tronvillain

I think an important factor that lisarea neglected to point out is that male homosexuals are male. While not all males are inclined to be promiscuous, I think males being attracted to males is a pretty good recipe for promiscuity, unless the attitude of average homosexual males towards it is significantly different than that of heterosexual males. It is difficult to see why this would be an argument against gay marriages though.

dk

dk

Sr. Zonules:
If only I could trade my 'ugly' stick for a 'reason' stick...
dk: Ok, I’ll assume you’ve brought you reason stick. Hi Zonules.

Sr. Zonules: Does a hetero couple have the right to deprive a child of 2 mothers or 2 fathers?
dk: Since every child has 1 mother and 1 father, the only reasonable answer would be, no.

Sr. Zonules: Also, if you're gonna bring the children into this, I wonder: what are the percentages (at least in america, but others are good, too) as far as the child's preference vs. the parent's preference?
dk: I’ve got it on reliable sources that mothers and fathers can have as many, many children, and that each child can have only one mother and one father whether they like it or not. Some people think mothers favor girls, and fathers favor boys but I think it varies from person to person. From personal experience I favored my mom, but would like to think all my kids would favor me, though in fact I suspect they might not, but that’s ok its not about me.

Sr. Zonules: also DK: DEFINE DEVIANT
dk: You have dictionary, but if you want to know what I meant by deviant in a particular context, you’ve got to quote me.

Sr. Zonules: It seems that all of your arguements are based upon the fact that gays/lesbians are somehow deviant,
dk: While I feel some homosexuals are deviant, I am certain many homosexuals are loving, hopeful, faithful, happy and inspiring people.

Sr. Zonules: because they have sex with the same sex.
dk: I don’t believe a homosexual is loving, hopeful, faithful, happy, inspiring, or deviant because of sex. That would be a rationalization on my part, and therefore an unacceptable act of judgement.

Sr. Zonules: One can only be deviant if there is a 'norm' or a law that specifically states what the 'norm' should be. (Why should I be labeled as a deviant if I like to eat tomatoes, when the consumption of tomatoes is illegal? (try also to replace 'tomatoes' with alchohol))
dk: If I subscribed to normative ethics then you’d be correct, but I don’t. You certainly shouldn’t be considered a deviant for eating tomatoes, that would be nonsensical. Its illegal to eat some kinds of mushrooms, but only because they are poison. Truth strangers than fiction there really are people that eat mushrooms because they are poison. Some of the people that eat poisonous mushrooms act weird, but I wouldn’t call them deviants.

Sr. Zonules: Do you think that opression of people leads them to do things they would otherwise not do? (I kind of think it does... A good story for this was a female student my mother was teaching shaved her head because her mother told her that it would "embarrass me and my friends" and that the girl will be punished if she did anything that didn't look good (which is HIGHLY subjective and a terrible thing to say). )
dk: Oppression of people? When I was a kid one of my best friend’s little brothers got bone cancer. First he went in for chemotherapy, then they chopped of both his legs, then he died. Oh, yah, he also lost all his hair but that didn’t seem to bother him. I suppose in a sense it is a matter of perspective.

Jinto

Jinto, are you even listening to yourself?

Yes.

For over three decades SIECUS, and Planned Parenthood have had a government monopoly on public schools sex education programs. Their theme from day 1 has been put a condom on it for safe sex, that from day 1 has been painfully ineffective Abstinence base programs have been around for 5 years, and have shown some promise, and spurred parental involvement if nothing else. From the 2002 Federal Budget for SIECUS and Planned Parenthood received 1.1 $Billion, and abstinence based programs about 102 million, about 10% of PPP. I don’t think abstinence based programs are a silver bullet, and their successes may be ancillary, due more to the threat of MDR microbes than substance.
I have no idea about the identity of the right-wing religious fundamentalists, except it sounds like a derivation of Hillary’s right wing conspiracy theory. I recognize many people when threatened argue irrationally with emotion laden stereotypes, I’m no exception to the rule, though I do try for what its worth.

Do you have any statistics to back up these claims of a monopoly by planned parenthood? Because I have never seen any evidence to show that even a significant minority of schools have sex ed that covers even the most basic question of where to get a condom, let alone the full range of contraceptive options. Virtually all sex-ed in the country is either abstinence-only or nonexistent. I personally remember the extent of sex education at my school - it consisted of exactly one 15 minute lecture on why sex is a bad idea followed by the sentence "If you're going to have sex, use a condom." No follow up was presented. Is this what you mean? Because one sentence of a fifteen minute lecture does not make that sentence the message being presented, especially when the entirety of the rest of the lecture is in direct contradiction to that sentence. In this case, sex-education was both nonexistent (no information beyond what any adolescent already knows from watching television), and abstinence-only. But if this is what you are counting as the kind of meaningful sex-education that PP is talking about, then it's no wonder you think it's ineffective.

I have 2 points,
1) gays might benefit from thinking a little bit less about themselves and a little more about their responsibility for what others suffer.
2) that the CDC data being incomplete can be skewed (you cut my next sentence) and I went on to quote the CDC saying 40,000 new cases of HIV are reported annually, and 70% are male and 30% female, and 50% new HIV incidence are in kids <25 years of age.

1) Gays have no more responsibility for the spread of aids than any other group. And if this isn't what you mean, then please clarify.
2) If you think the CDC data is skewed, then why are you using it?

Personally I think if the gay community sincerely wants to promote a monogamous lifestyle, then they need to clean up gay culture to overcome the promiscuous and pornographic values it promulgates within the gay community. I think that’s a wonderfully constructive idea. What’s the gay leadership say about cleaning up the cultural values it promulgates?

Well, I'm not aware of any formal gay leadership existing. However, the majority of gays value monogamous relationships and would like to see their monogamous relationships (that they are already in) be recognized legally by the state. That's what this whole issue is about.

have no idea why people put such great faith in psychological therapies and theories that decade after decade fail to deliver tangible results. I’ve concluded people delude themselves with psychobabble to rationalize infidelities and mitigate guilt.

Who's spouting psychobabble? Who's talking about psychological therapies? Am I reccomending that you be placed in a mental institution? Answer: noone, noone, and no. All I'm saying is that hatred, prejudice and bigotry are harmful factors. That is a simple statement of fact. What you are doing is saying "oh, but such and such is bad, so of course all people with that trait are bad," and then telling me that a group that has been subject to your prejudice and bigotry is having psychological problems when it is obvious that people subjected to prejudice and bigotry suffer psychological problems. And you expect me to reach a different conclusion for this particular instance than I do for every other group that suffers from others' prejudices? Like I said before: GET REAL.

Excellent, it appears we agree that gays need to clean up their culture, and allow health official to do their job. As a society we can set aside our petty differences to deal with the larger picture. The strategic direction should be to effectively track, document, isolate, root out and halt the spread of HIV/AIDs. More resources need to be dedicated to finding a vaccination. We can see from the new SARS epidemic what’s possible, but his has nothing to do with gay and lesbian marriage.

I see that irony escapes you.

First I haven’t said homosexuals are promiscuous, but that gay culture is laden with promiscuous and pornographic values. Second, it is a rationalization to justify gay marriage with heterosexual infidelities. Third, I’ve ad nausium tried to confine my remarks to gay culture, not gay individuals, lesbian culture, or lesbians. Fourth, you personally need to reflect upon “why” you find this discussion so threatening. Its a discussion, not a witch hunt

First, will you PLEASE tell me what this "gay culture" is before you continue making references to it. Second, no one IS justifying gay marriage with heterosexual infidelities. Third, if you tell me that "gay culture" has certain values and then tell me that most gay people don't have these values, you will have to explain just why you think these values are part of gay culture. Fourth, I don't find this discussion threatening.

First, nobody knows how many homosexuals are raising children. Census data indicates the vast majority may be lesbians that changed teams in mid-life, then perjure themselves in family court to take custody of their children from the father, then when mom and her mom’s co-parent split up children are torn between biological and foster parents in a spiteful guilt ridden custody game destructive to everyone, but especially to the children.

First you claim that noboy knows how many homosexuals are raising children, and then claim that you have census data on it, and then you give me something that is both damning ond obviously fabricated (since census data wouldn't cover this). Tell me, do you actually have ANY evidence to support this, or are you fabricating all of it?

Second, this isn’t only a homosexual issue, many single aging career oriented women chose sperm donors, surrogate mothers, in-vitro fertilization in a desperate attempt to beat their biological clock, or the ravages of PID.

So you're against any form of "unnatural" birth as well. Without considering that many women are infertile for reasons that have nothing ot do with age or infection. And conclude that the most obvious source of children for homosexual couples (read: ADOPTION) isn't even an option. Please. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Third, the issue of fraternal, paternal and maternal rights/obligations directly effects the laws (stare decisis) of millions/ thousands of people/families with unforeseeable consequences. Today judges assign custody for .>1/3 of the children in the US, so gay marriage has broad and far reaching legal ramifications. Fourth, the problem with adoption isn’t gays and lesbians, but the cost, endless red tape, bureaucrats and special interest groups that have turned the system into a nightmare.

Third, so what if judges assign custody for > 1/3 of the children in the US (and incidentally, I'd like to see you back this up)? Does that mean that they will be harmed by increasing the number of loving families available to care for them? Fourth, you seem to be suggesting that no child should ever be adopted, but rather go through the cost, endless red tape, bureaucrats and special interest groups that have turned foster care into a bloody nightmare? Puhlease. At least adoption has some sense of stability. And again, how will children be harmed by increasing the number of loving couples ready to adopt? You seem to think that because adoption isn't as good as being born to your own family (an assertation I have to disagree with, at least with adoption you don't have to worry about having parents with a criminal record), that we should nonetheless disregard that there are thousands if not millions of orphans and foster children who want NOTHING more than to be adopted by two loving parents. This is an immediate need, and every qualified parent, regarldess of who or what gender their partner is, needs to be counted.

Fifth, the gay and lesbian marriage proponents are doing an end run through the courts with blatant disregard for the freedoms of others.

Utter bull. It is the constitutional right of every citizen to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Sixth, it is not at all clear to me whether gays are concerned with children, or see marriage as a vehicle to use the law as weapon to wield power over children

Let me make it clear to you: HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT A SOCIAL IDEAL. IT IS NOT SPREAD BY INDOCTRINATION OF CHILDREN, IT IS NOT A CONDITION THAT ONE CAN CHOOSE. HOMOSEXUALS ARE NORMAL PEOPLE WITH NORMAL DESIRES AND DO NOT SEEK TO ADVOCATE HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ONLY THE TOLERANCE THEREOF, AND EQUAL TREATMENT OF THOSE WHO DO PRACTICE HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR. THE HOMOSEXUALS IDEAL WORLD IS ONE WHERE HOMOSEXUALITY IS REGARDED AS NO MORE MORALLY OFFENSIVE THAN PEANUT-BUTTER AND PICKLE SANDWICHES, NOT ONE WHERE IT IS ANY MORE COMMON. THEY DO NOT PREY ON CHILDREN, THEY DO NOT REPRODUCE BY INDOCTRINATION, AND HAVE NO INCLINATION TO WEILD POWER OVER OTHERS.

Mothers and Fathers secure the futures of children by ordering their lives with love for their children in marriage. Gays and Lesbians live tragically sterile lives, so I understand why they want marriage and children. Tragically the nature of their relationships disorders the institution of marriage by severing a child’s maternal or paternal bonds. Gays given their promiscuous and pornographic culture, and their predisposition to confuse love with a dose of MDR microbes have got serious health problems and culture issues. Lesbians are a more complicated circumstance. There are a number of possibilities. 1) they got pregnant out of wedlock by accident, disrespecting both the institution of marriage, themselves and the child. 2) They had children in a marriage, then violated the fidelity of their marriage to change teams, disrespecting the institution of marriage, their husband and their children. 3) they took it upon themselves to find a sperm donor to intentionally deprive the child of their father. 4) they adopt, and this has several scenarios I’m not going to detail, except to reiterate the problem with adoption isn’t gays and lesbian marriage.

How the hell does it "disorder" the institution of marriage to make it inclusive of MM and FF pairings? Gays do not have a "promiscuous and pornographic culture," and you have yet to show any evidence of such. Further, I would LOVE to know where the hell you get the idea that gays don't know the difference between love and microbal infection. You still seem to have this idea stuck in your head that gays prey on young boys to anally rape. Have a neurosurgeon remove the part of your brain that causes you to hold this idiotic assumption, then we'll continue.

As for lesbians (apparently you are not aware that MM couples also adopt children), you would apparently try to portray them as only being able to have children through lies and deciet. This while NOT showing that it actually happens. And tell me, why do you put the most frequent way of FF couples having children last?

I have great respect for human sexuality, marriage, family and children. But, as I’ve detailed, gay and lesbian marriage confuse family values with an act of infidelity that violates the family. I do understand stuff happens in life and everybody can only do their best given the circumstances, but to institutionalize infidelity for the sake of gay and lesbian marriages fundamentally violates the family.

Oh do tell me how the hell institutionalizing marriage is istitutionalizing infidelity.

No I don’t think gays cause or invent social injustices, deadly MDR microbes, pornography, promiscuity, infidelity, or other wrongs that afflict people with unbearable suffering. But gays do rationalize all of the above in a futile attempt to blame others for the vices consummate with gay culture. By rationalizing the many vices gays make charity impossible, and in this sense I’m reaching out to be charitable. I’ve addressed the father issue above, kids need a mother and a father. Gay and lesbian marriage isn’t a cure for dysfunctional and broken families but a rationalization for performing an amputation on families.

Again with the gay culture, you are obsessed with gay culture. Q for II: why do we get so many people obsessed with things that don't exist?

If you were truly being charitable, then you wouldn't be trying to rip innocent children away from their fathers and fathers, or from their mothers and mothers. And you still keep on with the "gay marriage isn't a cure for dysfunctional families." That's like saying we shouldn't use antibiotics because they don't cure viral infections. Gay marraige isn't SUPPOSED to cure dysfunctional families, it is supposed to do what any marriage does: allow people to live a secure life with the person that they love. That's it. You're the one claiming that this is supposed to have anything to do with curing dysfunctional families.

dk: The definition of culture is available in any dictionary, if you still have questions about “gay” then do a goggle search on “’gay culture’ NYC”. The first entry took me to an article, the first two paragraphs follows..

If you’re really interested go to gay bar, theatre, art show etc... Wherever you go, the dominant themes of gay culture will promote values laden with promiscuity and pornographic landscapes. My other observation was the unbelievable #s of Universities URL post pro-homosexual literature. Here’s one from .ABCNEWS.com : New Museum Celebrates NYC as Sex Capital : . Openly gay culture. ... brand-new museum, located at Fifth Avenue and 27th Street in Manhattan, is set to open Saturday with its inaugural exhibit, "NYC Sex: How ... abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/ museumofsex020930.html - 48k - Apr 3, 2003 - Cached - Similar pages. Now if you can come back with some entries that indicate gay culture promotes chastity, fidelity, and monogamy I’d love to read it, but that’s not gonna happen.

You know, somehow I think that what you're doing is awfully similar to people doing searches on the bloods and crips and then concluding that "black culture" is inherently violent. Now, if we're defining gay culture as being held by the majority of gay people, then please produce STATISTICAL evidence that gay culture promotes ANYTHING other than people being allowed to do what they want in the privacy of their own homes. And don't keep giving me crazy andecdotes from Christian websites, unless you want me to give you the WCOTC website as evidence that white culture is inherently violent.

That’s relatively unrelated to Western and Eastern Civilization.

Actually, it's FROM western and eastern civilization.

Don’t keep making me hit you ad nausium with this stick. Its none sense to rationalize gay and lesbian marriage on the basis of vices of fathers and mothers. You can’t fix drunkards, wife beaters, and child abusers with gay marriage. Its obvious our society has become hostile to the nuclear family. If the nuclear family were functional then gays and lesbians wouldn’t be a problem. Root cause is the ticket, not blame and shame rationalizations. .

Don't make me keep beating you ad nauseum with this stick. We aren't trying to to fix any of the above. What we are trying to do is give people who want to be in a loving, monogamous relationship with the person they love the chance to do so regardless of their sexuality. You are the one who is connecting the two.

Gay and lesbian marriage is bad idea because it further erodes the fidelity of the nuclear family by severing the bonds between children, mothers and fathers. Children need their mothers and fathers, and husbands and wives need to order their lives with love for their children, and each other.

You still seem to think that gay marriage is taking kids away from hetero families. The fact is that there are FAR more kids around than there are stable families, so what's happening is that people who are able to provide a stable family are giving one. What part of this do you not understand?

That’s an analogy to explain why gay and lesbian marriage is an inappropriate treatment of dysfunctional and broken families. You might have another argument I don’t know about, but the arguments you’ve offered so far are mere rationalizations. I’ve presented several scenarios where gay and lesbian marriages further aggravate and inflame an already tragic situation with laws legislated from the courts.

Please, if you want harm, take a look at this website. It details quite clearly a scenario (real-life, not hypothetical) where gay adoption bans are further aggrivating and inflaming a situation that before the idiots in law enforcement got involved was just fine, and they've turned it into a mess.

Gurdur

On second thoughts, after reading back in this thread, I am simply not going to say anything.

Treacle Worshipper

dk, I have taken out my facetious comments in the hope that it will persuade you to respond to me. I look forward to hearing from you when you have the time. TW.

Originally posted by Treacle Worshipper
Originally posted by dk
I should have said anal sex, sorry if this was confusing.
And what exactly is so terrible about anal sex? I mean, it's not really my thing, but I don't want to stop others enjoying themselves. And I do hear that some straight men like anal sex, so what's wrong with that?

The nuclear family contains a husband and wife ordered to raise children, for better or worse. Polygamy and polyandry are more complex derivations of the nuclear family.
Do you think poly marriages should be legalised, if they are only an extension of the nuclear family?

Single mothers head of household, same sex marriages, and designer families have begun to re-order human life with new configurations.
What about those single mothers who are widows? Are they re-ordering human life?
I agree that the public & legal nature of relationships is changing, but I don't see that this is a bad thing per se.

Without a legitimate commitment to family people become unmoored from the human family, in my world.
Why do you assume that gays are not committed to their families? I am single, but I am committed to my parents, brother & extended family. If I have the happiness to create another family, with a man or a woman, I will be committed to that family also. I think TomboyMom is a great example of a gay person who is totally committed to her family.

I don’t have a problem with gays or lesbians until they mess with kids/family.
How do you define "mess with"?

No, I don’t think being gay or lesbian is any different than being born with a bad temper. I don’t think a person with a bad temper has a right to loose control of themselves and violate other people, ditto for gays and lesbians.
How are two consenting adults doing whatever they want to do in the privacy of their home violating other people?

In my world people are born flawed, me more flawed than most. That doesn’t bother me in the least.
Do you consider homosexuality to be a flaw?

I don’t get upset until people start messing with kids, and when people mess with kids we get into big time evil.
You keep saying this, but why do you assume "gay = will mess with kids"?
You can't catch homosexuality, you know.

Homosexuals are people, and as people are culpable for the acts they commit themselves too, just like me. Any other supposition dehumanized homosexuals.
Would I be correct in saying that you think "being" homosexual is not wrong, but "doing" homosexual things is wrong?
If so, why is it wrong?

Gay culture views pornography as art and orders their community’s identity with promiscuous sex. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why the gay community suffers so horribly from HIV/AIDs.
Please, what is the "gay culture"?
BTW, I have since looked up "gay culture". It is not in the Oxford Pocket Dictionary. It is not in the Collins English Dictionary. Dictionary.com says this:

No entry found for gay culture.
4 suggestions found:
gas holder
gas-cooled reactor
Gazella thomsoni
goggle-eyed

None of the sources they give for "gay" include gay culture, either.
So, please provide your definition of "gay culture", preferably with a reference.

No, that gays have no business messing with kids.
Once again, how do you define "messing with", and why do you assume "gays" (all gays, by implication) do whatever you mean by it?
And I'll leave the rest, because it's not something I know about.
Looking forward to you response, dk.
TW

dk

Part 1 of n
dk: Jinto, are you even listening to yourself?
Jinto: Yes.
dk: I’m listening also.
dk: http://www.house.gov/burton/RSC/word/Weldon10.PDF gives some numbers. I quote, “It seems clear that Advocates for Youth, SIECUS, and Planned Parenthood are more interested in advancing their agenda by silencing any alternatives and in protecting their wallets at the expense of the health and well being of youth.”

Jinto:
Virtually all sex-ed in the country is either abstinence-only or nonexistent. I personally remember the extent of sex education at my school - it consisted of exactly one 15 minute lecture on why sex is a bad idea followed by the sentence "If you're going to have sex, use a condom." No follow up was presented. Is this what you mean? Because one sentence of a fifteen minute lecture does not make that sentence the message being presented, especially when the entirety of the rest of the lecture is in direct contradiction to that sentence. In this case, sex-education was both nonexistent (no information beyond what any adolescent already knows from watching television), and abstinence-only. But if this is what you are counting as the kind of meaningful sex-education that PP is talking about, then it's no wonder you think it's ineffective.
dk: Others can surmise what they want from SIECUS and PP sex-ed programs, as do I. No matter what else SIECUS and PP teach, they teach “put a condom on it for safe sex.” Nobody can argue that sex-ed programs are 1) ineffective and 2) SIECUS and Planned Parenthood have gotten 90% of the federal funding for over 30 years. I call that a monopoly, but it might be called a strategic advantage, strangle hold, or a dozen other adjectives. The bottom line never changes, they have performed woefully inadequately without tangible results. I quite frankly don’t understand why the government continues to give $ billions to organizations that don’t produce what they advertise. You can defend these guys, but why?

Jinto: I have 2 points,

1. dk: gays might benefit from thinking a little bit less about themselves and a little more about their responsibility for what others suffer.
   Jinto:Gays have no more responsibility for the spread of aids than any other group. And if this isn't what you mean, then please clarify.
   dk: When one gay man gives another man a dose of hiv/aids microbes by an act of anal sex somebody’s responsible. MSM to this day accounts for 54% of infected AIDs survivors, while gays make up between 1 and 4% of the general population.
2. dk: that the CDC data being incomplete can be skewed (you cut my next sentence) and I went on to quote the CDC saying 40,000 new cases of HIV are reported annually, and 70% are male and 30% female, and 50% new HIV incidence are in kids <25 years of age.
   Jinto:If you think the CDC data is skewed, then why are you using it?
   dk: In context, I explained where the CDC has incomplete data, the data can be skewed. In the area of hiv incidence of exposure the CDC has incomplete data, and says so. In many areas the CDC and NIH have complete information. In any case the CDC and NIH keep and secure the data others are by law compelled to submit.

dk: Personally I think if the gay community sincerely wants to promote a monogamous lifestyle, then they need to clean up gay culture to overcome the promiscuous and pornographic values it promulgates within the gay community. I think that’s a wonderfully constructive idea. What’s the gay leadership say about cleaning up the cultural values it promulgates?
Jinto: Well, I'm not aware of any formal gay leadership existing. However, the majority of gays value monogamous relationships and would like to see their monogamous relationships (that they are already in) be recognized legally by the state. That's what this whole issue is about.
dk: You’re either in denial or being intellectually dishonest. I have a bold challenge for anyone on this subject. Find one article in a gay publication that takes a strong position to promote chastity for gay teens, and I’ll throw in the towel. The closest I’ve come was an article written by a young gay man that explained, without marriage his virginity meant nothing. My question is, “How does he know he lost or kept his virginity if it means nothing?” I listened, looked, sniffed, licked and felt with all my senses for an answer, but I heard nothing, saw nothing, smelled nothing, tasted nothing and felt nothing. How can I possibly know?

dk: have no idea why people put such great faith in psychological therapies and theories that decade after decade fail to deliver tangible results. I’ve concluded people delude themselves with psychobabble to rationalize infidelities and mitigate guilt.
Jinto: Who's spouting psychobabble? Who's talking about psychological therapies? Am I reccomending that you be placed in a mental institution? Answer: noone, noone, and no. All I'm saying is that hatred, prejudice and bigotry are harmful factors.
dk: That wasn’t directed at you, but at everybody including me. There’s a school of thought called Eliminativism, “eliminative materialism and the propositional attitude”. This is tough to follow, but simple, profound, ironic and funny. Eliminativism is based on the proposition that “folk psychology” is false, so if correct nobody will believe in it. Folk psychology isn’t anything material, propositional, critical, sensual, definite, systematic or logical, but what the masses passively absorb about psychological theory over the course of their lives from the material world. Folk psychology registers mentally at a subliminal level so directs attitudes with propositions about science that are unscientific, but in itself factors large in the theatre of public behavior and opinion. I personally can’t bring myself to believe in Eliminativism, but my disbelief makes it plausible, possible and perhaps unavoidable. I thought I’d offer that little tidbit to lighten up for a second. hehehehehe

Jinto: That is a simple statement of fact. What you are doing is saying "oh, but such and such is bad, so of course all people with that trait are bad," and then telling me that a group that has been subject to your prejudice and bigotry is having psychological problems when it is obvious that people subjected to prejudice and bigotry suffer psychological problems. And you expect me to reach a different conclusion for this particular instance than I do for every other group that suffers from others' prejudices? Like I said before: GET REAL.
dk: Since I didn’t say oh..., you’re being rather presumptuous. In fact apart from what I said, for you to assert anything about me reveals your personal bias, attitudes and expectations. I personally have no idea what you’re talking about. Its bad when gay communities are decimated by HIV/AIDs for whatever reason it happens. Surely you don’t think hiv/aids in the gay community is normal. To speculate that oppression against gays causes hiv/aids is positively metaphysical and contrary to epidemiological observations about the pathogenesis of the disease. .

dk: Excellent, it appears we agree that gays need to clean up their culture, and allow health official to do their job. As a society we can set aside our petty differences to deal with the larger picture. The strategic direction should be to effectively track, document, isolate, root out and halt the spread of HIV/AIDs. More resources need to be dedicated to finding a vaccination. We can see from the new SARS epidemic what’s possible, but his has nothing to do with gay and lesbian marriage.
Jinto: I see that irony escapes you.
dk: I like irony. From an immunologic perspective medical professionals and public health officials learned how to treat epidemics from Typhoid Mary . She was an illiterate Irish immigrant cook that carried typhoid but didn’t suffer from the symptoms, she was a cotangent. Today we know typhoid spreads by a microbe from the stool of the carrier to the carriers hands, then into the food during food preparation. Mary was by all accounts a great cook, reliable worker and a nice caring person to boot. Tragically and unintentionally she killed many of the people for whom she preparing food. All she had to do was wash her hand thoroughly before preparing food, but they didn’t know that back then. Today we know better, right!

1. dk: First I haven’t said homosexuals are promiscuous, but that gay culture is laden with promiscuous and pornographic values.
   Jinto: First, will you PLEASE tell me what this "gay culture" is before you continue making references to it.
   dk: We can take up gay culture later in the post, but unless you’re a mind reader, in the future please don’t tell me what I said, if you don’t understand something I said, ask me and I’ll be glad to expound. When you reply to what I didn’t say, you are responding to your own egotism and bigotry.
2. dk: Second, it is a rationalization to justify gay marriage with heterosexual infidelities.
   Jinto: Second, no one IS justifying gay marriage with heterosexual infidelities.
   dk: In an earlier posts you rationalized, “Ah. So somehow gay marriage is so horrible because the couple could break up, or one of the parents could die, as opposed to heterosexual marriage where the risks are exactly the same.” This is not only a rationalization, but one based upon pretext in the context of something you believe. I said (paraphrased) child custody battles were horrible, and that gay marriage would make a bad situation worse. The ripple affect from gay marriage upon family courts could potentially affect everybody that goes through a custody battle, not just gays divorces. Again, unless you’re a mind reader, don’t tell me what I meant, respond to what I say, or ask me to expound.
3. dk: Third, I’ve ad nausium tried to confine my remarks to gay culture, not gay individuals, lesbian culture, or lesbians.
   Jinto: Third, if you tell me that "gay culture" has certain values and then tell me that most gay people don't have these values, you will have to explain just why you think these values are part of gay culture.
   dk: I said gay culture was laden with promiscuous and pornographic values. I’m not a mind reader, so I can’t possibly know what most gay people value. Gay culture however, because it is in the public domain, determines the verifiability , coherence, and consistency of my comments. As I demonstrate later in the thread my comment turns out to be correct, not because of what I said or believe, but because it can be verified by anyone except 1) an literate person 2) a person in denial whose convictions are so strong they overwhelm reason. .
4. dk: Fourth, you personally need to reflect upon “why” you find this discussion so threatening. Its a discussion, not a witch hunt
   Jinto: Fourth, I don't find this discussion threatening.
   dk: Then could you please explain. Why do you deny the verifiable, pretend to be a mind reader, argue with yourself on a discussion board, and support your viewpoint with tired old rationalizations. I find this odd, because at times you appear to be a bright articulate guy.

dk

dk: You’re arguing with yourself. I said census data indicates many women, once married with children, divorced their husbands to become lesbians, and perjured themselves in family court to get custody from the husband of the children. The Census Bureau made the comment to explain why they fudged the statistics. They explained, the data was incomplete. Why was the data incomplete, because it was the first time they inquired about sexual orientation and had no historical baseline to verify their calculations.
dk: You’re arguing with yourself. You begin your response with “So” to substitute “your pretext” for what I said. Its moronic, why do you do it?
dk: Again, You begin your statement with “So” to substitute “your pretext” for what I said. Its moronic, why do you do it?
dk: Utter denial, social legislation from the bench is one of the most hotly debated and widely publicized issues of our times. Abortion rights, gay rights, religious rights, free speech rights, minority rights, gun rights and privacy rights hinge upon the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court hangs on the precipice of a 5-4 simple majority Your response is quintessentially an example utter and complete denial. Why do you do it to yourself?

dk: I’ll view your statement as a complex conundrum of dogma mixed with pretext that mangles both. I never said homosexuality was a social ideal spread by indoctrination like a social disease. I said gay culture promulgated values laden with promiscuous and pornographic landscapes, a proposition that can readily be verified. In my opinion all the evidence indicates that gay culture wants its values validated, tolerated, legitimized, respected, accepted and celebrated by the greater society. In the early 1980s the AIDs crisis unmercifully ravaged gay communities in SF, LA and NYC. On the heels of the sexual revolution, civil right and the feminist movement the AIDs crisis became a fulcrum to elevate gay culture and associations to center stage. Gay associations were granted a seat at the table of public policy. Tragically they leveraged their elevated status to petition the courts for privacy rights. The courts granted them protection, and in effectively thwarted the epidemiological investigations. Since then Gays, Lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, national teacher unions, SIECUS/PP, university elites and civil liberty groups have banded together to petition the court to forcibly socialize gay values in public schools, boy scouts, 4 H clubs, YMCAs and any other organization in a position of trusted authority over youth. They chose to stay in the shadows for the pretence of enlightenment while their lovers died horribly in droves. I think the experience must have driven many gay men insane.

dk

dk:: The nuclear family is the basic social unit of Western and Eastern Civilization. The nuclear family is ordered to reflect the biological facts conjoined with the sociological realities derived from human nature. It has consistently met the needs of civilization for the last 3,000 years to make progress possible. The nuclear family promulgates and maintains itself on the principle of subsidiarity as a self contained, self duplicating autonomous unit. Each generation provides to the next generation a stable loving environment to raise children in a tumultuous world. Here’s how it works, children are raised under the protection of a marriage covenant. In a marriage covenant the mother and father commit themselves in a public ceremony to love, honor, care, and protect one another and their children till death parts them, and then in private the newlyweds consummate the marriage with sexual intercourse, more traditionally called the marital act. The fruit of the covenant, biology being what it is, generally blesses the family with children that are loved, raised, protected and cherished by the parents. When the parents grow old the children honor them. Gay and Lesbian marriage fundamentally changes the order of the nuclear family by severing the enduring relationship between parents and their children. It is impossible for a homosexual couple to consummate a marriage because they lack the necessary biological organs. Since gay and lesbian relationships are sterile, they can only acquire children by severing the bonds that order the nuclear family.

Jinto:
As for lesbians (apparently you are not aware that MM couples also adopt children), you would apparently try to portray them as only being able to have children through lies and deciet.
dk: Unethical people have always lied and deceived one another to obtain what they want. That’s why lies and deceit undermine the fabric of society turning people that might be friends into enemies. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Hussein all rose to power on lies and deceit for the sake of power, and commissioned unfathomable atrocities to acquired and hold the power they wanted. Maybe they needed the power because women love powerful men, maybe they needed power because their father loved them too little & their mothers too much, and maybe they needed the power because they had a small penises. Maybe all of the above. I have no idea, nor do I care, but I know lies and deceit undermine the fabric of society by turning friends into enemies, love into hate, hope into apathy, faithfulness into bondage and reason into cynicism.

Jinto:
This while NOT showing that it actually happens. And tell me, why do you put the most frequent way of FF couples having children last?
dk: I can’t prove the sun going to rise tomorrow. I put FF couples last because I think many are good mothers to their children, and were physically/psychologically abused, battered, brutalized and traumatized by their husbands, social services, courts, and society. I have contempt for men that so brutalize women and their children. I can’t justify perjury, nobody can, but I recognize genuine victims that love, live and would die for their kids.
dk: Nobody can institutionalize marriage any more than they can reinvent the wheel.
dk: You’re in a state of denial.

Jinto: If you were truly being charitable, then you wouldn't be trying to rip innocent children away from their fathers and fathers, or from their mothers and mothers. And you still keep on with the "gay marriage isn't a cure for dysfunctional families." That's like saying we shouldn't use antibiotics because they don't cure viral infections. Gay marraige isn't SUPPOSED to cure dysfunctional families, it is supposed to do what any marriage does: allow people to live a secure life with the person that they love. That's it. You're the one claiming that this is supposed to have anything to do with curing dysfunctional families.
dk: I’ll offer an analogy, people use antibodies to cure viral infections all the time, but the truth is antibodies are ineffective against viral infection but create MDR bacteria that pose a much greater threat than the original virus. The medical profession deceives the public by trying to meet their needs, and in doing so they become unwitting agent in the pathology of disease. When a doctor rationalizes their negligence they become corrupt. But when a doctor is honest with themselves, colleagues and patients and struggles to be diligent in the face of adversity they become competent even heroic.
dk: Come on Jinto, the crepes, bloods,,, etc. do have a culture. What do you think gang colors, gang signs, gang initiations, gang tagging, gang graffiti, gang turf, gang wars, gang drive by shootings and gang violence is all about.

dk: That’s relatively unrelated to Western and Eastern Civilization.
Jinto: Actually, it's FROM western and eastern civilization.
dk:: I was being sarcastic, related to but not entirely relevant to the relative relational concerns in relationhip to the original topic. Willie go round in circles, ba, ba, ba, baaa, baa, baa
dk: Last I heard everybody is male or female, and born too one set of biological parents, a man and a women. The mere fact that gays and lesbians want to marry isn’t a reason to reformat the nuclear family in their image. To assert that that somehow gay and lesbian marriage benefits children requires evidence, and you haven’t offered any.
dk: That’s not what I said, 1) dad and co-dad marriage severs the maternal bonds of the child, to meet the homosexual needs of the gay couple 2) mom and co-mom in a lesbian marriage severs the paternal bonds of the child, to meet the lesbian needs of the child. This is a legal reality with broad and far reaching effects that you simply refuse to address. Hey, I am critical of no fault divorce, premarital sex and unmarried mothers as a remedy for family dysfunction for the same reasons, as a remedy they stink because they subjugate the welfare of children to address the wants of mommy and/or daddy. We know today just how lousy a remedy these reforms ordered, by the evidence accumulated over the last 30 years.
dk: Please don’t change the topic to gay adoption, the problem with adoption isn’t gays and lesbians but all the bureaucrats, red tape, etc... The adoption system hemorrhages from the wounds inflicted upon the nuclear family by social engineers to accommodate the sexual revolution, divorce reform, radical feminism, hippies, and corporate greed.

Jinto

Okay. I warned you...

Ladies and gentlemen, it has become clear why dk doesn't want gays to marry. He's white, and white culture strictly forbids the acceptance of any kind of deviance, commanding them instead to crowd, stifle, and attempt to destroy anyone different from them. White culture has been quite clear on this point, and white organizations such as the WCOTC have always promoted intolerance as a nessecary part of being white. In fact, there is not a single white publication where associating with nonwhites or sexual deviants is even described as allowable. Clearly, further argument is futile, as whites are so wrapped up in their delusions of self superiority pushed by white magazines that they cannot open their maind to any logical argument presented by one of the "mud races."

Wow. That was painful to write.