Same Sex Marriage - UK takes a step forward...

[_Res Ipsa]

according to Brad Hudson's posts, so far, we can either side with informed science and agree that married biological parents are the best for children or we can rely on the cynical and scientifically contrarian posts which support putting children in a potentially detrimental position just to prove a political point.

BH's logic and reasoning on this matter is simple and to the point...
it clearly states that while "the science" has definitively concluded that married biological parents are the best for children when compared to unmarried parents, divorced parents, single parents, grandparents, step-parents, adoptive parents, foster homes, orphanages, homelessness, no parents, etc...yet surely LGBT parents are as good as married biological parents. Somehow the LGBT has an advantage over all these other parenting circumstances and can easily be "as good as" what has been proven to be the best.
Ignore the fact that studies have already concluded that LGBT parents are not "as good"...ignore the facts that LGBT parents are equated with many of these other parent conditions already deemed "not as good"...indeed...BH's superior criticisms and dissections have all but disassembled years of countless professional and verified studies - mostly by way of criticizing the source...such as claiming that since NARTH posted it on their website and NARTH does not agree with my position on homosexuality...must be wrong! must be bias!
However, opinion posted on LGBT website that agrees with my position...not bias! can not be wrong!

That being said...there are many studies that i have cited, many opinions and arguments that i have referenced, and the objective consensus is clear and consistent....and justifies my original claim.

Same old logic fail. Sub cites a bunch of surveys of American cars that conclude that Fords are the best, then argues that Toyotas must be inferior because Fords are the best. I've read every study he's posted that wasn't behind a paywall and verified that they do not conclude that gays or lesbians are inferior in any way when compared on an apples to apples basis (i.e., single parent straight moms to single parent lesbian moms). Anyone who takes the time to read through the thread and the cited studies will understand which of us cuts and pastes from websites without taking the time to read the sources and which of us does the homework.

[Guest]

...

[_vessr]

It is not a step forward to continue argueing about same sex marriage in this manner.

The step forward is to totally disreguard sexuality. Another way to think about it needs to come to pass.

The GLBT is no different than those they fight against though.

First off they need to throw out the "B" for bisexual ... because of its very nature implies promiscuity. Which is certainly not best for raising children.

Next ... what is up with members of the gay community being mortified when a supposed gay person has relations with the opposite sex? isn't that the exact reaction your fighting against?

Then there is a whole group of people that society forgot ... Those with gay tendencies but don't wish to be out of the closet about it. Infact the in the closet group is the problem the out of the closet gays can't get equality. Did it ever cross your mind that there are a whole group of people not comfortable with a "Black and White" label system on Gay? Who are not bisexual

You write, “It is not a step forward to continue arguing about same sex marriage in this manner.”

Why not? Debate is generally the means by which resolutions are made and equality is achieved in civilized societies.

You argue, “The step forward is to totally disreguard sexuality. Another way to think about it needs to come to pass.”

What other way is there to discuss equality in sexuality than to regard sexuality? There can be no other way to think about it than to think about it.

You say, “The GLBT is no different than those they fight against though.”

I don’t think you’ve proved this; and I will handle the matter a step at a time:

You write, “First off they need to throw out the "B" for bisexual ... because of its very nature implies promiscuity. Which is certainly not best for raising children.”

You are wrong. Heterosexuality does not imply promiscuity; nor does being a gay or lesbian person. Bisexuality does not imply promiscuity any more than the other forms of sexuality. Bisexuals are just as capable as any other person of having a committed relationship with one person, if they so choose.

You then ask, “what is up with members of the gay community being mortified when a supposed gay person has relations with the opposite sex? isn't that the exact reaction your fighting against?”

The gay community is fighting against inequality on the basis of sexual preference. They are not fighting against having relations with the opposite sex, just as they are not saying that bisexuals should be denied the right to be attracted to both sexes.

Finally, you write, “Then there is a whole group of people that society forgot ... Those with gay tendencies but don't wish to be out of the closet about it. Infact the in the closet group is the problem the out of the closet gays can't get equality. Did it ever cross your mind that there are a whole group of people not comfortable with a "Black and White" label system on Gay? Who are not bisexual[?]"

I had hoped you were being facetious here, but in context it appears that you are not. Society has not forgotten closeted gay and lesbian people. It has pressured some of these people to be secretive about their choice in sexual partners (e.g., "don't ask, don't tell"). Those who remain silent cannot be faulted for the inequality imposed on them and on others who choose to be out in the open with their sexuality.

I don’t know what you mean when you end with a mention of “a whole group of people not comfortable with a “Black and White” label system . …” If you are referring to those who are in the closet about their sexual preference, it has nothing to do with a “‘Black and White’ label system . …”

[_LittleNipper]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTHCwU9rUdY

[Guest]

...

[_LittleNipper]

I am totally against homosexual unions being called "marriage." But, if the country does become Moslem, well they will have a list of all the homosexuals to come and get and stone to death. That will make is easy for them. I know the Nazis first registered all the Jews and then they knew exactly where to find them ---------- later...

[Guest]

...

[_subgenius]

...(snip)...So isn't it really the old way of thinking about marriage that needs to be left behind?

Makes you wonder why the LGBT are so desperate to be married...a small percentage of the LGBT that is.
They argue that marriage is not about love, not about children, that it has absolutely no social value...that it is only a civil contract which bestows certain rights of government upon the happy couple....yet they behave otherwise...they have only ever wanted public validation of their chosen lifestyle...as if this is the social validation they craved from their mommy/daddy for so many generations...they want to instill a taxpayer funded dysfunction masked by the grimace of "equal rights".

Yes, if it were simply about access to legal rights, there are much simpler, cheaper, and more effective legal structures to provide the same.
This where they cry "separate blah blah equal" crap...like they have ever been subjugated to being 3/8 human.

That being said....still remains a step backward for society...a degradation of a social virtue....a sad attempt to derive psychological validation from the government.

[_Bazooka]

I see the French have now moved forward on same sex marriage....

Where was the Prop 8 style campaign by the Church in France?

[_Quasimodo]

I see the French have now moved forward on same sex marriage....

Where was the Prop 8 style campaign by the Church in France?

The Church must have finally realized that the tide of international opinion is against them.

Just like with polygamy and Black priesthood, it's always best to abandon one's cherished beliefs in favor of political expediency.