The Glade 4.0

What do you not understand?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

He seems to be a well spoken decent young man. I'd like to intelligently speak with him about the issue ask him some questions and voice concerns on my point of view.

My issue has never been: "Should the government deny homosexuals the right to adopt?" In a free society they should not.

My issue is "Should the government force a private adoption individual or organisation to accept applications from homosexuals?" In a free society they should not.

Edit Oopsie typo.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

No offense, but I find that hard to believe.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Well, to be sure, this is a topic that I've thought about a lot, and have pretty well researched over the years. I've been exposed to most of the arguments out there for and against, so I feel that my position is well thought out, rational and educated. So you're right that it's unlikely that I'll see anything new that's going to suddenly make me do an about face on my position.

However, that should not make one assume that I'm not open to experiencing differing viewpoints or interested in understanding their positions.

I would also strongly argue that we're talking apples and oranges here. Unlike abortions, no one is harmed by gays marrying.

Actually, government is harmed because a lot of things need to be revamped to make it happen. It wastes a lot of tax dollars that I'd rather spend on roads or broadband.

I believe I've seen the video he is speaking about. Of course, my issue with it, is you could use the exact same argument about anyone, just replace abortion with "abstaining from sexual relations." I wouldn't exist today if my parents hadn't gotten busy 38 years ago at the exact time they did. For this reason, nobody should ever abstain from unprotected sex. **** like rabbits and breed uncontrollably, or you're killing all the people who won't be born because you didn't screw each other. The problem with the video is it doesn't address the issue at all - it just makes an emotional appeal.

The video in the OP of this thread, however, DOES address the issue it is intended to. Sure, it does so anecdotally, but it does prove without question that a lesbian couple CAN raise a phenomenally successful and well adjusted son.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I thought people already knew this? Might as well make a movie proving that cars can drive... *yawn*.

No, I think it would happen as I proposed at least as whats been demonstrated by groups like HRC. I fight this double standard every time I go to PRIDE or other meetings. Tolerance is demanded but someties forgotten to be given. My point being is that there is an absolute prejudice against things percieved as "the establishment".

The only "requirement" I feel is needed for effictive raising of kids is a stable household. No revolving door father figures, no transient households, etc. All this pissing and posturing about who's better to raise kids is political theater. Honestly I think that two lesbians are better qualified to raise kids then two gay males just due to how I've seen how each type of couples typically act. In the end, I still believe that children need to be raised by their biological parents in a stable enviorment. Anything else, in my opinion, is just a substitute that will be less effective to some degree.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Are we talking gays marrying or gays adopting? I can get behind no one is harmed by gays being married(in a sense). You'll have a harder time convincing me that it's no big deal for a gay couple to raise a kid.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Gay couples are probably better at raising kids on average because they have to go through a lot of leg-work to adopt one. This difficulty shows responsibility. A straight couple with kids is more likely to live in the ghetto and also split up.

The video is in regards to gay marriage. Or more specifically, comments on a proposal for Iowa to change their constitution to specifically prevent gay marriage. The son in question, is not adopted, but the biologial son of one of the mothers, through a sperm donor.

I'll urge again to watch the video, it's not very long and at a minimum it's nice to see a young man these days who so obviously has their **** together.

It's still a common argument against Same-sex marriage....that somehow children of same-sex couples will somehow be highly disadvantaged compared to children of heterosexual couples.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I don't understand how they can make this argument when 100% of the evidence is on the other side (supporting same-sex couples to be clear).

You don't understand how? Many (perhaps not most) of the same people who make this argument also believe that evolution is a fraud, that the Universe was created only 6000 years ago over a six day period, and that a deluge once wiped out all human and animal life on the earth other than that which was contained in a 500 foot long, three story high box.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I wish the gays would get off this whole gay marriage discrimination thing. Just get with a bunch of straight people that want to share marriage benefits and I bet the opposition would decrease a good bit.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Good solution, just be tied to someone you don't care about for the rest of your life.

No, as in a bunch of straight people that want to get married to each other so they can reap the benefits of marriage. See, I'm trying to point out that gays really aren't discriminated against when it comes to marriage.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Yeah, I think he got that. It's a terrible idea.

Anyway, the way I see it, if you allow gays to marry, you must allow immediate family members to marry, straight friends to marry, and any other 2 adults that want to "marry" for any reason. Furthermore, what's the justification for keeping it couples?

I agree. I think all these people should be able to marry, provided the overhead in changing the laws is very small.

I don't get this. While he is a very intelligent, articulate young man, most of what he stated really doesn't mean anything. How do we know is isn't (or won't be) a child molester or serial killer?

And if he were, what would that have to do with the fact that his parents are straight or gay or bi or lesbian, or somewhere in between?

Whether or not lesbian (or any other kind of ) couples can be good parents isn't what's important. Even if statistically non-straight couples were horrendous parents, it does not justify "codifying" discrimination (which he mentioned, but only briefly).

This is why my response to any gay marriage argument is always "what is the societal objective in sanctioning marriage?" And then, we need to proceed from there.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Be that as it may, it is still the primary argument put forth by the opposition. A sacred institution between a man and a woman does not hold water in court.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

The "survived an abortion" part. It's not like surviving a gunshot wound or a three story fall. Could you elaborate on the circumstances of this alleged survived abortion?

_________________

An abortion attempt then? Sorry, didn't phrase it correctly. Any way, here is the wiki on the woman I was talking about.

Gianna Jessen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gianna_Jessen

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

I would guess they induced labor right at the 6/7 month borderline where it's still legal and the child survived despite being that premature.

RE: The gay marriage argument, I'm for gay marriage but don't think it's a civil rights violation to deny it or anything like that. Marriage is not a right, for anyone.