What Rights (If Any) Should Be Awarded To Homosexual Couples? Part 3

???? I never claimed otherwise. I said you and Johnny "whine". Dont have to be gay to whine.

Forming a heterosexual couple has the badge of a potential of procreation and all the issues it can entail. Who is the father, who is responsible for providing and caring for the child and improving the wellbeing of those children.

It can happen with any two consenting adults. Nothing special about those who happen to be homosexual.

 

None of the rights of marriage other than maybe hospital visitation medical decisions when one is incapacitated. Gays could duplicate that with a simple medical power of attorney so not sure of your point.

 

You missed 90% of my post - here, let me quote it for you.

As for your remark about it just being limited to medical benefits that is a joke - you should look up all the automatic benefits that come with marriage that have nothing to do with children. Homosexual couples cannot (in a few states) form a contract that even looks similar to marriage protections - but you already know that as I have cited you several resources to back this up after you basically called me a liar - after which you simply switched to another "talking point".

 

No you don't, do you?

Enid Blyton couldn't have said it better herself? Now what about all those gay couples who are providing and caring for the child and improving the well-being of those children?

Right, so no reason to enact laws which especially serve the purpose of excluding persons of the same sex to marry.

 

You missed ALL of my post. I was referring to the "legal kinship which automatically awards them rights to each other". Like I said, it doesnt have any of the rights of marriage.

 

What about them? What POSSIBLE justification could there be for different treatment for children being cared for by "gay parents". Probably more children as we speak being raised by single parents and grandparents, than have EVER been raissed by gay couples. But you expect society to promote gay couples raising children as somehow worthy of government recognition, endorsement and subsidies because they are freakin gay, while denying it to the single mother and grandmother because they are related???? Absurdity. Being freaking gay parents isnt some kind of second best alternative to biological parents.

 

It's your strawman. No one is saying marriage rights should be denied to other people, but this is the gay and lesbian forum... What part of that aren't you getting?

 

There is no POSSIBLE justification for different treatment of children being cared for by gay parents or straight parents. Their parents should be able to marry in EITHER case.

Irrelevant even if true.

No because they are PEOPLE who don't deserve to be treated differently due to harmless characteristics over which they have little or no control.

I never said that. I said it could be wise to maintain restrictions on certain "family" couplings but just as illogical in other cases. However these need to be looked at separate from same sex couples who have already been proven to be similarly situated to the majority of heterosexual couples (except they can't bear children together) and IDENTICALLY SITUATED to sterile heterosexual couples (because they can't bear children together either).

I'm glad you agree there's nothing "second best" about gay parents, your position seems to be evolving!

 

The above is ludicrous.

 

Well, that isn't what is actually being called for per se; you should have no problem then. BTW, you will never control how anyone may 'think'; drop that notion now... please.

 

I think you ask the wrong question. It should be: What rights, if any, should be awarded to American couples? Because there should be no separation. Anything the government offers to one group, it should legally offer to all groups. In marriage that is any two consenting adults. Why are we separating gays from this group like they are some kind of subhuman?

 

Zilch with a capital Z!

 

Put them all on a desert island and they will soon die out.

 

I asked you this once before, but you never answered.

'Do you actually like anyone or anything?'

Is there any group of people you don't hate, or don't want to see die?

You seem to have a very hostile attitude towards anyone that's different from yourself. Is there a reason?

 

It's all in your mind. You obviously don't, or refuse to accept, anyone with a point of view that is different to yours. So you divert the discussion.

 

It's people who make statements like this ...

"Put them all on a desert island and they will soon die out."

... who have the problem.

I'm certainly not wishing anyone to die.

 

Ahhh so you think it's purely genetic? Interesting...

If you put lesbians and gay men together there's likely going to be a lot of articificial insemination going on anyway.

 

http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/0...nsemination/WilhnlJM1gstO4ZBXpTTqO/story.html

Here's a Massachusetts supreme court ruling affirming that if a child is born within a same-sex marriage, said marriage confers on both partners equal custodial rights. The marriage created those.

 

Exactly whats being called for in the title of the thread. Evactly what has been required by every court case creating a right for gay marriage.

 

No, it says the artificial insemination law confers on both partners equal custodial rights. Using the tortured interpretation that the word "husband" can be a man or a woman. When you suspend the meaning of words to creare new meanings, anything is possible.

 

"In a ruling released yesterday, the court said current state law gives the two same-sex spouses equal legal standing when a child conceived by artificial means is born during their marriage, though the law refers to a “husband’’ and a “married woman.’’"

 

Your point? Its still the state law on artificial insemination that they judged to confer legal custody to the other spouse. Only applies in the case of married lesbians.

 

It clearly states that the equal legal standing was applicable BECAUSE of the marriage, not just because of the artificial insemination having taken place. The other partner may not even have been present at the time of conception or birth.

So there is an example of same-sex marriage creating parental responsibility and accountability.

 

How long do you propose we keep doing this and would you be happy if this were your son or daughter?

 

Wrong, dixon. It is clear enough that you spin, revise virtually any information, in your frivolous effort to spin the truth.

You have a right to have at it; but rest assured, you aren't succeeding. You cannot FOOL all of the people in perpetuity. Get that into your biased thinking NOW... you'll be a lot better-off for it later.