toldailytopic: Same-sex marriage: for it, or against it?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Silent Hunter

Well-known member
Not if you were serving the interests of the authority, . . .
. . . were he actually serving any interest other than being a nuisance and . . . :troll:.

. . . which run contrary to the points being made against Chrys.
. . . he has a . . . point?

You just have to understand which way the windmill is tilted. There's a bias in play and it isn't hidden.
. . . which isn't the issue . . . that I can tell.

. . . I'm talking about his behavior . . . not the so-called "point" he's "defending".
 

Silent Hunter

Well-known member
I am trying to show how marriage protects the child
. . . and . . .

. . . doing a lousy job at it too . . .

. . . and . . .

. . . you should start a new thread . . .

. . . if . . .

. . . that is what you want to do . . .

. . . because . . .

. . . this thread is about . . .

. . . same-sex marriage.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
I am trying to show how marriage protects the child

Rather you've been asserting that the purpose of marriage is to protect the child, which it isn't. Taking vows of commitment is irrelevant to any children that may or may not result from such a union, something you continually ignore else you'd have answered my last.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
if you are going to hang around, you might as well answer my question

do you understand the significance of a woman staying home with her child?

Answer mine and I will. You up for it or are you going to continue being a goof? This isn't a one way conversation so start answering the questions posed to you instead of deflecting away from them.
 

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
do you understand the significance of a woman staying home with her child?

do you understand the significance of a woman staying home with her child?

the child is better off if the mother stays home with the child
but
the mother is then dependent on the father
and
is relying on his commitment to stay toghether

is that clear?
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
the child is better off if the mother stays home with the child
but
the mother is then dependent on the father
and
is relying on his commitment to stay toghether

is that clear?

Nope. It's just yet another assertion from a guy who obviously isn't married nor has children and just makes soundbites. No wonder you shy away from answering questions doofus.

:plain:
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
what part don't you agree with?

A woman is not reliant on her spouse being committed to their marriage. It takes commitment from both involved to make it work. A child can be looked after by a father at home with no ill effects. The purpose of marriage is not to protect a child also btw.

Your refusal to even attempt an answer to my question is also duly noted.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
this is obvious to any reasonable person
so
how do we go about protecting the mother who stays home to protect her child?

It's obvious to any reasonable person that the purpose of marriage is not to protect 'the' child. Why aren't you answering anybody else's questions?
 

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
how do we go about protecting the mother who stays home to protect her child?

with a commitment from the father that til death do they part
and
if the father should die first, the mother would get the benefits accrued by him during his career

while she stayed home to protect the child
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
with a commitment from the father that til death do they part
and
if the father should die first, the mother would get the benefits accrued by him during his career

while she stayed home to protect the child

:blabla:

People make those vows whether there's children or not! You're nothing but a slimy little troll nowadays who has no idea what he's talking about and continually squirms around direct questions posed and that which undermines your position.

What happened to you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top