David Frum: Why Do We Need Marriage Equality?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

<<<Homosexual couples are just as capable>>>

I know in your mind that is true, but the facts just don't bear that out and though you have seen them you still make these claims with no hesitation.

Yes, the Country is changing .... but I think you might be a little short sighted.

Kinda of like the person in the train tunnel who notes the change from darkenss to a bright light..... not realizing even more change is coming rapidly.

It must be exhausting to be so afraid while the rest of society evolves around you. Sure, Danno. The 'facts' say that homosexuals can't raise children as well as heterosexuals do. Because they're producing some real winners, right? Whatever you say.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Some here seem to be afraid they might be attracted to some young fruity boy raised by gay parents, enough to cheat on his wife, risk getting caught, and having to give her the house, and the car.

[Danno 1,228]

[quote name=' timestamp='1364319382' post='6081615]

I think you confuse assigning importance to children and their welfare with making children the reason marriage exists.

Honest question-

If there were no children, for how many decades would the social importance and tradition of getting marriage last?

[Teddy B 17,252]

Damn, I never should've taken lunch today. This thread is much more entertaining than a trip to the hardware store.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Honest question-

If there were no children, for how many decades would the social importance and tradition of getting marriage last?

You don't think that people get married to form a lifelong commitment to each other and to take care of each other should something happen to one of them? It's only for having children?

[decocker 7,198]

As to yer second point about a SS couple, after 20 years of marriage - I say no, the surviving 'spouse' shouldn't get anything. But that's just my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

ew. what i horrible opinion to hold on to. good luck getting rid of that nasty soon

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ahh you're full of #######, and the Euro-centrist came out dressed as "developed world".

I tend to look at countries that are developmentally and economically similarly situated as the US. That would be Canada, Australia, Western Europe and Japan. Those are our peers. You would much rather compare the US to Afghanistan and Uganda and other backwards places. You can do that, of course, but it makes no sense at all. It's like comparting a Model T to a Lexus. Good luck with that.

Look even in Europe huge numbers of people a pose it. 30 States in this country said heII no!

That was then. This is now. The homophobe league lost all of their contests last November. Every last one of them.

So if support is so weak even here you know what it means for the masses of the world.

Personally, I don't care how same sex marriage is viewed in Saudi Arabia. Do you?

Anyway dude you had better face reality and you can start by looking at the projections of what this world will even look like in 30-40 years.....your ideas and the people who support them are on the way out.

Wrong. Your kind is dying off. In 30-40 years, people will look back and wonder why there was a debate on gay marriage in 21st century America.

[^_^ 5,021]

From today's oral arguments. The topic of children was front and center. Here's an excerpt.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: -- I -- it seems to me that your position that you are supporting is somewhat internally inconsistent. We see the argument made that there is no problem with extending marriage to same-sex couples because children raised by same-sex couples are doing just fine and there is no evidence that they are being harmed. And the other argument is Proposition 8 harms children by not allowing same-sex couples to marriage. Which is it?

GENERAL VERRILLI: Well, I -- I think what Proposition 8 does is deny the long-term stabilizing effect that marriage brings. That's -- that's the

argument for -- for marriage, that -­

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: But you also tell me there has been no harm shown to children of same-sex couples.

GENERAL VERRILLI: California -- there are 37,000 children in same-sex families in California now. Their parents cannot marry and that has effects on them in the here and now. A stabilizing effect is not there. When they go to school, they have to, you know -- they don't have parents like everybody else's parents.

Honest question-

If there were no children, for how many decades would the social importance and tradition of getting marriage last?

If there were no children, humanity would be extinct within 2-3 generations.

[Danno 1,228]

I can't figure it out. You know why? Because it doesn't make any effing sense and it's a complete fabrication that your brain came up with. Why? I have no idea. Someone along the way taught you to be afraid of everything you don't like and now you're convinced entire nations will become extinct because two guys get married.

You figure out your issues and come back to us.

"There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."

The USA has one of the HIGHEST rates of fertility in the Western world..... did you get that one of the HIGHEST.

The only reason ours has not matched Europe decline is because our immigrant population is doing such a good job.

Nealry every country you listed are far below replacement level, some countries, experts say "can not recover."

Edited March 26, 2013 by Danno

[Darnell 8,479]

Some here seem to be afraid they might be attracted to some young fruity boy raised by gay parents, enough to cheat on his wife, risk getting caught, and having to give her the house, and the car.

No fair bringing up a different demographic, aye?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

"There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."

The USA has one of the HIGHEST rates of fertility in the Western world..... did you get that one of the HIGHEST.

The only reason ours has not matched Europe decline is because our immigrant population is doing such a good job.

So? What does the fertility rate in the US have to do with anything? Are people going to stop having kids because gay people get married?

The gay people already exist, Danno. They aren't going to take away from the straight population that are already reproducing.

Nealry every country you listed are far below replacement level, some countries, experts say "can not recover."

... and this is because of the gays getting married? How so?

Edited March 26, 2013 by Evylin

[^_^ 5,021]

And ... even gay people reproduce.

[Darnell 8,479]

So, what would it look like, from a socio-economic standpoint,

if ONLY SS couples adopted children, USCitizens, that were in orphanages or eligible to be adopted ?

ie - no one else allowed to adopt,

no single parent,

no hetero couples,

no existing relatives,

etc etc.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Darnell

[Penny Lane 8,159]

So, what would it look like, from a socio-economic standpoint,

if ONLY SS couples adopted children, USCitizens, that were in orphanages or eligible to be adopted ?

Why would that happen? Are you even attempting to make a point?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

<<<Homosexual couples are just as capable>>>

I know in your mind that is true, but the facts just don't bear that out and though you have seen them you still make these claims with no hesitation.

You are merely incapable of accepting that the facts you presented do not support whay you think they support. You refuse to accept that even if the very man who authored the study I think you are referring to made clear in unmistakable terms that his work does NOT show any parenting inferiority of same sex couples.