CaptainCourtesy

Please, bhkad. I have debated this issue many times and have a wealth of information that shows that child-rearing from gay couples produce equally healthy children as straight couples.

But let's look at marriage, today. >40% of all marriages will end in divorce. This is up from 14% in the late 1940's. Since we know that children from single parent families or blended families do worse (statistically) than those from families with two parents (straight or gay), it is obvious that marriage is harming children. With the kind of increase I've shown, it is obvious that marriage, itself is a failure (straight marriage only, since gays can't marry), and combined with the danger to children, straight marriage should be banned, at least until we do more research.

Now, bhkad, do you see how ridiculous your argument is? I certainly hope so.

__________________
"Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

====||:-D

bhkad

Last week anyone who had suggested that plastic baby bottles were hazardous would have met with derision and their suggestion would have had to buck at least that many decades of research and usage with NO hint or clue of harm.

But then we woke up this week to find that decades of research and experience aren't always enough to detect a serious problem requiring prohibition.

And, unlike the baby bottles, there would be no way to reverse this kind of law once it was passed. We'd have ONE chance to get it right. No looking back. No turning back. No stopping the flood waters of Gay parenting once they begin to flow with official sanction.

BTW, I do support Gays being able to adopt orphaned kids because that helps alleviate that problem, to some degree, without opening the floodgates to full, unrestricted Gay parenting. Also, it helps us perform the research and conduct the studies by which the answer might be found.

Aside from the emotional satisfaction that Gay folks would derive from sanctioned parenthood, how is society benefited by acting now as opposed to waiting for another generation or three of research data?

I mean what is 60 or so years compared to the amount of time man has spent on Earth, with heterosexual family unions having proven to be the building blocks of every society, culture and nation on Earth? Surely this wonderful social innovation will prove to be just as wonderful in the year 2100 as it is today.

Sometimes I get the impression some people think parenting is just for the parents. Sometimes I think some people think it's just for the kids. And sometimes I get the impression some people think parenting is just about the family.

The importance of the emotional rewards to the parents is important. The health and well being of the child is the #1 immediate concern. And the strength of the family unit, however it is comprised, is to be encouraged. However, there has never been an innovation, in all of man's existence and considering all of his crazy innovations to make things MODERNIZED and NEW and BETTER, never has man come up with an idea that had a greater potential to negatively impact civilization.

And you'd think more of you would be more concerned with the potential consequences to this nation or this society than in granting Gay couples a panacea to make them feel good, to make the kids feel good and to make us breeders feel really good.

It reminds me of another time we did something similar. We made it possible for dependent children and their mothers to get food and shelter, just as long as there were no able bodied males in the household.

And no one EVER suspected that helping kids would lead to todays' gang, drug, gangsta rap/hip hop street thug pimp life.

But it did.

__________________
But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America. http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell060508.php3

CaptainCourtesy

And since we know that a large percentage of straight marriages end in divorce, and that this harms kids, both via a single-parent household and via the emotional stressors of dealing with that divorce, it is obvious that we need to suspend all straight marriages until this situation can be studied more adequately and ways of correcting this situation can be found.

1069

So maybe we should've made it impossible for abandoned mothers and their children to "get food and shelter", then they all would've just died and there'd be no "gang, drug, gangsta rap/hip hop street thug pimp life".

Good thinkin'.

__________________
Lightdemon: "Is 10 going to outer space or something?"
Jerry: "...yes, 10 is going to outerspace."

Panache

Actually I think banning straight marriage is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Why are we handing out goodies for hooking up with someone to begin with?

Panache

Again you make an excellent point. Not to mention that the institution of marriage is unfair to unmarried people. Why should the government be involved at all?

CaptainCourtesy

Sarcasm, Panache. I forgot we never did finish that debate...I must get back to that, later today.

Panache

One man's sarcasm as they say.

bhkad

Nope. That is part of the natural scheme of things.

bhkad

Is it a liberal thing to only see two extreme options and none others?

How about recognizing that destroying the black family was a possibility when deciding on this wonderful measure? Providing for the black male would seem to make sense if someone was thinking and if they were thinking about what was best for America, the black family, black men and children in future generations.

It seems clear to me that do gooderie needn't be irresponsibly extreme.

How about it, 10?