063 it is written 1125 , Thou shalt worship 4352 the Lord 2962 thy 4675 God 2316, and 2532 him 846 only 3441 shalt thou serve 3000 .
Luk 10:18 And 1161 he said 2036 unto them 846, I beheld 2334 Satan 4567 as 5613 lightning 796 fall 4098 from 1537 heaven 3772.

Click to expand...

Not sure why you brought the difference between Lucifer and Satan into this(don't ask my belief on it). You've also brought in scripture. Since you accel in doing that, perhaps you wouldn't mind posting in the scripture in both the New and Old testamnet that are against homosexuality? I know they're there (sincerely), but you'd seem more apt to do so, and I have less time.

CriticalThought said:

Jerry the Bible Thumper does not support same sex marriage. Who would have guessed?

Click to expand...

That's as bland as me saying that liberals don't believe in God's absolute morality.

If you thought that as an insult to Jerry, it's not really one at all. Maybe if you get more personal and reckless you'll do better at provoking people; rather than stating statements that don't insult anyone at all.

Wake said:

Not sure why you brought the difference between Lucifer and Satan into this(don't ask my belief on it). You've also brought in scripture. Since you accel in doing that, perhaps you wouldn't mind posting in the scripture in both the New and Old testamnet that are against homosexuality? I know they're there (sincerely), but you'd seem more apt to do so, and I have less time.

Click to expand...

I like how they introduce scripture and religion into the thread and then accuse others of being the bible-thumper. Trolling at it's finest eace

Jerry said:

I like how they introduce scripture and religion into the thread and then accuse others of being the bible-thumper. Trolling at it's finest eace

Click to expand...

To be objective, I see it differently. I see them as not being devout Christians at all, but state scriptures and try to argue their case as those they understand religion based from experience. They call people "Bible-thumpers" because those being called that are actually devout in their religion. Some truly devout Christians aren't only not phased, but take pride by being called that because it's essentially a non-believer making fun of their devotion and depth of experience.