Gays have just as much of a right to marry

Or arranged marriages.

That is rather traditional too.

 

The color of a car has no relation to its ability to function. The race of a husband or wife is irrelevant to the formation of nuclear families. And ones socialism has no relation to their ability to vote.
ON THE OTHER HAND, the sex of the couple is FUNDAMENTAL to their ability to form nuclear families.

 

Always revealing when the advocates for gay marriage who argue that marriage cant be limited to only heterosexual couples on the basis of procreation, because not all heterosexual couples have the ability or desire to procreate. And yet, they have no problem prohibiting ALL closely related couples from marrying, because closely related couples of the opposite sex have the potential of procreation

 

I was with you until the end.

First of all there's compelling evidence that children benefit the most from a stable home with two committed parents. But even the prop 8 folks couldn't massage the data to say that stable homes with one of each sex had any kind of edge of same sex ones. So you can say that it's fundamental but I don't think you're doing so for any reason other than you like the idea. Or dislike the alternative. Why hold views for which there isn't any evidence?

Saying it's obvious things are better with a mom and a dad isn't going to magic that into being true. It either is or it isn't, and it seems fishy that something which is supposedly such a primal force for good wouldn't leave a single measurable trace no matter how hard it's looked into.

Now if it's about procreation I would expect the gay marriage debate to be just a small sidebar to the much more serious issue of childless marriages, which I don't know if you know this is EVERYWHERE. We don't know how we're going to explain to the kids why there's an abomination living next to Madge's place. The more they smile and spend time with each other the more it's obvious they're up to no good. What's next? Making it illegal for a hippo and a boulder to have kids?

 

Infertile heterosexual couples can marry.

Oh snap.

You contradicted yourself in one post again.

 

There is an abundance of evidence to show that children born into homes with both their married parents do better than children who are not. Children born to single mothers have higher rates of poverty, juvenile delinquincy, drug and alchohol abuse, teenage pregnancy, HS dropout and criminal conviction as an adult.

 

???? What contradiction?

 

The issue isn't the magical word of "marry". It equal treatment under the law. Equal taxes. Equal rights. Equal Medicare and Social Security benefits.

 

Is that just for the homosexual and heterosexual couples, or any two consenting adults? Government doesnt encourage heterosexual couples to marry because they are sexual. They do so because when heterosexual couples are sexual, children are frequently the result.

And in California, it was only about the word "marry".

 

People don't usually get married, because the government 'encourages' them.

 

The problem is that the government should not be involved in the private lives oif citizens when their private lives do not effect other people.

And yes, as long as you and your sister are both adults, I would support you.

 

forming nuclear families is not a requirement of marriage, rendering your argument meaningless.

 

that procreation can be used as a means to deny a couple the right to marry.

 

You dont understand the concept of a contradiction. There is none.

 

With your commentary/memes, it is more like cognitive dissonance.

 

of course I do, as I just exposed the one in your argument.

 

Simply clueless.

I have already explained it to you, very slowly, a dozen times before.e

 

You claim that same sex couples cannot marry because they do not procreate.

- Procreation is not a requirement of marriage.
- Couples who are to marry are never asked by the state if they are going to have children.
- Young infertile couples are allowed to marry.
- Elderly couples are allowed to marry.
- Couples who are fertile but have no intentions of raising children are allowed to marry.
- Same sex couples are just as infertile as an infertile heterosexual couples.

Your argument is a contradiction. End of story.

 

But we're not talking about single parent households. We're talking about gay marriage - two people. Can you look into the numbers regarding two parent households, both traditional and non, and get back to me?

 

You are correct.

 

?????? uuuuhhhh children born into homes with both their married mother and father are more likely to have a TWO PARENT household when compared to children born to single mothers.

 

But connecting that to a conversation about granting homosexual couples the right to marry, is not very relevant. It certainly would not support exclude them from that right.

 

would you like to reply to what he actually said now?

 

??? Very relevant considering that only when a man has sex with a woman, is single motherhood an issue. Two guys shacking up, boning each other, there are no concerns as to who is going to provide and care for the children they create.

 

There's a few flaws with this

1: You mention the importance of "building the nest" as one of the main reasons, if not the one reason, for giving heterosexual couples extra rights. Why is building the nest any less important for homosexual couples who wish to adopt or who already have kids of their own? They may not need to be "bribed" into marriage just in case they will reproduce like heterosexual couples, but building the nest is a different issue.

2: Heterosexual couples who have not procreated don't need these rights all their lives, as the fertile years and risk of single-motherhood only lasts so long. There's no need to give these rights to heterosexual couples their entire lives, regardless of their ability, willingness or suitability to reproduce throughout their entire life.

Certainly not the children that they themselves would create, but there are children that they adopt or that are born of surrogate mothers. Marriage is an important part of adoption eligibility, and often necessary to perform a joint-adoption among two people and to maintain joint custody.... thus establishing fules for who is going to provide and care for the child(ren).