Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jan 10, 2010 12:29:20 GMT -5
OR
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jan 10, 2010 12:32:20 GMT -5
I personally support gay marriage. I believe that marriage and other civil rights protections need to extend to every citizen.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Jan 10, 2010 13:22:38 GMT -5
I am against.
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Jan 10, 2010 13:24:39 GMT -5
Indifferent
But if they wanna get married then let them, i dont see what the problem is..
|
|
tyson
Amicus
Posts: 1,256
|
Post by tyson on Jan 10, 2010 16:38:13 GMT -5
zvone is an ultra-atheist, so he doesnt see the importance of why marriage is between a woman and a man only.
that is the word used to describe the union between a man and a woman.
all of the modern countries of europe were built on the foundations of christianity, and its laws, which outlaw homosexuality. same with middle eastern countries, and islam being the foundation of their states, and hinduism for india, and buddhism for east asia, and so on... all major religions speak against homosexuality, and most peoples living in these states around the world, still are believers of their faiths. now society has modernised, and we have come to tolerate those who are gay, but thats where it should stop. gays have to understand that even though they might not like that they cant get married or adopt children, they have to understand that the countries that they live in have been built on the foundations of christianity, and still majority of these nations are still believers, and they dont want to see gays having the right to do these things, as it goes against the morals of a christian to willingfully accept these things implemented by the state, if they have a chance to stop it by their vote.
not only should the governments not support gay civil unions, but they should call their "man to man" union something else.
if homosexuals want to live together, and pledge to live together for the rest of their lives, then so be it, but they should not expect any support financially, or have their union certfied as marriage by the government.
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Jan 10, 2010 17:07:40 GMT -5
I see no problem in them marrying, as long as they get treated just like any other marriage (financially).
with that said, I am against gays adopting children, bc that obviously has an influence on their future. I see homosexuality as a disorder.
|
|
tyson
Amicus
Posts: 1,256
|
Post by tyson on Jan 10, 2010 17:15:31 GMT -5
^ you cant have one without the other. if you declare that gay couples are equal to hetero couples within the law, then to say that they cant raise or adopt children is hypocritical, and you will not win any gratitude from gays just because you accepted gays to get married.
gays want to be equal to non-gays in every way.
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jan 10, 2010 17:19:09 GMT -5
Today, most countries refer to themselves as being secular, and possess such doctrines as separation of church and state. That is one of the ideals of a modern state. To implement an outdated ideology such as Christianity goes against the current principles. Do you seriously consider the Bible, Quran, Tanakh, etc. to be taken literal and possibly affirmed as rulebooks in a state? Today's countries are not theocracies, at least the successful ones, and to even fathom of installing such outdated principles as included in the aforementioned texts would go against every modern institution, even marriage (remember, polygamy was allowed in the Bible).
Secondly, the term "marriage" has consistently evolved over the centuries. For most of the time, marriage was more or less a business agreement between two families who arranged the marriages of their children. Yet, same-sex marriages also existed. In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies. Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history. It wasn't until in 342 CE, Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans issued a law in the Theodosian Code prohibiting same-sex marriage in Rome and ordering execution for those so married.
Thirdly, the word "marriage" comes from Old French mariage, from marier (“‘to marry’”), from Latin maritare (“‘to marry", literally “give in marriage’”), from maritus (“‘lover", "nuptial’”), from mas (“‘male", "masculine", "of the male sex’”). Does it mean man to female?
Fourthly, you make an argument for Christian morals. Alright, let's see some of these morals from the Bible.
Death for Adultery If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
Kill Witches You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)
Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)
Kill Fortunetellers A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)
Yes, brilliant morals and great argument.
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jan 10, 2010 17:33:57 GMT -5
The social science literature overwhelmingly rejects the notion that there is an optimal gender mix of parents or that children and adolescents with same-sex parents suffer any developmental disadvantages compared with those with two opposite-sex parents. The professionals and the major associations now agree there is a well-established and accepted consensus in the field that there is no optimal gender combination of parents.
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Jan 10, 2010 17:37:20 GMT -5
That may be the case zvone, but I just can't see how gay parents would have some type of "gay" impact on their adopted children.
|
|
|
Post by todhrimencuri on Jan 10, 2010 18:32:17 GMT -5
I wouldnt care... but the very fact that religious nuts are so against it makes me for it. I love nothing more than to see the Pope and his minions get it up the arse...
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Jan 10, 2010 18:54:12 GMT -5
Oh, really? I can't imagine any normal child accepting the fact that his father's name is Davor and his mother's - Robert, for instance. Who would like to be in his/her shoes when comparing their parents to those of other kids and wouldn't that traumatize any child?
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jan 10, 2010 19:03:10 GMT -5
The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated in Pediatrics, the most-cited journal in the field of pediatrics: "More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents."
BTW: In January 2008, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that same-sex couples have the right to adopt a child. In the U.S., LGBT people can legally adopt in all states except for Florida.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Jan 10, 2010 19:10:55 GMT -5
World is really going wrong. That's all I can say.
|
|
CiKoLa
Amicus
Gotovina Heroj!
Posts: 3,728
|
Post by CiKoLa on Jan 10, 2010 20:20:38 GMT -5
Zvone .. are you gay?
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Jan 10, 2010 20:41:30 GMT -5
Like I said, I believe that they did their analysis, but put yourself in their position? Would you be the same?
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Jan 10, 2010 21:45:39 GMT -5
They shouldn't be allowed to adopt, hell no, no fuckin way. Fuck "human rights" when the child is going to be traumatized for the rest of his life.
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Jan 10, 2010 22:19:09 GMT -5
Zvone I believe your sources, but I believe that some of those studies may be partial and subjective. I don't want to sound too skeptical of any type of statistics or studies, but many are faulty.
I was just reading Peter Schiff's "Bull Moves in Bear Markets". I vaguely remember you mentioning that your in finance, so here is any example from his book where he questions government statistics, in this case questioning the gdp....Schiff claims that the US GDP is inaccurate because it purchases of cars built in mexico and japan (toyota honda) are added to the gdp, while in reality they are taking away from GDP. Some of my professors agree, while other disagree. My point is that even hard statistics like GDP can be swayed and misinterpreted, so I defintely think studies like the ones your quoted can me wrong.
Sorry I didn't mean to get off topic but it was the first example I could think of.
|
|
Zvone
Amicus
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Posts: 525
|
Post by Zvone on Jan 10, 2010 23:19:37 GMT -5
You know the answer to that, seceru. That's because social sciences are based on assumptions, they aren't exact. I do understand what you're trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 10, 2010 23:40:42 GMT -5
I say do not call it marriage (since historically it was a union between a man and a woman centered around traditional reproductive family unit as described here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage#History ) but civil union instead with same legal rights and call it a day.
|
|