world population

[Mare Tranquillity]

We can still predict which gay couples will create children - none of them.

I'm curious why you keep saying that. Do you really think that NO gay couples have EVER had a child? Or do you simply think that denial is the best way to maintain your argument?

And marriage is still a regulation that should be imposed on people as little as possible. Only when there will be children or the state cannot tell when there will be children should the regulations be imposed. In instances where there are special privileges those special privileges should be removed.

The imposition is irrelevant since it is a voluntary contract and no one is required to sign up. When people sign the contract they are agreeing to abide by the rules. Your point is irrelevant.

The laws are already equal in that everyone who wants to create children falls under the jurisdiction of the laws -either as breeders who are married or as breeders who are unmarried. Even the gay people when they breed are under the law so it is equal - except for the special privileges which need to be revoked in any instance in which they don't need to exist for the regulation of breeding.

Okay, I'm good with that as long as gay people are allowed to enjoy the special privileges UNTIL they are universally revoked. Denying them unilaterally while still giving them to part of the population--based only on a religious point--is wrong and against the Constitution. Agreed?

As an analogy, if we make business laws to regulate businesses for the protection of customers then it would make no sense to apply those business laws to those who do not operate businesses. But everyone can decide to operate a business.

Okay, so anyone who signs up gets equal treatement? That's all we're asking. If we sign the contract we get what everyone else gets. You're okay with that?

Now about gay people who want to marry other gay people to protect the children they won't be creating and then they claim that they are being treated unfairly: as soon as they start creating children the marriage laws should apply. As long as they are not creating children they are being treated with the most amount of freedom from marriage laws one could want. They are willing to give up their freedom from marriage laws so that they can gain some of the benefits that have wrongly been given to married people - that is silly. All of us should be advocating the removal of wrongly given benefits.

Maybe you are right and no one should get the special rights, but until the day comes that the special rights are no longer given to anyone, then gay people should have the same legal right to share in those privileges as anyone else.

Once again, you say that gays will not be creating children when you know that to be a fallacious statement. Why do you keep posting a lie?

 

[numinus]

I'm curious why you keep saying that. Do you really think that NO gay couples have EVER had a child? Or do you simply think that denial is the best way to maintain your argument?


The imposition is irrelevant since it is a voluntary contract and no one is required to sign up. When people sign the contract they are agreeing to abide by the rules. Your point is irrelevant.


Okay, I'm good with that as long as gay people are allowed to enjoy the special privileges UNTIL they are universally revoked. Denying them unilaterally while still giving them to part of the population--based only on a religious point--is wrong and against the Constitution. Agreed?


Okay, so anyone who signs up gets equal treatement? That's all we're asking. If we sign the contract we get what everyone else gets. You're okay with that?


Maybe you are right and no one should get the special rights, but until the day comes that the special rights are no longer given to anyone, then gay people should have the same legal right to share in those privileges as anyone else.

Once again, you say that gays will not be creating children when you know that to be a fallacious statement. Why do you keep posting a lie?

Only mare can twist a thread about population to mean gays.

Duh?

 

[Dr.Who]

The imposition is irrelevant since it is a voluntary contract and no one is required to sign up. When people sign the contract they are agreeing to abide by the rules. Your point is irrelevant.

That is actually a good point.

I have long stated that I don't really care very much if gays get married or not and have only debated it because it keeps coming up. Before these threads here I never gave it much thought. I have even stated that I don't think gay marriage will effect the state of straight marriage much.

So if someone wants to let the state control their lives why should I care?
Well, I should care enough to just let them know it is a mistake. But it is their life to lead not mine.

And the special privileges should be removed.

As it is I don't think a significant number of gays will continue to get married. They will discover that it is an institution that does not do much for them and interest will fade.

So unless someone shows me that I should care more about how they lose their rights or that it will effect others my new line will be that "I don't care" and I will just point out false reasoning when I see it.

 

[Dr.Who]

Only mare can twist a thread about population to mean gays.

Duh?

yea, but "duh" is still a demeaning way to say what you could say more brilliantly with better chosen words.

 

[PLC1]

Only mare can twist a thread about population to mean gays.

Duh?

Right. Anyone who uses the word "Duh" over and over can see that gays aren't part of the population.

Achmadinajad, or however the pres of Iran spells his name, agrees. Remember him telling an audience in the US that there are no gays in his country?

 

[Dr.Who]

I'm curious why you keep saying that. Do you really think that NO gay couples have EVER had a child? Or do you simply think that denial is the best way to maintain your argument?

It really gets hard not to call you rude names. This has been discussed before and you have a great ability to forget what you have obviously not learned.

NO. No gay couple has ever created a child. No sperm has ever combined with another sperm to create a child and no egg has ever combined with another egg to create a child. Not even in the lab.

What has happened is that one member of a gay couple has engaged in heterosexual reproduction by borrowing sperm or eggs and artificially creating children. One member of a gay couple has even created children by sleeping with members of the opposite sex, in which case they have again engaged in het sex.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

It really gets hard not to call you rude names. This has been discussed before and you have a great ability to forget what you have obviously not learned.

NO. No gay couple has ever created a child. No sperm has ever combined with another sperm to create a child and no egg has ever combined with another egg to create a child. Not even in the lab.

What has happened is that one member of a gay couple has engaged in heterosexual reproduction by borrowing sperm or eggs and artificially creating children. One member of a gay couple has even created children by sleeping with members of the opposite sex, in which case they have again engaged in het sex.

Following in the Bill Clinton pattern, you have narrowed the meaning of "had" so that you can say that "no gay couple has every 'had' a child". According to COLAGE (Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere) there are about 10 million children who have been or are now being raised by gay couples. The actual process for producing the child is irrelevant since we are discussing marriage and the protections that it provides for families and children.

It's patently obvious that you have no valid argument to make against gays marrying since you keep rotating around from one untenable point to another. I'm not sure that artificial insemination can be considered "heterosexual" when two lesbians do it, but if that makes you feel better then by all means keep saying it.

When you actively try to deny 10 million children the rights and privileges provided by law, I don't think that could be construed as "loving others as yourself".

I can see why you might want to call me rude names, Who, since I keep showing that your arguments are invalid. And I've done so without rude names too.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

That is actually a good point.

I have long stated that I don't really care very much if gays get married or not and have only debated it because it keeps coming up. Before these threads here I never gave it much thought. I have even stated that I don't think gay marriage will effect the state of straight marriage much.

So if someone wants to let the state control their lives why should I care?
Well, I should care enough to just let them know it is a mistake. But it is their life to lead not mine.

And the special privileges should be removed.

As it is I don't think a significant number of gays will continue to get married. They will discover that it is an institution that does not do much for them and interest will fade.

So unless someone shows me that I should care more about how they lose their rights or that it will effect others my new line will be that "I don't care" and I will just point out false reasoning when I see it.

Ten million children, and you think that gays will not continue to marry if they are given the same rights as everyone else? Okay.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Only mare can twist a thread about population to mean gays.

Duh?

Gays aren't part of the population? I guess Jesus' commandments aren't the only things you can't fathom.

 

[Dr.Who]

Following in the Bill Clinton pattern, you have narrowed the meaning of "had" so that you can say that "no gay couple has every 'had' a child". According to COLAGE (Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere) there are about 10 million children who have been or are now being raised by gay couples. The actual process for producing the child is irrelevant since we are discussing marriage and the protections that it provides for families and children.

It's patently obvious that you have no valid argument to make against gays marrying since you keep rotating around from one untenable point to another. I'm not sure that artificial insemination can be considered "heterosexual" when two lesbians do it, but if that makes you feel better then by all means keep saying it.

When you actively try to deny 10 million children the rights and privileges provided by law, I don't think that could be construed as "loving others as yourself".

I can see why you might want to call me rude names, Who, since I keep showing that your arguments are invalid. And I've done so without rude names too.

When gays adopt a child they can use the same protections that any other two people use when they adopt.

 

[Dr.Who]

Ten million children, and you think that gays will not continue to marry if they are given the same rights as everyone else? Okay.

That ten million number sounds really fishy. Give a link please.

I bet we will find that there are not that many, that they are being raised by one gay parent who divorced his opposite gender spouse, or other facts that show that 10 million children are not being raised by gay couples.

If ten percent (not so credible a number in itself) of the population is gay and there are 300 mil people then there can only be 30 mil gay people. It takes two to make a couple so there can only be 15 mill gay couples. Most of them don't have kids, etc.


Ah, I think I see what you did. You are probably talking about the number of children that have ever had a gay parent in the history of the world?

The number in the US who are presently wanting marital protections because they think it will help them raise kids better is bound not to be large enough to motivate enough to want to get married. This is the paragraph that could be debated.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

That ten million number sounds really fishy. Give a link please.

I bet we will find that there are not that many, that they are being raised by one gay parent who divorced his opposite gender spouse, or other facts that show that 10 million children are not being raised by gay couples.

If ten percent (not so credible a number in itself) of the population is gay and there are 300 mil people then there can only be 30 mil gay people. It takes two to make a couple so there can only be 15 mill gay couples. Most of them don't have kids, etc.


Ah, I think I see what you did. You are probably talking about the number of children that have ever had a gay parent in the history of the world?

The number in the US who are presently wanting marital protections because they think it will help them raise kids better is bound not to be large enough to motivate enough to want to get married. This is the paragraph that could be debated.

I knew you'd want a link so I gave the name of the group: According to COLAGE (Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere) and here is their site: http://www.colage.org/

This group is national and the figures refer only to children that have been raised by gay parent(s) or are being raised by gay parent(s). The fact that you have been and may still be in total denial about gays having children is a real impediment in our discussion.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

When gays adopt a child they can use the same protections that any other two people use when they adopt.

Do you mean to say that they can NOW do that or are you saying that they SHOULD be able to do that?

 

[top gun]

I knew you'd want a link so I gave the name of the group: According to COLAGE (Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere) and here is their site: http://www.colage.org/

This group is national and the figures refer only to children that have been raised by gay parent(s) or are being raised by gay parent(s). The fact that you have been and may still be in total denial about gays having children is a real impediment in our discussion.

Mare waves off the first sign... he's set up for the number one fastball... he checks first base... winds up.............. A SWING AND A MISS... MARE STRIKES HIM OUT.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Mare waves off the first sign... he's set up for the number one fastball... he checks first base... winds up.............. A SWING AND A MISS... MARE STRIKES HIM OUT.

Good video clip! Very telling, very insightful. In all the research done on gays raising children, the biggest problem that has been uncovered, the thing that causes the worst feelings in the children is their abuse at the hands of the children of homophobic straight parents, the judgment of the society in which they live. So much for Loving Others as Yourself.