First of all, let me say I appreciate an intelligent response on this issue, unlike most of the ones I've gotten. OK, keep deluding yourself into believing that pointing out the absurdity of "sheep humping is a protected right" constitutes an unintelligent response.
I agree that families are the foundation of society. I disagree with the government engaging in social engineering - once you give them that power, they can take it in any direction, and that's what's happened here.
Yeah, states have only had the power to marry since the Reformation. We got screwed immediately...give or take 500 years.
I agree about special benefits, but I am very skeptical that the number of single mothers will increase.
You're arguing against reality. See next post.
That's one of the biggest causes of abortion.
Can you cite data that supports that?
I'm of the mind that a child is better off in a two-parent same-sex household than a single-parent household or the horrible state institutions for the poor children who have no parents.
1. You may be of the mind, but we have no data to support it.
2. Given the prevalence of drug/alcohol abuse and other destructive behaviors in the gay community, I think that's not a safe bet.
3. I believe most kids who have a single mom would be better off raised by my wife and me, so why don't we remake society's laws so that I'm their dad? All we'll have to do is set up a big federal check for me each month.
Really, I do love the "We're already in the stick house, so moving to the straw house is no big deal" argument. Really a classic.
First of all, be fair to CharlesWayneCT; I said this stuff, not him, so no need to drag him in.
OK, keep deluding yourself into believing that pointing out the absurdity of "sheep humping is a protected right" constitutes an unintelligent response.
I never said it was a protected right. I was speaking abstractly about the power of government to enforce morality.
Yeah, states have only had the power to marry since the Reformation. We got screwed immediately...give or take 500 years.
First of all, I never said it would happen immediately. Secondly, we didn't have governemnt involved in so many other aspects of life that your marital status become relevant. Was there any debate over whether same-sex partners should qualifiy for marital employer-based health insurance benefits? We're living in another world now.
1. You may be of the mind, but we have no data to support it.
Do you have any to oppose it? It's hard to quantify. I think it's reasonable to assume that having some parents is better than none.
2. Given the prevalence of drug/alcohol abuse and other destructive behaviors in the gay community, I think that's not a safe bet.
Speaking of supporting data, you have any credible data on this? More importantly, any proof that they're the same people that are trying to adopt? Most hard partiers, gay or straight, have no interest in raising children.
3. I believe most kids who have a single mom would be better off raised by my wife and me, so why don't we remake society's laws so that I'm their dad? All we'll have to do is set up a big federal check for me each month.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, so I'm not touching this one for now.