• 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!

Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

humbolt said:
There's no backup required. It's reality. Homosexuals do not procreate. And I need not back up my claim. Or not. When all else fails, try a little common sense. The claim has been that homosexuals make good parents. I don't dispute that. I'm merely pointing out that historically they have not had much of an opportunity to demonstrate it, and thus lack a significant track record to validate the claim.
Click to expand...

Homosexuals can procreate. Pretty much common sense.
 
bubbabgone said:
See that's where you're wrong. It does apply.
Answer this.
When the Equal Protection clause was established in the 14th Amendment, do you think it anticipated someday it would be used to sanction same-sex marriage?
No?
Yet here we are today, arguing about a possible successful use of that clause to do that very thing. And the legal precedent would be established.
Yet you think it can't possibly be used to apply to incest marriage. Well me and Sonia have recognized that it very well could.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't apply, no matter how badly you want it to. It MIGHT apply in the future. That is for future courts to decide upon. It's nothing but a red herring.
 
tech30528 said:
Of course you will. That's what you guys do when you have no argument. You resort to ridicule assuming that we care what you think and will avoid your pointing and laughing. Thing is we don't care about what you think. You are demonstratively wrong time after time. Conservative values have been beneficial to raising children for centuries. Assuming your way is better because it is different is a fallacy as evidenced by, well, you. Your parents were the result of a more liberal approach to child rearing which resulted in this generation. Case proven. Your parents ****ed you up and you can't see it. As luck would have it this stuff swings in cycles and it is correcting as we speak. All of your complaints about conservatives will soon be your issues, don't expect us to step in to help you pick up the pieces.
Click to expand...

Ridiculing stupid arguments like yours is far better than given them any credence. Credence assumes that they have some value and they don't.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Homosexuals can procreate. Pretty much common sense.
Click to expand...
Not within the same sex, which is what SINGLE SEX MARRIAGE is all about, which is rather a more common, common sense, given that's the argument at hand.
 
humbolt said:
Which keeps me in line with human nature. You, not so much.
Click to expand...

No, your understanding of human nature is based on a lack of logic. The issue is yours, not human nature's.
 
humbolt said:
Not within the same sex, which is what SINGLE SEX MARRIAGE is all about, which is rather a more common, common sense, given that's the argument at hand.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not what SSM is about. Try again.
 
Bronson said:
There have been several studies which show children are best raised by their biological parents in a low conflict household

Gay marriage does not follow Natural Law

Why do gays get to change the definition of marriage that applies only to them as a sexual interest group?
Click to expand...

Where can I find the book of natural law and who wrote it?
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I bet the selection of individual couples has a big impact on the more positive results for gay couples. Being that I imagine any gay couple trying to adopt is likely facing a number of difficult social hurdles, needs to prove financial stability, and the adoption is naturally pre-planned

Most hetero parents just fall into the job
Click to expand...

A good point. There is an inherent sampling error often built in.

But this gets back to my point, that adoption is a judicial process that involves a particular child and particular prospective parents and the point of the proceeding is to determine what is in the best interest of that child in this particular case.

Therefore, Scalia's question totally misses the context of how adoptions happen -- they don't occur in the aggregate, but via a process where the inquiry is directed at determining the best interests of the child.
 
Last edited:
Fisher said:
Nope. It undermines your apparent bent that gay rights are a Constitutional and not a political issue.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as 'gay rights'. It's called 'human rights', and it's about equality. I have never seen an argument against such equality that doesn't come from ignorance and/or religious beliefs, or just pure nonsense. As far as I am concerned, those standing against such equality have just as moronic of a stance as those that protested against interracial marriage long ago.
 
Rocketman said:
I'm not, but I enjoy letting you think you are right
Click to expand...

Of course you are. Your belief otherwise is a reflection on your lack of understanding of this issue. I'm always amazed that people don't, but I assume that it tends to be a choice.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, your understanding of human nature is based on a lack of logic. The issue is yours, not human nature's.
Click to expand...
My understanding of human nature is that logic has little to do with human nature. Otherwise the term human nature would not exist as all human activity would be logical. Maybe you can start a campaign to wipe it out.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Of course you are. Your belief otherwise is a reflection on your lack of understanding of this issue. I'm always amazed that people don't, but I assume that it tends to be a choice.
Click to expand...

As usual you have spouted nothing but bull**** to support your stance
 
tech30528 said:
Actually the reason Republicans are losing elections is that the electorate is being overtaken by clueless young people who are much more interested in their immediate personal gratification than what is actually good for the country. Turn everything over to the government, surely their intentions are pure :roll: so you can spend more time on Facebook and pursuing whatever feels good today. I no longer have any interest in what these people have to say. As far as I'm concerned they will get what they deserve. I'm just out to make sure I don't get pulled down with them. "Change" is not always good even if it feels good today. But hey, you guys will figure that out. Find funding for a few more "unbiased" studies (oddly enough performed by those with an agenda and expected outcome), whatever makes you feel all intellectual and superior for now. When that falls apart for you, don't come knocking.
Click to expand...

I thought the last post was full of ignorance, but this one tops it. Good job.
 
humbolt said:
My understanding of human nature is that logic has little to do with human nature. Otherwise the term human nature would not exist as all human activity would be logical. Maybe you can start a campaign to wipe it out.
Click to expand...

Your understanding of human nature, based on the posts in this thread, seems to be lacking. You might want to do something about that.
 
Arbo said:
There is no such thing as 'gay rights'. It's called 'human rights', and it's about equality. I have never seen an argument against such equality that doesn't come from ignorance and/or religious beliefs, or just pure nonsense. As far as I am concerned, those standing against such equality have just as moronic of a stance as those that protested against interracial marriage long ago.
Click to expand...

So religious rights enumerated in the Constitution don't matter to you. Well gay rights don't matter to a lot of other people. All that oppression crap is largely nonsense. It is a political issue not a "human rights" issue no matter how badly you want it to be otherwise. I suspect soon enough the SCOTUS will let you know that.
 
Rocketman said:
As usual you have spouted nothing but bull**** to support your stance
Click to expand...

As usual, you don't understand the issue... as you have so completely demonstrated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom