Homosexual Marraige

[Juliette]

So erm.. because other children might laugh, gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children?!

Jim, Jim.. you are close to convincing me to change my vote to "in favour".

[Cole]

So erm.. because other children might laugh, gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children?!

Jim, Jim.. you are close to convincing me to change my vote to "in favour".

You and I know it's for more than that...
Just that I didn't want to start an endless debate on the moral/twisting etc that would cause to children with someone who is much thinking the opposite. Getting lazy there with time going!
I still think it's a very bad idea for them to have children, not only for that reason.
But I have a bit enough now of that debate.. So I think I'll leave it for now and move to something else!

[MajorLeeHurts]

*sigh* Pops for someone wearing an Obama tag you do sure seem a bit conservative.

Theres nothing wrong with raising a child and teaching tolerance I believe it does more harm to raise children in a straight family who could be intolerant.

Take your self as an example who's homophobia allows you to justify the judgment you cast on homosexuals would you then raise children who were tolerant or intolerant of humans based on sexual preference?

[Cole]

*sigh* Pops for someone wearing an Obama tag you do sure seem a bit conservative.

Theres nothing wrong with raising a child and teaching tolerance I believe it does more harm to raise children in a straight family who could be intolerant.

Take your self as an example who's homophobia allows you to justify the judgment you cast on homosexuals would you then raise children who were tolerant or intolerant of humans based on sexual preference?

I keep saying them I am not socialist or left wing for such reasons.
I have some conservatives ideas, so what?

Lol at last paragraph. If I was homophobic I wouldn't have same speech as I did have. Did I say it should be forbidden to be homo on the law or something like that? Do witch hunt on them?
I don't think so!

I would teach my children that those people are different, that they don't do like they should given human nature, but that as long as they don't annoy and want things like marrying or do their stuff in public, there's nothing wrong to say about them.

Guys are meant to be attracted to women and the opposite. When children are young they can be influenced easily, we must protect them from being influenced. Because they would simply miss alot by not being straight

Children need both a father and a mother to raise them, because each parent has a role, being raised by only mother since I was 14, I see the difference from when both my parents lived together. Each parent gives something that the other can't.

They *really* need a mother AND a father. Believe me. I also know what I say, even if I'm not 35 or something like that.

[Mystake]

Mariage has been made to be the union between a man and a woman, I don't see why it should change..
Afterall, these people live freely in couples, and it's not like all heterosexual people marry when in couple, so I fail to see why they could be allowed to do it.

agreed.

Marriage is the unity of a couple under the church. It should be up to the church to unite them, not laws etc.

If gays wanna get married, make up a new word for it. Like... Unioned?
The union of these two males or females
as opposed to marrying them.

If there's one thing for me, I'm old fashioned when it comes to marriages.


edit: like Pops I agree to be properly nurtured a child needs both male and female influence on their life. Sure you can have a male and a queen, but nothing is the same as a mother and father because you can't get a motherly feel from a gay couple.

[semper]

i have stay silent on this tread, mainly because of RL reasons, and the fact that my personal experience has little to do with this game. However, u all seem to be hell bend on expounding on issues that u may or may not have little personal experience with. So to wit......

i was married for 20 years. It had it's up and downs, but produced 3 children(all girls) who both my former wife and i love very much. As it is with human nature, people change, and become new things. My former wife, as she entered her 40's , began to question issues about her self and who she was in the world. After we had separated, she began a relationship with a woman, which lead to there living together with the kids. I, at first, was upset by this, and questioned the effects on my children. As the years have past, i have begun to have an unspoken respect for both my former wife and her girlfriend. My children all excelling in there life challenges, graduating colleges or attending with high honors. My former wife's girlfriend shows both love and compassion for them, and has by all respect become a parent to them also. They show no personable ill effects to this transition my ex wife has gone through in her life, and in ways seem a bit better for it. They are more understanding of the differences of people, the ability to be who one wants to be. I, personally, have been in ways the better for it, though the process to understanding these changes in some one i once loved dearly have been long, and at times emotional draining. I believe, for my childern, the key to being healthy adults was, and is, that the issues faced by these living arrangements where spoken to head on, and look at clearly.

now u know more about me than i ever wished, but u touched a nerve.

Main reasons of why I fully disagree with them marrying/having children, just been mentionned!
People don't seem to realize what would happen to a child with two dads/mums...they should consider it before saying anything positive about it.
If adults with sanity and intelligence are hostile to it, then imagine what children/teens reactions would be infront of it.

more experience in this field than you know through a similar extension, but that is for my closest friend only to know.

However, one case of it having no effect does not mean what I said was wrong.

@ Lois, I dont know if you were responding more to what Jim wrote or me, but what I said is a complicated explination. Like I said, look at observational learning for a brief idea, but thats by no means the full theory. I will write more on this topic as of later.

[MajorLeeHurts]

so you would rather have a child raised by Britney Spears and Michael Jackson cuz lord knows they can breed and are wonderful parents lol .

Just because they are male and female doesn't make them perfect parents or make a perfect child at all. Just because men and woman can breed doesnt mean they should or would do a better job.

and isnt the fact that a gay couple would go through all they had to go through speak to the fact that they have commitment and a desire to love and raise a child which is more than what most children do have.


and oh ya ...
Obama was raised by one parent he looks to have turned out ok

[_willie_]

Mariage has been made to be the union between a man and a woman, I don't see why it should change..
Afterall, these people live freely in couples, and it's not like all heterosexual people marry when in couple, so I fail to see why they could be allowed to do it.

agreed.

Marriage is the unity of a couple under the church. It should be up to the church to unite them, not laws etc.

If gays wanna get married, make up a new word for it. Like... Unioned?
The union of these two males or females
as opposed to marrying them.

If there's one thing for me, I'm old fashioned when it comes to marriages.


edit: like Pops I agree to be properly nurtured a child needs both male and female influence on their life. Sure you can have a male and a queen, but nothing is the same as a mother and father because you can't get a motherly feel from a gay couple.

Actually marrige is no longer under the chuch in fact never was under the church, it was what ever religion you happen to be apart of. pagians would gather around the marrige stones, jews go to synagoge, and hindu's go to temple. not always a chuch...


Marrige is a law binding two people together that share a common interest. weather it be male compaionship or female the end result is still the same. as well you can go to city hall and get married you do not have to go to a place of relgious gathering to be seen as husband and wife or let alone wife and wife or husband and husband.

let everyone fall in love with who they want be apart of who ever's lives that they want to. it is there choice in the end not the choice of the masses to deside how they live there life with a loved one.

[Colton]

Yes. Cos we`re not in the middle ages any more. Cos we`re supposed to live in a modern secular society that is not hostage to "values" of religion(s). Cos marriage is an institution of two persons binding together uder law for certain legal benefits; like line of inheritance, medical decisions for ones partner etc. etc. etc., why should those be reserved for only certain couples that accumulate wealth/live their life together?
Pragmatically it just makes sense. Its not fair/right to set serious obstacles in peoples way based on their bedroom preferences. It is absurd. And it only collapses when people get all religious and sanctimonious about it.

Indeed.

[Demeisen]

marraige is between a man and a woman. those who swing another way can always enter into a civil partnership, which is marraige in all but name right?

gay couples shouldnt be allowed to adopt. at least not in this time.

imagine what it would be like for a child to go to their 1st day at secondary school with their two gay dads (wearing daffyd style clothes of course). that kid would get mocked back to 1984. fact.

maybe in the future where same sex parents wont draw as much notice/insults/attention it will be ok. that would need to be in a more tolerent and therefore better society. but not yet. its not fair on the child.

theres also the major importance of both a male and female role model for children.


btw i am in no way opposed to lesbians. infact i encourage people to wear comfortable shoes. but still no marraige/adoption yet. . . yet


oh and thats a good idea from mystake about being unioned.

[n3M351s]

A Marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.

Therefore a Homosexual Marriage is unfeasible.

If Homosexuals want to 'marry' they should come up with a new word for it.

May I suggest Homosexiage or Garriage.

[[KMA]Avenger]

i say we stick all gays in the desert where there is plenty of room for them to do as they please and make their own laws as to what they can and cannot do with regards to marriage and adoption.
we then stick an electrified 200 foot fence around said desert with automated 50 cal gun emplacements.
in such an environment they can do as they please and leave us alone, they would be happy and we would be happy...

everybody is happy, but till such a thing actually happens, they live in a heterosexually dominated world and therefor abide by our laws and tolerances or lack thereof., there's always the desert if they don't like it!

sorry if my post offends anyone or is to strong but i've already stated i hate them with a passion and with good reason.

[papa~smurf]

worked good in Germany in '39 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


WOW

[Cole]

Erm G, it looks like a concentration camp or Guantanamo...gays sure aren't doing as they should, given nature of humanity...but going this way is overly excessive by far. And that isn't what democracies do (aka the big bad NWO for some lolz)!

[semper]

Erm G, it looks like a concentration camp or Guantanamo...gays sure aren't doing as they should, given nature of humanity...but going this way is overly excessive by far. And that isn't what democracies do (aka the big bad NWO for some lolz)!

well no actually. Its the way of society Jim, not humanity. Humanities way is to pass on genes for the survival and betterment of the human race. Homosexual people can STILL do that, just because they seek pleasure in different shades, does not make their intentions unnatural. I give the example of dogs (its the best i got at the moment) a dog will go with anything to get the rush it wants. At the end of the day, humans are animals. It really only becomes that much more complicated when we start adding in emotions and extra value to a pleasure seeking experience, which are then twisted and affected by society. (A shocker there...when does that not cause problems...)

I just thought I would throw that one out there. See if it ruffles any feathers or causes any steps back in arguments...