View Single Post
  #11   Report Post  
Gould 0738
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment

It's a threat to the well-being of kids growing up in such a screwed up
environment. It's the moral decay of a society which is dominated by
homosexuality. You think it's not a problem? Look at the history of
civilizations in which homosexuality flourished.


That logic is almost as flawed as "if you don't support sending our troops to
the war in Iraq, you're hoping they get killed".

Gay marriage is illegal in Florida, right?
According to your statement above, there must not be any homosexuals in the
entire state. If they can't marry, they'll simply disappear.

At least you are honest enough to say that your real agenda is to somehow
eliminate homosexuality. (You could give a rip about marriage.)

The other good one I hear from the right on this issue is the AIDS argument.
"Gays
spread AIDS and other diseases, and if we allow them to marry our health care
costs
will go through the roof." What a crock.

Since gays generally cannot marry at the current time, there must not be any
gay sex taking place, and therefore there must be few or no incidents of
sexually transmitted HIV. Sure.

By encouraging monogamous relationships, whether among the gay or straight
community, the amount of screwing around should decrease. The fewer partners
the average person has, the
lower the odds of contracting or spreading AIDS.

The last rib tickler is the argument that
"people will marry sheep! Grown men will marry 9-year olds! People will marry
their parents! Eleven men will move in with seventeen women and they'll call it
some kind of marriage!" Nonsense. A legal civil union should be allowed between
any *two* consenting *adults* who are *not closely related*.

Even George Bush rather recently said he was in favor of "civil unions". I
guess that was before he started nosediving in the polls and figured he could
rally some emotionally-charged homophobes to his side.

If marriage isn't a legal contract, one shouldn't have to go to the courthouse
to get divorced. If it is a legal contract, why should it be the sole legal
contract where a person's sexual orientation prohibits them from entering into
a legally binding commitment?

The solution is *not* to take marriage away from the churches. The BA
Evangelicals that are marching in the streets to declare that God hates
homosexuality (if not homosexuals themselves) should never be forced to perform
a marriage for a gay or lesbian couple, or even accept a homosexual as a member
of their church. Ever.

The solution is to take marriage out of the hands of the state. Let any two
consenting adults who are not close relatives formalize
a monogamous relationship for purposes of property ownership, inheritance,
paternity, etc as a "civil union." Gay or straight. That would be the end of
the state's involvement. Those couples who wanted the benefit of the religious
sacrament of marriage would go to the same place they would go for baptism,
communion, confession, or what not- a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, etc.

Your synagogue, or church, would never be required to bless the union of people
your religion condemns. By the same token, an equally sincere church on the
other side of town that interprets the scriptures a bit differently should not
be prevented from marrying any couple it chooses to.

As far as the kids go: NOYB, you're a medical professional. So shame on you.
There are clinical studies that show children raised by homosexual parents are
typically as well adjusted as kids raised in
a hetero household. Why you would ignore the professional studies in your own
discipline to repeat the political sloganeering of the under-informed is
somewhat astonishing.

Those specific kids who are adopted by homosexual couples rather obviously all
started off in a hetero household, but in many cases were either abandoned by
the parents or removed by the state due to drug abuse, child abuse, or other
problems. In the case of older kids, there is often nobody willing to adopt
them. Would these kids be better off left in straight (but problem) homes where
they are beaten, whored out, and who knows what else rather than living with a
same-sex couple who would take proper care of them? I guess that consistent
with the logic that "Gay people will disappear, or at least not have sex if we
don't allow them to marry" would be a thought that "Straight people never raise
screwed up kids.".