martha
Blue Crack Supplier
AEON, I have to go to bed, so I'll check back in the morning.
Why do you keep trying to paint me as someone that is opposed to gay couples specifically from adopting?
martha said:I'm addressing the belief that the state shouldn't be involved in marriage at all, yet you refuse to engage in this discussion. Why is that?
AEON said:Because I already answered it.
martha said:Then please direct me to the post. It may have gotten lost somewhere in the adoption sidetrack
AEON said:...and I'm leaning toward entirely removing incentives for marriage...
AEON said:...Let’s just move to some sort of flat tax model and I’ll be happy.
AEON said:best left outside of the government's interference. It does not need incentives any more than it needs protection
AEON said:Legal affirmation of romance is not necessary when there are no legal incentives. However, if any two (or more) people want to draft any sort of "contract" regarding property, inheritance, money...etc. - they a free to do so and the court system can and should be used to protect these contracts just like any other contract between people.
AEON said:Concerning taxes, I am in favor of a flat tax across the board for every adult - married or not married
Oh please. You'll do anything to avoid the real issue.
While I don't think this is the least bit accurate - it did make me realize something - it appears you actually view conservatives as enemies instead of people with different viewpoints.
While I don't think this is the least bit accurate - it did make me realize something - it appears you actually view conservatives as enemies instead of people with different viewpoints.
At the end of the day, emotions rarely help make sound decisions...
Although I think I've done a very good job of separating ideas from people (which I chalk up to all the philosophy I've read), it's worth remembering that it's much easier to do this when the outcome of one's opinions one way or another has no bearing on one's life. That much different than being gay or even female, really, where conservative viewpoints, if enacted, would enact terrible hardship and would certainly make it much harder to see conservatives as allies in any respect.
Do you honestly think a conservative goal is to "take things away from groups they don't like"?...When all I hear from conservatives are ways to take things away from groups they don't like, what else are they but enemies?
martha said:Then please direct me to the post. It may have gotten lost somewhere in the adoption sidetrack.
AEON said:If I find it, and re-post it, what will you do to entertain us?
martha said:I can't tap dance, although I took lessons once.
And no one wants me to sing. :shudder:
I could fall off my bicycle. I haven't yet, but I think we all know it's going to happen at some point.
martha said:AEON, thank you for the quotes you provided..
melon said:Although I think I've done a very good job of separating ideas from people (which I chalk up to all the philosophy I've read), it's worth remembering that it's much easier to do this when the outcome of one's opinions one way or another has no bearing on one's life.
Perceive at last that you have in you something better and more divine than the things which cause the various effects, and as it were pull you by the strings. What is there now in my mind? is it fear, or suspicion, or desire, or anything of the kind? – Marcus Aurelius
melon said:That much different than being gay or even female, really, where conservative viewpoints, if enacted, would enact terrible hardship and would certainly make it much harder to see conservatives as allies in any respect.
C'mon martha - start dancing or singing or falling....
AEON, thank you for the quotes you provided.
AEON and Fguy, you guys put on quite the tap dancing show last night after I went to bed. I'm sure your friends would have found it very straight of you guys.
What are you talking about?
I think that's pretty naive, to be honest. Given that contraception and social welfare are readily available, it's naive to think that moral hazard isn't an issue here. Before contraception and the welfare state, you might have had a point.
There are communities where pregnancy and having a bunch of kids is a badge of honour. Not least because of the social welfare benefits.
Unless you admit gay men kissing is gross - then you are not being honest.
While I don't think this is the least bit accurate - it did make me realize something - it appears you actually view conservatives as enemies instead of people with different viewpoints.
At the end of the day, emotions rarely help make sound decisions...
The sad part is - I truly believe that this is the only "answer" that some people want to hear.No, she was talking about honesty in general.
Thank you - I think the same of you and most of the others in this forum.I think you're smart. You think before you post.
I am not so quick to concede this point. My Christianity is quite "outside the box" in many areas. While I obviously agree with the Fundamentalists on whether or not homosexual acts are sinful - I disagree with them on astrophysics, geology, biology (evolution)...etc. I also disagree with them that the state should legislate marriages. This is more of a libertarian view than a conservative one.But I think, in the end, you're against homosexuality for religious reasons and that's that.
Well, to quite a few people outside this forum these arguments do in fact make sense. To many it does seem that a child should be placed in a home with mother and father - if possible. To many it does make sense that the state should not be involved in the marriage process. While I am not suggesting you agree because a large group of people also agree - I simply want to point out that the ideas being presented are not so out of the mainstream that they shouldn't be discussed.You're trying to rationalize it with these arguments, and they're not making sense.
As I said above - this is only partially true.If you simply told us, "My religion has made its thoughts clear on homosexuality and I agree with them. That's my reason." I think it would go a long way to help us understand where you're coming from.
I agree to a certain extent, which is why I said the state should not be involved in the marriage process.I would disagree profusely with attempts to put religious views in law, but I would know why you think that way.
Please accept my apologies...Every secular attempt you've made to discuss this issue makes my head hurt...
While I agree with most of this, I would say to you, that it is easy for you and I not to get emotional about this topic when we do not have to worry about marriage being denied us.
I am emotional about it in reference to my gay relatives who have been a better role model for my marriage than the eleven marriages among my parents and my wife's parents.
I would also add into the mix that my cousin has done very well for himself, is married, has children despite being raised by two women.
Well, to quite a few people outside this forum these arguments do in fact make sense. To many it does seem that a child should be placed in a home with mother and father - if possible. To many it does make sense that the state should not be involved in the marriage process. While I am not suggesting you agree because a large group of people also agree - I simply want to point out that the ideas being presented are not so out of the mainstream that they shouldn't be discussed.
I agree to a certain extent, which is why I said the state should not be involved in the marriage process.
I think you need to understand that you're talking about my demographic, the people I know. I'm a teenager. I know exactly why kids do what they do sexually. And the ones that get pregnant aren't getting pregnant simply because, "Meh, who cares, someone can just adopt this kid!"
3. It's a badge of honor to continually give birth to children to put up for adoption?
Well, I certainly can't deny what you have observed. This is obviously a success story - and I'm certain there are others. I think you have certainly demonstrated that gay adoption can succeed, but I am still not convinced that it is a child's best chance for success if equally qualified heterosexual couples are available.
From a middle class background though, right?
In a certain class of society.
In a certain class of society.
Oh, I would love to hear this, please explain.
Depending on political point of view, elements of society that are disadvantaged or elements of society that are addicted to handouts.
No, it doesn't depend on political point of view. You stated more than once that there is a "certain class of society" where it's a badge of honor to pop out babies and then give them up to adoption. So what are you basing this on, and where are your numbers? And what the hell do "handouts" have to do with it?