I agree it's crazy that you'd write that given I didn't.
The “no difference” theory is dead: Same sex parenting
- Thread starter GFR7
- Start date
I didn't actually think so, but you put a great big stamp of approval over the whole of what he proposed and without serious qualification that's exactly what one of his ideas could lead to.
You mean to the outside parties. I suppose so.
Then something else was wrong at home or your perception is off on the men. Or do you think that both of your sisters were no good and managed to fool these good, educated men of theirs?
TracerBullet
New member
to all married couples right?
are you planning to redefine "marriage" to include pedophiles and children?
GFR7
New member
I was presupposing that everyone now believes domestic violence negates a marriage.Town Heretic said:
I mean objectively. For instance, getting a trophy wife to replace your old one might really just be shallow.
None of the above. My sisters are beautiful, intelligent, and very , very juvenile and unstable. (One of them told me, "I've all my life wanted a criminal.") Trust me, if you knew what I know and had experienced it for many years, really lived it, you'd agree.
we are just trying to protect the kids
so
just let us know
if
you need help protecting two guys living together
I am sure somebody will care
TracerBullet
New member
whoever originally said that there was no such thing as a stupid question obviously never met you
I think most reasonable and decent people would support that aim.
Let me know if you need any help connecting that to a rationally supported premise. :think: Because I love a challenge.
Last edited:
WizardofOz
New member
How about polygamy?
Should it be legalized? Wouldn't its legalization further redefine marriage?
How about incestuous pairings?
Any "bigotry" on your part when it comes to its legalization?
There will doubtless be a strong argument for it, though I imagine there will be historical, sociological and psychological arguments made against it. It's even hard to oppose Biblically when you consider the wives of some of God's men, like Abraham or Solomon.
It would expand or reestablish wider parameters for participation.
Much less difficult to oppose given genetic and psychological distortions involved with that sort of pairing.
I don't think bigotry has to come into play in any of the considerations going on here or even in the one involving homosexuals. You can oppose that latter union without being a bigot. But you can't, so far as I can discern, oppose its legality as a rationalist. And that should be the foundation for secular law.
Why the slippery-sloped questionnaire?
Is the left redefining marriage or simply attempting to include homosexuals under the current rubric?
PureX
Well-known member
The bigotry becomes evident with the assumption of one's own moral superiority. An assumption based on the unquestioned allegiance to one's own perspective and opinions.
IMJerusha
New member
It boils down to one word: sin. Children know that word as "bad."
WizardofOz
New member
Gay marriage and polygamy
A not-so-slippery slope
The air is alright up here. Feel free to remove you head from the sand.
It's all part of the same debate.
Don't be a bigot. Why shouldn't polygamists and blood relatives be included under that same umbrella?
Don't dodge the issue.
OR perhaps you don't know everything that was going on in their marriages. People of selective reasoning view things as they wish to view them.
Your list is shallow, at best. Divorces aren't about *tax breaks*.
shagster01
New member
My parents hated each other when I was young. They finally got divorced when I was about 11. I do wonder if two moms who love each other would be better than a mom and dad who hate each other.....
GFR7
New member
Well, I know my sisters very well. All too well.
lain:
shagster01
New member
What kind of opposite sex marriage examples were used in this study? Healthy ones?