yguy

Just for the record, the irony escapes me.

Kimpatsu

Now, why am I not surprised?

Kimpatsu

Nothing if not topical.

Colander of Truth

Well we all know this came about because of the civil rights movement freeing-up them dang blacks! After all, they were once considered property, and with no legal standing to sue in a federal court, and not considered persons, according to the Supreme Court, which decision hastened the Civil War. All this in the face of an objective morality which proves that slavery is ok. Therefore, it is perfectly logical to extrapolate the possibility that if homosexuality is unacceptable, soon so will being black, or asian, or indian, or liberal (no nevermind, that one is already gone), or a woman.

dk

(oops triple post)

dk

(oops double post)

dk

Salmon of Doubt: Please excuse me, I'm just an ignorant science student, but that load of jargon doesn't make the most sense to me. I wonder why it is that you can't phrase your argument in simple terms so that any old joe can understand it?
dk: Lets try something different, Read the following, and tell me what it means to you with respect to Lesbian families?
Its an excerpt from the Moynihan Report published in 1965.
Solmon of Doubt: What you're saying seems to be... single moms bad... therefore lesbians also bad because there is no father involved... but it does require a commitment to family which is admirable.
Do men, or gay men show less of a commitment to family? Are their efforts for recognition of marriage or family less admirable?
dk: I wouldn’t use the word “bad”, but it doesn’t bother me like some people. The best example of the x-family comes from inner city black communities where 90% of families with children are headed by unmarried women.. There are more young black men in jail than college. Young men murder and assault more men than women, and commit the vast majority of murder and assaults against women. Women are rarely pedophiles or rapists (statutory or violent). It is simply not equitable to compare deviant behavior of young men with women. I'd say the effects of the x-family presents with greater violence in young men because they are more inclined to violence than women. The effects however are not limited to or necessarily more destructive to young men than women. Nowhere, that I know of, are women more degraded than in the videos and music that comes from young men raised in x-families.

Solmon of Doubt: Also, you failed to answer my other questions. Do you have any response to the extension of your argument that male gay sex is more dangerous and risky than hetero sex so it is worse. So isn't lesbian sex more desirable as it is the safest of the 3?
dk: Males (as a sex) are more dangerous than women, it has nothing to do with being gay or lesbian.

Solmon of Doubt: Do you think lesbians should marry? Is it morally wrong for lesbians to adopt children, or undergo procedures to help them have children? If your opinions on lesbians are different to those on male gay sex, why is that? Is it simply that you feel more threatened by gay men, or is there some mysterious other reason?
dk: Women that have children should order their lives for the sake of children, just like young men. Being gay or lesbian has nothing to do with it. Everybody, including me, is more threatened by men because men commit more violent crimes than women, being gay or lesbian has nothing to do with it. Go review the Justice Department’s statistics on violent crime, don’t take my word for it. The single exception is domestic violence becouse in many x-families men simply aren't present.

In the context of this thread a young man is >12 and <23 years of age.

dk

I thought I'd address your questions directly and support my answers. I didn’t pull the Justice Department Statistics on the, victims and perpetrators of violent crime by sex.

• Solmon of Doubt: Do men, or gay men show less of a commitment to family?
  dk: Since gay men are men I'd have to say no, but gay culture and the policies advocated by gay leaders are destructive to the nuclear family.
• Solmon of Doubt: Are their efforts for recognition of marriage or family less admirable?
  dk: The scandalous public conduct of people in the gay community makes me skeptical.
• Solmon of Doubt: So isn't lesbian sex more desirable as it is the safest of the 3?
  dk: I wouldn’t use the word desirable, but in the context of functionality the x-family is a tragedy, so I'd say no.
  The status of children in single mother households has been determined “at risk”, the ranking of the risks follow. The Census Bureau says.
  1st .Poverty, (35% of custodial mothers were poor, ---- Women in US: Bureau of Census .
  2nd Welfare dependence
  3rd Both parents absent
  4th 1 parent families
  5th Parent that has not graduated High School
  .
  %50 percent of US Children are “At Risk”.
  ----- http://www.census.gov/prod/3/97pubs/cb-9702.pdf
  
  Code:

  Numbers in Thousands
  Census  .unmarried Moms .two Parents
  ______ . ______________ .___________
  2000 . . _16,162. . . . _49,795
  1990 . . _13,874. . . . _46,503
  1980r. . _11,406. . . . _48,624
  1970r . . _7,452. . . . _58,939
  1960. . . _5,105. . . . _55,877

  above: Living Arrangements of Children Under 18 Years Old: 1960 to Present
• Solmon of Doubt: Do you think lesbians should marry?
  dk: Lesbians can’t marry, and I don’t think Lesbian Marriage should be institutionalized.
• Solmon of Doubt: Is it morally wrong for lesbians to adopt children, or undergo procedures to help them have children?
  dk: Adoption and, sperm donors and IVF are different issues issues, but sperm donors and IVF for Lesbians deprive the child of a father. Adoption is such mess from within the foster care system I can’t venture an educated opinion. I don’t think Lesbians make suitable Foster Parents, but I don’t have a clean answer because I think there are many very abusive foster care families.
• Solmon of Doubt: If your opinions on lesbians are different to those on male gay sex, why is that?
  dk: Because lesbians are women, and gays are men.
• Solmon of Doubt: Is it simply that you feel more threatened by gay men, or is there some mysterious other reason?
  dk: Men are more dangerous than women, see previous post.

Treacle Worshipper

Well, I had kinda hoped you'd address my particular situation, rather than taking it into the abstract, but hey.

Originally posted by yguy
If we cannot exclude homosexual relationships from the definition of marriage, we cannot logically exclude x-party marriages, mother-son marriages, etc.

H'm. I presume you mean polygamy by "x-party marriages". I personally have no problem with polygamy (either -gyny or -andry or mixed). Neither do most ancient civilisations, & I believe there are still some around today who practice it.

Incestuous marriages I personally find kind of icky, but they too have a long & noble history. The Egyptian Pharoahs used to marry their mothers/aunts/sisters in order to keep the royal blood in the family.
I don't know if adult incest is classified as a mental illness nowadays. Dr Rick, do you know about this, please?

What I'm trying to show here is that morality changes, and just because you find something immoral, it doesn't necessarily mean it always was or will be so.

Also, as other people have pointed out, if we extend monogamous marriage to homosexuals, it does not necessarily follow that we will extend it to any other form of marriage.

And homosexual marriages which try to imitate conventional marriage with respect to child rearing deprive the child of either a mother or a father.
I'm not going to address this, because it isn't relevant to my personal situation.
TW

dk

Lets clear up what the x-family is...