I'm against gay marriage.

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: marcello

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: marcello

Originally posted by: MaxFusion16
why not just let homosexuals marry and let natural selection take its course. Within a few generations, the homosexuals would become extinct with no offsprings. Problem solved.

It's not a genetic trait, so that won't happen.

EDIT: Are you saying that sexual preference is a product of a person's upbringing/environment?

I don't know what it is a product of. But to say that it's entirely genetic and will "weed" itself out is wrong.

All the data/studies I've seen indicate that there is a genetic component at work, but not in an absolute sense. So one person may be more likely than another to be gay based on genetics, but there's still a "nurture" contribution as well.

 

[Audiophile1980]

I'm suggesting that if this were to occur in nature, homosexuality would not be a favorable trait for survival, and over time nature would take care it. Survival of the fittest.

Well that would still be wrong. Any RECESSIVE gene will survive natural selection since it not EVIDENT (does not affect its host) in every case. This means that this host will survive to pass the gene on and it will manifest itself in some people (but not all since it's recessive).
This is why we have genetic diseases and why they haven't been weeded out.
Evolution 101.

 

[vital]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

.......and two men or women can't deal with financial burdens or raise a healthy child why, exactly?

assuming a child is wanted in the family...
when a child is raised with 2 dads, it's missing the love & qualities of child rearing from both mom & dad. true some children are left behind with these qualities when parents are divorced, but the decision of divorce is brought out after the child is born or after the couple is married. in a gay marriage, the couple has already made the decision to allow the child to be raised without the qualities of mom & dad child rearing.

 

[MaxFusion16]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: MaxFusion16

Originally posted by: Audiophile1980

So Cheney and the chair of the GA Christian Coalition are secretly gay? They both have gay daughters.....please explain how this could have happened.
.

While there is overwhelming evidence (brain structure) that it is genetic, such a gene must be recessive. (as any gene which isn't selfish like a genetic disease) That means that it will most certainly be passed on as many people who carry it are straight and thus will reproduce. Also, many gay men use surrogate mothers and many lesbians use sperm banks.

I'm suggesting that if this were to occur in nature, homosexuality would not be a favorable trait for survival, and over time nature would take care it. Survival of the fittest.

That's not what you said. You said

homosexuals were forced to lead a normal life due to social and religious pressure, so the trait is passed on.

which implies that people like Cheney and/or his wife must be secretly gay and have suppressed it.

i was responding to eli's comment on how homosexuality might have been passed down, my initial comment clearly stated that if they were allowed to marry, the problem might just work itself out.

 

[Audiophile1980]

Originally posted by: PhasmatisNox
I am against America and Freedom.

I live in Massachusetts.

Fixed.

 

[Audiophile1980]

assuming a child is wanted in the family...
when a child is raised with 2 dads, it's missing the love & qualities of child rearing from both mom & dad. true some children are left behind with these qualities when parents are divorced, but the decision of divorce is brought out after the child is born or after the couple is married. in a gay marriage, the couple has already made the decision to allow the child to be raised without the qualities of mom & dad child rearing.

That's the most faulty reasoning I've ever seen.
So single mothers shouldn't be allowed to have kids?
Ban reproduction without marriage!!!
Two mothers, two fathers, same as a mother and a father. What is it you think a mother and a father can give that two fathers or two mothers can't?
Certainly more than a single parent.
It's all moot anyway, since the point of a marriage is not necessarily reproduction.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: vital

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

.......and two men or women can't deal with financial burdens or raise a healthy child why, exactly?

assuming a child is wanted in the family...
when a child is raised with 2 dads, it's missing the love & qualities of child rearing from both mom & dad. true some children are left behind with these qualities when parents are divorced, but the decision of divorce is brought out after the child is born or after the couple is married. in a gay marriage, the couple has already made the decision to allow the child to be raised without the qualities of mom & dad child rearing.

Are you saying that living with a single or divorced parent is better for a child then a healthy same-sex couple?

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: MaxFusion16

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: MaxFusion16

Originally posted by: Audiophile1980

So Cheney and the chair of the GA Christian Coalition are secretly gay? They both have gay daughters.....please explain how this could have happened.
.

While there is overwhelming evidence (brain structure) that it is genetic, such a gene must be recessive. (as any gene which isn't selfish like a genetic disease) That means that it will most certainly be passed on as many people who carry it are straight and thus will reproduce. Also, many gay men use surrogate mothers and many lesbians use sperm banks.

I'm suggesting that if this were to occur in nature, homosexuality would not be a favorable trait for survival, and over time nature would take care it. Survival of the fittest.

That's not what you said. You said

homosexuals were forced to lead a normal life due to social and religious pressure, so the trait is passed on.

which implies that people like Cheney and/or his wife must be secretly gay and have suppressed it.

i was responding to eli's comment on how homosexuality might have been passed down, my initial comment clearly stated that if they were allowed to marry, the problem might just work itself out.

No, you implied that gay people make more gay people when in fact it's straight people producing gay people for the most part. As such, your assertion is absurd.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: vital

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

.......and two men or women can't deal with financial burdens or raise a healthy child why, exactly?

assuming a child is wanted in the family...
when a child is raised with 2 dads, it's missing the love & qualities of child rearing from both mom & dad. true some children are left behind with these qualities when parents are divorced, but the decision of divorce is brought out after the child is born or after the couple is married. in a gay marriage, the couple has already made the decision to allow the child to be raised without the qualities of mom & dad child rearing.

So it's a different parental arrangement, but I don't see how this is necessarily better/worse than the typical mom/dad arrangement. The assumption that this is somehow bad for the child is based on the assumption that a gay marriage is somehow inherently "bad" as well. Unless you have data showing children raised in gay households have problems (other than the obvious; ridicule by the small-minded) I don't see your point.

The other bit is that not all couples have kids anyway.

 

[Thraxen]

No, you implied that gay people make more gay people when in fact it's straight people producing gay people for the most part. As such, your assertion is absurd.

That's not at all what he said. Clearly, it's not what he said since that would be impossible (going on the idea that it's genetic).

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

No, you implied that gay people make more gay people when in fact it's straight people producing gay people for the most part. As such, your assertion is absurd.

That's not at all what he said. Clearly, it's not what he said since that would be impossible (going on the idea that it's genetic).

Can you not read? He said that it was repressed homosexuals living a straight life producing the gay people in the world.

homosexuals were forced to lead a normal life due to social and religious pressure, so the trait is passed on.

That's pretty clear to me.

 

[Red Dawn]

Man I long for the days before Rubes learned about the internet!

 

[Thraxen]

Can you not read? He said that it was repressed homosexuals living a straight life producing the gay people in the world.

OK... I stand corrected, but your statement really doesn't contradict anything he has said. He could still say that some of these "straight" people are the repressed gays he is talking about.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Can you not read? He said that it was repressed homosexuals living a straight life producing the gay people in the world.

OK... I stand corrected, but your statement really doesn't contradict anything he has said. He could still say that some of these "straight" people are the repressed gays he is talking about.

Right, and I said it's interesting that someone like Cheney managed to crank out a gay daughter. The point is that he doesn't have a point. Even if you were to somehow ID and sterilize all gay people currently walking the planet, there'd be a whole new batch in a few years.

 

[MaxFusion16]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: MaxFusion16

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: MaxFusion16

Originally posted by: Audiophile1980

So Cheney and the chair of the GA Christian Coalition are secretly gay? They both have gay daughters.....please explain how this could have happened.
.

While there is overwhelming evidence (brain structure) that it is genetic, such a gene must be recessive. (as any gene which isn't selfish like a genetic disease) That means that it will most certainly be passed on as many people who carry it are straight and thus will reproduce. Also, many gay men use surrogate mothers and many lesbians use sperm banks.

I'm suggesting that if this were to occur in nature, homosexuality would not be a favorable trait for survival, and over time nature would take care it. Survival of the fittest.

That's not what you said. You said

homosexuals were forced to lead a normal life due to social and religious pressure, so the trait is passed on.

which implies that people like Cheney and/or his wife must be secretly gay and have suppressed it.

i was responding to eli's comment on how homosexuality might have been passed down, my initial comment clearly stated that if they were allowed to marry, the problem might just work itself out.

No, you implied that gay people make more gay people when in fact it's straight people producing gay people for the most part. As such, your assertion is absurd.

I was stating one possibility on how the trait might have been passed down, and I understand that straight people with the recessive gene could produce homosexual offsprings. However, assuming no human intervention, if the homosexuals were allowed to marry, then the spread would be limited to the straight people with the recessive gene, thus establishing an equilibrium.

I don't understand what the big deal is regarding gay marriage, just let them marry already. If homosexuality stemmed from genetics, then it's natural, and you just can not suppress nature.

 

[Thraxen]

Right, and I said it's interesting that someone like Cheney managed to crank out a gay daughter. The point is that he doesn't have a point. Even if you were to somehow ID and sterilize all gay people currently walking the planet, there'd be a whole new batch in a few years.

But isn't he the one that also said it's a recessive trait? If so, that point (about Cheney) still doesn't contradict what he has said. Now I have no clue if it's any sort of genetic trait or not, but I could see where his point may have some merit (albeit slim). Working from a genetic standpoint, if many of the people expressing the normally recessive trait got married and if most chose to adopt rather than use a surrogate wouldn't that result in the eventual decline of the trait (serious question)?

 

[vital]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

.......and two men or women can't deal with financial burdens or raise a healthy child why, exactly?

assuming a child is wanted in the family...
when a child is raised with 2 dads, it's missing the love & qualities of child rearing from both mom & dad. true some children are left behind with these qualities when parents are divorced, but the decision of divorce is brought out after the child is born or after the couple is married. in a gay marriage, the couple has already made the decision to allow the child to be raised without the qualities of mom & dad child rearing.

So it's a different parental arrangement, but I don't see how this is necessarily better/worse than the typical mom/dad arrangement. The assumption that this is somehow bad for the child is based on the assumption that a gay marriage is somehow inherently "bad" as well. Unless you have data showing children raised in gay households have problems (other than the obvious; ridicule by the small-minded) I don't see your point.

The other bit is that not all couples have kids anyway.

i do know that in general, a child raised with both mom & dad is more healthier than a child who is raised with only one parent. however, there are no data showing gay households w/ problems. but nonetheless, it's still missing the qualities from traditional child rearing. so without data that gay households do raise children that are as healthy as any other family, the couple is taking a risk at the child's expense.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Right, and I said it's interesting that someone like Cheney managed to crank out a gay daughter. The point is that he doesn't have a point. Even if you were to somehow ID and sterilize all gay people currently walking the planet, there'd be a whole new batch in a few years.

But isn't he the one that also said it's a recessive trait? If so, that point (about Cheney) still doesn't contradict what he has said. Now I have no clue if it's any sort of genetic trait or not, but I could see where his point may have some merit (albeit slim). Working from a genetic standpoint, if many of the people expressing the normally recessive trait got married and if most chose to adopt rather than use a surrogate wouldn't that result in the eventual decline of the trait (serious question)?

No, because (assuming the recessive trait theory is true) most people are just carriers for the trait and not actually gay and would thus marry/reproduce normally. It's then a genetic roll of the dice each time as to whether the offspring ends up gay or not. If they don't end up gay, they're probably a carrier and the cycle repeats.

This is analogous to certain adult-onset genetic conditions where there's no way to know the fate of your offspring short of genetic testing beforehand (except that the genetics of "gayness" is still pretty murky at best).

Serious answer.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

A gay couple cannot support and raise a healthy child?

EDIT: Dammit Fausto

Sorry, as the forum "Homo-Defender" (I forget what idiot called me that way back when) it's my duty to stay on top of this thread.

"Homo Defender" LMAO who called you that?!?!?!

Ausm

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: vital

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

.......and two men or women can't deal with financial burdens or raise a healthy child why, exactly?

assuming a child is wanted in the family...
when a child is raised with 2 dads, it's missing the love & qualities of child rearing from both mom & dad. true some children are left behind with these qualities when parents are divorced, but the decision of divorce is brought out after the child is born or after the couple is married. in a gay marriage, the couple has already made the decision to allow the child to be raised without the qualities of mom & dad child rearing.

So it's a different parental arrangement, but I don't see how this is necessarily better/worse than the typical mom/dad arrangement. The assumption that this is somehow bad for the child is based on the assumption that a gay marriage is somehow inherently "bad" as well. Unless you have data showing children raised in gay households have problems (other than the obvious; ridicule by the small-minded) I don't see your point.

The other bit is that not all couples have kids anyway.

i do know that in general, a child raised with both mom & dad is more healthier than a child who is raised with only one parent. however, there are no data showing gay households w/ problems. but nonetheless, it's still missing the qualities from traditional child rearing. so without data that gay households do raise children that are as healthy as any other family, the couple is taking a risk at the child's expense.

You're making a vast amount of assumptions there with zero data backing your position. You may recall a certain Lance Armstrong was raised by his mom only after his father abandoned them and I'd say he turned out alright.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: vital
i am against gay marriage as well. but i do not think that marriage is a religious term. marriage is a legal contract. it has a lot to do with financial burdens and more importantly raising a healthy child.

A gay couple cannot support and raise a healthy child?

EDIT: Dammit Fausto

Sorry, as the forum "Homo-Defender" (I forget what idiot called me that way back when) it's my duty to stay on top of this thread.

"Homo Defender" LMAO who called you that?!?!?!

Ausm

I don't remember, it was quite a while ago in a similar thread.

 

[TitanDiddly]

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: PhasmatisNox
I am against marraiges and civil unions.

I live in Massachusetts.

In general?

?

I beleive that homosexuality is wrong, but I do not hate homosexuals.

 

[Fritzo]

I think gay relationships should only be held on the SIDE of the marraige. :Q

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: PhasmatisNox

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: PhasmatisNox
I am against marraiges and civil unions.

I live in Massachusetts.

In general?

?

I beleive that homosexuality is wrong, but I do not hate homosexuals.

Dude yoiu should be for it, that would mean more desperate straight woman, that way you might stand a remote chance of getting laid at least once in your life

 

[djheater]

Originally posted by: Fausto
*sigh*

I'm going to drive over and kick you in the crotch if you post something like this again.

ROADTRIP!