Calzaer

As usual, you're missing the important part of the post you're responding to. Let me single it out for you:

Either start actually using real evidence, as in, evidence that has nothing to do with your completely worthless unfounded speculation, or STFU. I'm sick of it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. You're going to start getting the Magus treatment from now on: "PROVE IT OR SHUT UP."

yguy

Then I guess you and they have a dilemma, since I have no intention of being silent of my own accord any time soon.

Perhaps you'd have more effect if you used bigger type and put it in bold italics with lots of exclamation points.

anakata

Same sex marriages have been legal and practiced in Sweden for some while now, and we (I used to live there if you didn't know :-)) have yet to see this "erosion of moral infrastructure" and "gender confusion".

Nowhere357

Everybody doesn't understand you. Maybe you fail to make yourself clear, and constantly evade questions.

Think this through: Support your position, or there is nothing to substantially challenge. Let's say you're right, then intuitively, if we ban automobiles (homosexuals), there will be no more car wrecks (gender confusion). Car wrecks (gender confusion) are a problem. Of course you don't want to ban autos (do you?) so why do use different thinking and jump to a conclusion for one subject and not the other?

So it's not a case of "claim that gender confusion isn't a problem", it's a case of your conclusion does not follow from your reasons, and you have to support your position or it fails.

You won't/can't support your position, so it fails.

prediction: yguy's next post will be without content.

Fr.Andrew

(yguy): It is patent that "homosexual marriage" robs the child of one gender role model. It is intuitively obvious to me, at least,that such deprivation encourages gender confusion. No one here has substantially challenged this, preferring instead to essentially claim that gender confusion isn't a problem.
(Fr Andrew): It is not "patent" that "homosexual marriage" robs a child of one gender role model, no matter how many times you assert that it is.
It is not intuitively obvious (to anyone except you) that "homosexual marriage" encourages gender confusion, no matter how many times you assert that it does.
Everyone (except dk) has challenged you to substantiate those points for several weeks now...and except to refuse, or to offer more of your opinion--you've come up dry.

Calzaer

yugy: So you admit to being a troll? IE, someone who throws out inflammatory opinions and refuses to back them up with facts?

winstonjen

yguy:

As does single parenting, divorce (to a lesser extent), death of a parent, etc.

And you haven't explained why it is a problem, either. If men can cook better than their partners, would you still want the woman to cook?

yguy

Show me how.

Originally posted by Nowhere357:

That is not my position.

This is closer:
HS behavior is not a priori deviant.
HS behavior is a normal part of animal behavior.
HS behavior does not violate rights.
THERFORE hs behavior is not deviant.

yguy responded:

Public copulation (PC) is not a priori deviant.
PC is a normal part of animal behavior.
PC does not violate rights.
THERFORE PC is not deviant.

It appears to me, then, that PC may be justified by your position as easily as can HS. Kindly point out the flaw in the logic. Failing that, it appears your position needs rethinking.

There will be no more discussion between you and me on this subject, Nowhere man, until you address the above.

yguy

In the vast majority of those cases, there is no prior intent to deprive a child of a gender role model. What are we gonna do, make it illegal for one parent to die?

Don't be dense. The ability to cook has nothing to do with gender. The ability to be a father or a mother does.

yguy

A troll is also someone who says things you don't agree with, and whom you find annoying. I obviously fit that definition. That being the case, if you keep reading my posts, I can drive you crazy. If you insist on giving me that power, it's not my problem.