Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

Omgitsme said:

There is no advantage or disadvantage to SSM. Why should there be? And why would the children of same sex parents feel different if homosexuality were completely accepted?

Click to expand...

Why would a kid feel different? Maybe because they don't have a "mommy" and "daddy" like normal kids.

Kal'Stang said:

Bold: This part can be taken in two different ways Hic. And you've used it two different ways in the past so I've got to ask you...what do you mean by "feel different" and "built in"?

Click to expand...

If I was a green frog but all the other frogs were red, I would feel different, wouldn't I?


Tim-

Mathematician said:

Why would a kid feel different? Maybe because they don't have a "mommy" and "daddy" like normal kids.

Click to expand...

Key phrase in my post was if homosexuality were completely accepted. BTW before this argument about whether or not there are negative aspects of having homosexual parents begin every peer reviewed study ever done on the subject shows there are no negative aspects of having homosexual parents.

Hicup said:

Of course it's not.. That's the point!

They want legal acceptance through legislation.. What other kind of acceptance would one expect if they sought legal acceptance through legislation? There are a good number of people that are against the death penalty in states where the death penalty is legal. Has the government attained acceptance through legislation or haven't they?


Tim-

Click to expand...

If you had read the thread, you would be aware that people are claiming they want social acceptance through legislation. Reading the thread = good.

Hicup said:

Ok... So then, what's the advantage of homosexual marriage over that of heterosexual? Is there one? If there were no prejudice, no discrimination, and if homosexuality were completely accepted, would the children of homosexual marriages ever feel "different"? Isn't it, or wouldn't it kind of be built-in?


Tim-

Click to expand...

Legal arguments do not require an advantage of SSM over strait marraige.

No, in fact you can feel quite normal with gay parents.

Hicup said:

If I was a green frog but all the other frogs were red, I would feel different, wouldn't I?


Tim-

Click to expand...

If my parents were black and every other kids parents were white would I feel different? If I were adopted and all the other kids wernt would I feel different? If my parents were poor and all the other kids parents were rich would I feel different? You see what im getting at? There are tons of reasons a kid is going to feel different from the other kids and we dont fret about them nearly as much as we do about how a kid is going to feel if they have homosexual parents.

Omgitsme said:

If my parents were black and every other kids parents were white would I feel different? If I were adopted and all the other kids wernt would I feel different? If my parents were poor and all the other kids parents were rich would I feel different? You see what im getting at? There are tons of reasons a kid is going to feel different from the other kids and we dont fret about them nearly as much as we do about how a kid is going to feel if they have homosexual parents.

Click to expand...

Voice of experience: by the time you are old enough to understand what is going on, you are old enough to understand that it ain't a big deal. It is a nonissue.

Kal'Stang said:

Words are subjective because everyone percieves things differently from others.

Click to expand...

Feelings are subjective. How a relationship is structured is subjective. But posts on DebatePolitics.com are not composed of feelings and relationships, posts are composed of words. Words have definitions. The Webster definition for 'love' does not contain Webster's definition for 'trust'. That doesn't mean your love for your wife has no trust, it means when you use the word 'love' in a post, the causal reader is not automatically including 'trust' in the meaning. It's important that you describe your relationship as including both.

Kal'Stang said:

Take a look at Christianity. How many different sub-groups are in Christianity? Off of ONE book? And all of those books have the same exact words in it. If words are not subjective then by all means tell me how in the world there are so many different Christian groups.

Click to expand...

Certainly. First let me point out that Catholics, Protestants and Mormons are not all using the same bible. The Catholic bible contains books the Protestant bible does not, due to deferring processes in authenticating scripture. Mormons added onto the bible a whole new collection of modern works neither protestant nor Catholics can authenticate using their different processes. So right off the bat your premise that there is only 'one book' is false. Additionally, the bible is a collection of books, not a single book of it's own, so your premise is twice disproved.

Moving on to Protestant denominations:
Matin Luther is the principal character for instigating the Protestant Reformation with his 95 Theses, As these theses are not scripture, nor are they regarded by Lutherans as such, Lutherans are using more than just your "one book". Baptists simply believe that the baptism ritual should only be performed by professing believers, and not ever to new borns since a new born can not confess loyalty and obedience. Baptists are an example of subjective priorities, not subjective meanings of words.

I could go on.

Kal'Stang said:

Love by itself does not include trust.

Click to expand...

Which is why your statement "love is all we have" necessarily excluded trust, and is also why I said "love in not enough, a marriage is based on trust".

Kal'Stang said:

But I also don't love my sister the same way that I love my mother.

Click to expand...

Pro-ssm never qualifies what kind of love they're talking about, so any kind of love is open for marriage, therefore.

Kal'Stang said:

One word can encompass a thousand words to a person giving the right circumstances.

Click to expand...

In a poem, perhaps, but not in a dry, impersonal post in an online forum while surrounded by debate opponents who's job is to pick apart everything you say.

Omgitsme said:

There is no advantage or disadvantage to SSM. Why should there be? And why would the children of same sex parents feel different if homosexuality were completely accepted?

Click to expand...

I would think that SS marriage IS a disadvantage to heterosexual marriage in one important category. You can assign any measurable as you wish but, children of OSM are the children of both parents. They are a product of both parents genetically, and that genertic disposition is realized in and as a normal progression of the evolutionary model which is composed of both parents genetic matieral. That is to say that evolution progresses on a macro scale, NOT a microcosom.. The model for evolution consists of a male and a female producing offspring. It does not require adoptions, or invetro, and it cannot include parents that are not the prodgeny and in turn to their own children. Homosexiuals do not evolve as a family they evolve as individuals..



Tim-

Redress said:

Voice of experience: by the time you are old enough to understand what is going on, you are old enough to understand that it ain't a big deal. It is a nonissue.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I had a friend whos mother was lesbian and I honestly had no clue anything was different. I just knew that his mom and dad were divorced and he lived with his mom and his moms friend. It didnt hit me until I was like 16 and I thought about it a bit more.

Hicup said:

I would think that SS marriage IS a disadvantage to heterosexual marriage in one important category. You can assign any measurable as you wish but, children of OSM are the children of both parents. They are a product of both parents genetically, and that genertic disposition is realized in and as a normal progression of the evolutionary model which is composed of both parents genetic matieral. That is to say that evolution progresses on a macro scale, NOT a microcosom.. The model for evolution consists of a male and a female producing offspring. It does not require adoptions, or invetro, and it cannot include parents that are not the prodgeny and in turn to their own children. Homosexiuals do not evolve as a family they evolve as individuals..



Tim-

Click to expand...

That is not a disadvantage and you do not understand evolution(hint: marriage is not an evolutionary concept).

Redress said:

Legal arguments do not require an advantage of SSM over strait marraige.

No, in fact you can feel quite normal with gay parents.

Click to expand...

Says you.. You do not need an advantage but you do need to demonstrate that your gay situation has NO disadvantage.. And it does, but unlike a married dysfunctional heterosexual family, a GAY family is inherantly dysfunctional..


Tim-

Hicup said:

I would think that SS marriage IS a disadvantage to heterosexual marriage in one important category. You can assign any measurable as you wish but, children of OSM are the children of both parents. They are a product of both parents genetically, and that genertic disposition is realized in and as a normal progression of the evolutionary model which is composed of both parents genetic matieral. That is to say that evolution progresses on a macro scale, NOT a microcosom.. The model for evolution consists of a male and a female producing offspring. It does not require adoptions, or invetro, and it cannot include parents that are not the prodgeny and in turn to their own children. Homosexiuals do not evolve as a family they evolve as individuals..



Tim-

Click to expand...

Your arguing about same sex parenting not same sex marriage but ok. Every peer reviewed study on same sex parenting shows no negative impact on children. I have also never seen any evidence that there is some advantage to both parents being genetically related to their child.

Hicup said:

Says you.. You do not need an advantage but you do need to demonstrate that your gay situation has NO disadvantage.. And it does, but unlike a married dysfunctional heterosexual family, a GAY family is inherantly dysfunctional..


Tim-

Click to expand...

Why the hell would a "gay family" be inherently dysfunctional?

Hicup said:

Says you.. You do not need an advantage but you do need to demonstrate that your gay situation has NO disadvantage.. And it does, but unlike a married dysfunctional heterosexual family, a GAY family is inherantly dysfunctional..


Tim-

Click to expand...

That would be wrong on every level. All that gay people need to show is that SSM bans violate their constitutional protections. Gay familes are not inerantly disfunctional.

Redress said:

That is not a disadvantage and you do not understand evolution(hint: marriage is not an evolutionary concept).

Click to expand...

There are no evolutionary concepts. Evolution has no foresight, but I would argue that marriage itself is an evolutionary natural progesssion for intelligent beings. Would you disagree?

There is an advantage to marriage, and if not a complete genetic component then why and how would you suggest that homosexual marriage was somehow better? if it is not better, then it is equal, then please define how they are equal? if not equal, then all the people that have a beef with gay marriage actually have a beef with gay marrie don't they?


Tim-

Omgitsme said:

Your arguing about same sex parenting not same sex marriage but ok. Every peer reviewed study on same sex parenting shows no negative impact on children. I have also never seen any evidence that there is some advantage to both parents being genetically related to their child.

Click to expand...

first off there is no quality studies on SS parenting, the science is in its infancy.. Secondly, would you say that naturally a genetic bond to a child is superior to that of a non-genetic bond?


Tim-

Hicup said:

There are no evolutionary concepts. Evolution has no foresight, but I would argue that marriage itself is an evolutionary natural progesssion for intelligent beings. Would you disagree?

Click to expand...

I would disagree. Marriage is a social contruct and does not in itself lead to higher chances of passing on genes.

There is an advantage to marriage, and if not a complete genetic component then why and how would you suggest that homosexual marriage was somehow better? if it is not better, then it is equal, then please define how they are equal? if not equal, then all the people that have a beef with gay marriage actually have a beef with gay marrie don't they?


Tim-

Click to expand...

I do not claim SSM is better than strait marriage. Any othe straw men I can kill off for you?

Hicup said:

first off there is no quality studies on SS parenting, the science is in its infancy.. Secondly, would you say that naturally a genetic bond to a child is superior to that of a non-genetic bond?


Tim-

Click to expand...

So you are saying there is no proof that SS couples are inferior in raising children? This is the one thing you ahve gotten right today.

Hicup said:

first off there is no quality studies on SS parenting, the science is in its infancy.. Secondly, would you say that naturally a genetic bond to a child is superior to that of a non-genetic bond?


Tim-

Click to expand...

Of course there are quality studies on the subject.

And I would say that neither are superior. All a kid needs is loving parents who can dedicate their time to raising a child.

Redress said:

That would be wrong on every level. All that gay people need to show is that SSM bans violate their constitutional protections. Gay familes are not inerantly disfunctional.

Click to expand...

Redress really? How do gay people show that they are being violated? Even if they managed too legally as with other states, does it really change the level of acceptance? Do people sit down and say oh yeah crap the politicians and judges got it right?


Tim-

Redress said:

I would disagree. Marriage is a social contruct and does not in itself lead to higher chances of passing on genes.

Click to expand...

:lamo

all I can think about is that idiot feminist wanna-be-just-like-my-professor yelling at me in class that GENDER IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT!!!

:lamo

Omgitsme said:

All a kid needs is loving parents who can dedicate their time to raising a child.

Click to expand...

What is available to us seems to indicate (as I recall) that the general best provision is two biological parents plus a grandparent. :shrug:

Hicup said:

Redress really? How do gay people show that they are being violated?

Click to expand...

I am assuming you did not mean that as it reads. Please read the court cases Perry v Schwarzenegger and Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services. Not only is the claim made, but it stood up to legal examination.

Even if they managed too legally as with other states, does it really change the level of acceptance? Do people sit down and say oh yeah crap the politicians and judges got it right?


Tim-

Click to expand...

No one is trying to legislate social acceptance. What gays are trying to do is gain legal acceptance. In that case, yes, it does change the level of acceptance.

Redress said:

I would disagree. Marriage is a social contruct and does not in itself lead to higher chances of passing on genes.



I do not claim SSM is better than strait marriage. Any othe straw men I can kill off for you?

Click to expand...

Just because it's a social construct does not disqualify it as an evolutionary result.. Polygammy would require that the state change a great deal in order to accomodate, so too does gay marriage. Other than the degree of what we need to accomodate for, why exclude one over the other? Other that what the state has to change or make provisions for, why fundamnetally should we see one as better than the other?


Tim-