Gay people happen to be the most selfish, self-centered, dysfunctional people there are, and if their civil union ends up being deleterious or not really doesn't really concern them. It's about *them* not anyone else.
If anyone else ends up being hurt , socially, psychologically, mentally, sexually, so be it.
Don't forget, this gay couple will do anything to have their adopted kids follow the same lifestyle patterns the single gay couples do. Don't you dare tell me that they wouldn't do whatever they could to have their adopted kids choose their won sexuality even if it meant going against their own sexual preferences.
Justice Ginsburg:I'd Prefer the Egyptian or South African Constitution to the US
Judge Ginsburg:Please let me know if the Egyptian Constitution allows for gay couples to adopt.
Usually, I'd advise women traveling in Egypt to have bodyguards accompany them to prevent crime of a sexual nature but that's not any poblem you would ever have to worry about it.
I don’t trust science anymore anyway.
Or mankind, pretty much.
You’re right, and for the record, we do have scientific answers. They’re just hidden by the homopsychiatric cabal.
The problem is that an adopted child has NO SAY in the matter when two butt plumbers decide to adopt him/her to be the “child” of ADAM & STEVE.
I know for myself, I would want both a mom & a dad, not Adam & Steve.
Now that recreation is a civil right, I enjoy shooting AR15’s.
If the test is what effect it has on children , then we need to allow prayer in the classroom.
I don’t mean this the way that its sounds, but Scalia’s point that science has not determined that gay parents have adverse effect on children is beside the point imo. The wide, PC interpretation of 14A’s Equal Protections Clause by liberal media, including Obama guard dog Fx News, in support of gay marriage is wrong. This is evidenced by Section 2 of 14A which discriminates on basis of sex, age and citizenship.
So 14A allows states to make laws that discriminate on bases not protected by enumerated rights, sex not protected where 10th Amendment protected power to regulate marriage is concerned, as long as the states discriminate equally against non-traditional marriage.
Here’s the answer as to whether or not it hurts children:
“58 percent of the children of lesbians called themselves gay, and 33 percent of the children of gay men called themselves gay.”
snip http://www.aolnews.com/2010/10/17/study-gay-parents-more-likely-to-have-gay-kids
I wonder if Scalia is not signalling that he’ll vote for gay marriage. He’s saying there’s no proof children are hurt or helped.
Who is she kidding and why is she a Justice on the Court of the worlds’ greatest country?
Isn’t it odd the gays usually have lawsuit and court somewhere when you mention them.?
After a number of years observing the changes in our population, it is my opinion that you can say the very same thing about a large sector of the traditionally married couples as well, throughout the Western civilization. People born after about 1963 seem to trend this mindset of self-love above others is prevailing more and more. Those preferring same-sex gratification are merely a slice of the general attitude. Those preferring historical man/woman gratification are just another slice of the same selfishness. The segment preferring godly standards and behavior is nosediving.
Just in case anyone forgets what the real thing looks like.
Studies have shown that divorce has a deleterious affect on children as well. Does that raise divorce to a Constitutional issue?
This case should be decided on Constitutional grounds. Marriage is a state issue, not a federal one. The people of California decided that they don't want same sex marriage. Therefore same-sex marriage is and should continue to be illegal in the state.
Isn’t it interesting we know many gay men are incredibly promiscuous, sometimes having thousands of sex partners from compulsive, daily hook ups.
Yet we get the image of all these wonderful sedate couples who are pillars of the community.
It’s all a pretend game.