the conservative case for same sex marriage - Page 49 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-21-2011, 10:08 PM   #961
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Considering the topic was DOMA, it would not have been pertinent for him to address the single mother issue.
He was grandstanding is the point. For one thing "nuclear family" has always, and is still, defined in Merriam-Webster thusly:
Quote:
nuclear family
noun

: a family group that consists only of father, mother, and children
First Known Use of NUCLEAR FAMILY
1947
But, just as marriage has recently had to be redefined so will nuclear family one supposes.

For the other thing, as I mentioned, gay adoption and gay marriage simply have not been around long enough to make any statistical judgement whatsoever as to their impact on society.
__________________

INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-21-2011, 10:39 PM   #962
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
So which are in favor of:

a. abortions to prevent single mothers

b. more (free) contraception to prevent single mothers

c. stoning of immoral women to prevent single mothers

d. women staying in abusive relationships to prevent single mothers

e. locked chastity belts to prevent single mothers

f. plural marraige to prevent single mothers
Let's see... the current rate of children born to unwed mothers is, depending on the year, 38-40 percent. The year I was born, to my married mother, the rate was 5.3.

When I was born in 1960:

A) abortion was illegal
B) oral contraception was 1 year from market and condoms were condoned by some churches and usually only available in pharmacies
C) stoning of women was illegal
D) abusive relationships exist in shack-up single mother homes too and at a higher rate I'd be willing to wager
E) I couldn't find chastity belts in an old Sears catalog I have
F) polygamy was illegal as well

So, there must be something else, a wee bit less dramatic perhaps, that could be done.

Yes, no?
__________________

INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-21-2011, 11:38 PM   #963
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
He was grandstanding is the point. For one thing "nuclear family" has always, and is still, defined in Merriam-Webster thusly:


But, just as marriage has recently had to be redefined so will nuclear family one supposes.

For the other thing, as I mentioned, gay adoption and gay marriage simply have not been around long enough to make any statistical judgement whatsoever as to their impact on society.
I feel so bad for Merriam and Webster, whatever are they going to do now?

And your last point there is sort of the whole point. The guy was trying to cite a study about nuclear families vs. single parent families and make it about same sex marriage, which is wrong. That was Franken's contention.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 06:21 AM   #964
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
It is indeed troubling.
But you were cool with the other person lying?

Your 'Leave it to Beaver' painting of your childhood is a lie as well.

Do you have any clue as to how many children were born out of wedlock and how many abusive relationships were not reported back then due to stigma? A stigma brought on by your line of thinking?
BVS is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 10:38 AM   #965
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
The Senator might also look into that statistics concerning children raised by single mothers. It is indeed troubling.


stop this. just stop. it has nothing to do with gay people.
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-22-2011, 11:04 AM   #966
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
So, there must be something else, a wee bit less dramatic perhaps, that could be done.

Yes, no?


yes. let's make sure that gay people can't get married.

that will solve the problem.
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-22-2011, 02:06 PM   #967
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

The Senator might also look into that statistics concerning children raised by single mothers. It is indeed troubling.
What is the point of bringing this up? Franken's argument was NOT that any old family configuration is as good as another--his point was that the study did not indicate that gender of the two parents was the defining issue in the healthy upbringing of the child, but rather the presence of two parents. The study didn't mention gender. Even if the researchers only studied heterosexual couples the sexual orientation of the couples was not the focus of the study, and therefore it's not appropriate to make that the point of the study for whatever reasons.

As you yourself pointed out there hasn't been a lot of research on the impact of same-sex married couples on chidlren, and as such this study cannot be used to make any statements about the effectiviness of such households.

But then you're smart enough that you already know this. I can only conclude that you're purposefully trying to obfuscate the issue.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 02:37 PM   #968
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 10:59 AM
the evidence shows that the best environment for a child is for it to have two committed lesbian mothers.

Kids with Lesbian Parents May Do Better Than Their Peers - TIME



but even still, i think that children need two good parents, so i am willing to give heterosexual men the benefit of the doubt, despite the fact that far and away the biggest threat to children -- sexually or physically -- are straight men.
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-22-2011, 03:04 PM   #969
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
but even still, i think that children need two good parents, so i am willing to give heterosexual men the benefit of the doubt, despite the fact that far and away the biggest threat to children -- sexually or physically -- are straight men.
I can't wait until the older generation that thinks that male on male pedophiles equal gay dies off. I can't believe I still hear that occasionally.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 03:56 PM   #970
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:59 AM
but if he wasn't gay he wouldn't be molesting little boys
deep is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 04:06 PM   #971
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kramwest1 View Post
I can't wait until the older generation that thinks that male on male pedophiles equal gay dies off. I can't believe I still hear that occasionally.
When you say older, do you mean the 65+ crowd? Because I have heard neo-cons in their 30s and 40s say this. Sad but true.

When I hear people compare homosexuals to pedophiles, that to me shows nothing but pure hatred and fear of homosexuality, more so than citing the Bible that its wrong.
Pearl is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 04:15 PM   #972
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
but if he wasn't gay he wouldn't be molesting little boys

if they were gay, would men stop raping women and molesting little girls or beating their wives?
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-22-2011, 04:17 PM   #973
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
still, defined in Merriam-Webster thusly:

you'll note that definition came about only in 1947 (post bomb, too, interesting ...)

before that, families were much different and more inter-generational than the past 60 years.

really, no 5,000 years of tradition.
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-22-2011, 04:38 PM   #974
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 02:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you'll note that definition came about only in 1947 (post bomb, too, interesting ...)
Though the term was coined in 1947, the concept had apparently been recognized by sociologists since the 17th century. And some historians have pinpointed the nuclear family as a concept (father, mother, children) being solidified by the end of the medieval period. Apparently as early as the 8th century, the term "family" was recognized in Germanic tribes as meaning one's immediate family.

Quote:
before that, families were much different and more inter-generational than the past 60 years.

really, no 5,000 years of tradition.
Agree with inter-generational. The role that both a father and mother plays -- regardless of the cultural interpretation -- is up for much debate.
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 04:43 PM   #975
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 06:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
if they were gay, would men stop raping women and molesting little girls or beating their wives?
nobody has ever accused a gay man of doing any of those things

lets stay on topic, we are concerned about little boys being molested by men because they are gay men.

we don't have any bias' or prejudices, our only concern is little defenseless boys.

who can argue with that?
deep is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 05:16 PM   #976
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl View Post
When you say older, do you mean the 65+ crowd? Because I have heard neo-cons in their 30s and 40s say this. Sad but true.

When I hear people compare homosexuals to pedophiles, that to me shows nothing but pure hatred and fear of homosexuality, more so than citing the Bible that its wrong.
Mainly 55+ crowd.
I am fortunate to not hang around people closer to my age who are so wrong and confused.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 05:17 PM   #977
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:59 AM
From my Senator:

Quote:
Al Franken - U.S. Senator, Minnesota

Dear Mark,

There’s no good argument against marriage equality. There’s no good argument for the Defense of Marriage Act, one of the most unfair laws passed in my lifetime. And there’s no good argument for leaving it on the books.

What are we waiting for? The country has evolved -- Americans support the repeal of DOMA. So does President Obama. So does President Clinton, who signed it into law in 1996. So does Bob Barr, the Republican who wrote the darn thing.

I say it’s time. It’s time for gay and lesbian Americans to enjoy the same rights as the rest of us. It’s time to toss the bigotry and the fear into the dumpster of embarrassing history where they belong. And you know what? It’s time for progressives like you and me to stop waiting around for someone else to make this country what it ought to be.

It’s time to repeal DOMA. Let’s start right now, you and me. I’ve written a petition to get the ball rolling -- click here to add your name now!

Marrying Franni was the best thing that ever happened to me. And it’s always pained me to know that our country denies that right to millions of gays and lesbians.

Over the years, those of us who support marriage equality have had to put up with a series of nonsensical arguments from those who support marriage discrimination. And, one by one, their ridiculous objections have been proven wrong.

Same-sex marriage doesn’t hurt straight couples. It doesn’t hurt kids who grow up in loving same-sex families. It doesn’t hurt anyone. DOMA, on the other hand, is an ugly stain on our country. And every day we don’t repeal it is another day we’re making millions of Americans second-class citizens.

Let’s make today the day -- sign my petition to repeal DOMA and let’s get this done already.

I think we can do this, and I think we can do it now. But we can only do it if we convince decision-makers in the Obama administration and Congress that we won’t shut up until this gets done.

So let’s show them how many of us are prepared to fight for this -- right now. Sign my petition and tell Washington it’s time to repeal DOMA.

This is going to be a tough fight. But it’s a matter of simple fairness. We’re right. And we can win. Are you ready to fight alongside me?

Thanks,

Al Franken

P.S.: The first step is signing our petition. But if you’re ready to do more right now, how about forwarding this email to ten people or sharing it with your friends on Facebook? Or Tweet about it -- and make sure to use the hashtag #itstime.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 06:01 PM   #978
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maycocksean View Post
What is the point of bringing this up? Franken's argument was NOT that any old family configuration is as good as another--his point was that the study did not indicate that gender of the two parents was the defining issue in the healthy upbringing of the child, but rather the presence of two parents. The study didn't mention gender. Even if the researchers only studied heterosexual couples the sexual orientation of the couples was not the focus of the study, and therefore it's not appropriate to make that the point of the study for whatever reasons.

As you yourself pointed out there hasn't been a lot of research on the impact of same-sex married couples on chidlren, and as such this study cannot be used to make any statements about the effectiviness of such households.

But then you're smart enough that you already know this. I can only conclude that you're purposefully trying to obfuscate the issue.
I didn't really bring it up as I didn't literally mean for the senator to address it during a committee meeting on DOMA. Or even to hijack this thread.
Only that I consider the rising rate of unwed, young mothers a much more serious issue with a staggering human toll and cost to society.
And now that I think about it--I don't want a political buffoon like Al Franken remotely involved with addressing the issue.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 06:06 PM   #979
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 10:59 AM
So, you're saying you fell into the same trap as the guy Franken was talking to, talking about what are basically non sequiturs.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 07-22-2011, 06:52 PM   #980
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
So, you're saying you fell into the same trap as the guy Franken was talking to, talking about what are basically non sequiturs.

I have no idea the context from that short clip, only that Sen Franken is hostile to the gentlemen's testimony and feels the need to get a cheap laugh at the witness's expense.

For the record, early in this debate I cited such studies to support my beliefs and thanks to Irvine saw that that was not entirely fair. While I still think the ideal for child rearing is a loving biological mother and father (and that only a zealot would think otherwise) I no longer would cite statistics comparing same-sex parents with single parents in my opposition to gay marriage.
__________________

INDY500 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proposition 8 discussion continued yolland Free Your Mind 797 03-03-2009 01:09 PM
SPLIT--> California's Proposition 8 on Same-Sex Marriage phillyfan26 Free Your Mind Archive 1002 11-08-2008 02:23 PM
Rate my album collection. shart1780 Lemonade Stand Archive 75 02-13-2008 11:07 PM
Go Home Human Shields, You U.S. Wankers... Iraqi Citizens topple main Saddam Statue Headache in a Suitcase Free Your Mind Archive 130 04-15-2003 07:48 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×