"Gay 'marriage' doesnt hurt society"

[Regular_Atheist]

A ridiculous analogy. There are huge differences between instructing on basic civilized behavior and something like sexuality which has generally been up to parents as to when, what and how these issues are addressed.

One would expect a child in elementary school would be told not to bonk each other over the head or kick or scratch or pull hair. It’s idiotic to think a teacher would have to have written permission to maintain order in the classroom. But parents should not have to guard against agenda based teaching on matters of sexuality. Further one of the major objections is the timing of these curricula. This starts WAY too young. Five year olds do not need to be told “don’t bully your gay playmates” because neither they nor their playmates are gay or overtly heterosexual. When elementary school kids express graphic knowledge of sexual activity, hetero or homo, it indicates they are being subject to inappropriate actions or discussions. It is also a clear sign of sexual abuse.

Nor do children need to read “Heather Has Two Mommies” long before they even understand basic biology.

Clearly the idea is not to guard against some epidemic of bullying of “gay” six year olds but to start’em young and indoctrinate them.

Wait, wait, wait, do they do the ‘anti-gay bullying’ thing in primary schools? I know they don’t in the United Kingdom, and I don’t even think they do it in secondary schools. If they do, though, that’s dumb. Most people with homosexual tendencies will have noticed sometime in secondary school, though, regardless of whether they’re ever open about it in their time in the school.

One thing that confuses me is why you’d need to specifically address anti-gay bullying and couldn’t just address bullying in its entirety. I’m a little sceptical about whether or not they do teach primary school children what you claim they teach them.

 

[edwest2]

That’s the whole point. The bullying is not just about being gay, it’s about stopping bullying, period. That is a good goal - a great goal. But to make it all about gays, with token help to others, is the wrong approach. It’s obvious - very obvious - they think that if they get to the little kids that all of it will go away. The problem is that most people who kill each other, know each other. and that mugger, that drug addict who mugs you, will cut your throat if you don’t give him your money. It’s about human behavior, period. That guy with the gun doesn’t care if you’re gay, straight or from Mars, he just wants to settle a grudge, you hurt him in some way or drugs control his mind.

In Detroit, last Summer, there was a rash of black on black shootings. Bored punks, out of work, trying to prove themselves, belonging to gangs and getting crazy off dope. The quote in the newspaper was “Another man’s life don’t matter anymore.”

Peace,
Ed

 

[LisaA]

Wait, wait, wait, do they do the ‘anti-gay bullying’ thing in primary schools? I know they don’t in the United Kingdom, and I don’t even think they do it in secondary schools. If they do, though, that’s dumb. Most people with homosexual tendencies will have noticed sometime in secondary school, though, regardless of whether they’re ever open about it in their time in the school.

One thing that confuses me is why you’d need to specifically address anti-gay bullying and couldn’t just address bullying in its entirety. I’m a little sceptical about whether or not they do teach primary school children what you claim they teach them.

You apparently failed to read Biblepoe’s post where he was trying to justify introducing topics of homosexuality into the classroom to prevent bullying:

Don’t bully gay classmates," or, "Treat your gay classmates like everyone else."

Like most homosexual apologists, they cloak their agenda in preventing victimization rather than the real agenda of normalizing homosexuality at an early age.

You are wrong that these topics are not introduced in the elementary schools in America. That has been a very frequent reason for parents’ objections. It’s one thing to teach middle schoolers basic biology, it’s quite another to graphically report on how homosexuals “do it” and to try to make believe Heather’s two mommies are the same as Joey’s mom and dad. There is also a well known book about some supposedly gay penguins, aimed at grade schoolers. Once again the real agenda is to play “let’s pretend” that homosexual relations are identical to heterosexual relations…this at an age when most children don’t have a CLUE about ANY sexual relations. Little girls walk around arm in arm. They are being loving and sweet, not homosexuals. Little boys wrestle and poke each other in fun. Again this is not sexual behavior, it is the way little boys act around friends. Sexualizing children is one of the major problems in our society IMO and the incidence of STDs, pregnancies and abortions is good evidence my opinion is based on reality.

I don’t believe these topics should be addressed with pre-pubescent kiddies. They have enough to do to learn arithmetic and reading. That’s actually why most parents think their kids are in school.

Lisa

 

[maximus]

I’m not going to lie, guys. Polygamy sounds really fun.

There, I said it.

Having a stay at home wife and a wife in the work force sounds fun and practical. It would be nice to have a one’s own harem. However, there are always consequences when tinkering with traditional marriage.

In the US communities where polygamy exist what happens is that the young boys are kicked out into the streets so they do not represent competition for those seeking to have more wives. Would you throw out you own sons in order to have a sexually over indulgent lifestyle. .I wounder how this works out in the Muslim world where you can have 4 wives; I guess that would make for a lot of angry disenfranchised young men.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Having a stay at home wife and a wife in the work force sounds fun and practical. It would be nice to have a one’s own harem. However, there are always consequences when tinkering with traditional marriage.

In the US communities where polygamy exist what happens is that the young boys are kicked out into the streets so they do not represent competition for those seeking to have more wives. Would you throw out you own sons in order to have a sexually over indulgent lifestyle.

Oh, I totally forgot that sex made children. Whenever you come up with an idea that seems perfect, nature always finds a way to ruin it, doesn’t it? Maybe that’s why homosexuality is so appealing.

Would I throw out my sons in order to have more sex? Probably not. I don’t know how much of a threat they’d be to me. If they wanted to sleep with one of their dad’s wives, I’d be a little surprised. Though know you’ve reminded me of the sex = children rule, I think I’ve gone off the idea. Or maybe I’d take better precautions. Or just have relationships with other men.

 

[marymary1975]

A ridiculous analogy. There are huge differences between instructing on basic civilized behavior and something like sexuality which has generally been up to parents as to when, what and how these issues are addressed.

One would expect a child in elementary school would be told not to bonk each other over the head or kick or scratch or pull hair. It’s idiotic to think a teacher would have to have written permission to maintain order in the classroom. But parents should not have to guard against agenda based teaching on matters of sexuality. Further one of the major objections is the timing of these curricula. This starts WAY too young. Five year olds do not need to be told “don’t bully your gay playmates” because neither they nor their playmates are gay or overtly heterosexual. When elementary school kids express graphic knowledge of sexual activity, hetero or homo, it indicates they are being subject to inappropriate actions or discussions. It is also a clear sign of sexual abuse.

Nor do children need to read “Heather Has Two Mommies” long before they even understand basic biology.

Clearly the idea is not to guard against some epidemic of bullying of “gay” six year olds but to start’em young and indoctrinate them.

Futher homosexual activity is NOT “as healthy as heterosexual activity” and to claim so is to be either ignorant or on a crusade. Again please refer to basic biology. One’s ailmentary canal is not built for either the intrusion of foreign objects or the biological results of said intrusion. Homosexuality is not a normal behavior. Your slip is showing but good try.

Lisa

Lisa’s answer is perfect. All I am going to add is that you are incorrect as to that there are limits to the right of the parent to tell the school what not to do. The reason precisely of the high rates of bullying in the US is because teachers tend to be afraid of disciplining kids because of the many lawsuits won by parents over schools and teachers. Reality is that the teacher’s actions are the ones restricted to the extent that if a kid gets hurt at school the school won’t do anything until they have contacted the parent. Not that long ago, a friend of mine’s son fell at school and had a fracture and the school had problems finding the mother. The school left the kid sitting in pain, they wouldn’t even give him a pain killer or first aid, for one hour and 45 minutes until the mother answered their call. Can you explain to me how come the school can teach about homosexuality to my kid without my permission but they are not even capable of giving my child a pain killer when my child gets sick while waiting for me?

 

[Regular_Atheist]

You apparently failed to read Biblepoe’s post where he was trying to justify introducing topics of homosexuality into the classroom to prevent bullying:

Don’t bully gay classmates," or, "Treat your gay classmates like everyone else."

Like most homosexual apologists, they cloak their agenda in preventing victimization rather than the real agenda of normalizing homosexuality at an early age.

Yeah, I totally ignored his post. Silly me. :3

But, yeah, I didn’t see anything in his post that suggested this was being taught in primary schools. But, yeah, it’s bad. If it happens.

You are wrong that these topics are not introduced in the elementary schools in America. That has been a very frequent reason for parents’ objections. It’s one thing to teach middle schoolers basic biology, it’s quite another to graphically report on how homosexuals “do it” and to try to make believe Heather’s two mommies are the same as Joey’s mom and dad. There is also a well known book about some supposedly gay penguins, aimed at grade schoolers. Once again the real agenda is to play “let’s pretend” that homosexual relations are identical to heterosexual relations…this at an age when most children don’t have a CLUE about ANY sexual relations. Little girls walk around arm in arm. They are being loving and sweet, not homosexuals. Little boys wrestle and poke each other in fun. Again this is not sexual behavior, it is the way little boys act around friends. Sexualizing children is one of the major problems in our society IMO and the incidence of STDs, pregnancies and abortions is good evidence my opinion is based on reality.

Yeah. Very bad. If it is actually happening.

I don’t believe these topics should be addressed with pre-pubescent kiddies. They have enough to do to learn arithmetic and reading. That’s actually why most parents think their kids are in school.

Yeah, agreed.

 

[LisaA]

Yeah, I totally ignored his post. Silly me. :3

But, yeah, I didn’t see anything in his post that suggested this was being taught in primary schools. But, yeah, it’s bad. If it happens.

Yeah. Very bad. If it is actually happening.

Yeah, agreed.

Yes’ I’m afraid so although it’s usually cloaked in “anti-bullying” or “diversity” programs. Here’s a quote from a recent Washington Post article (WaPo is VERY liberal)

"School officials say it’s important to start early, before children’s perceptions of gay life are dominated by playground put-downs.

Two national gay rights organizations have proposed new elementary teaching guides. Under the banners of “Ready, Set, Respect!” and “Welcoming Schools,” they offer lesson plans and tips for introducing diverse families, challenging gender stereotypes and countering hurtful language. (One popular tip sheet: What do you say to “That’s so gay?”)

In elementary schools, a growing number of openly gay — and legally married — parents are also pushing for change. They want their families to be reflected in classroom discussions and on back-to-school-night bulletin boards"

There are school sponsored events, “gay days” with innocuous titles to fog the real agenda…i.e. anti-bullying, diversity, tolerance are the supposed objectives but the programs serve to normalize homosexuality and sponsors are homosexual activist groups.

Again it’s indoctrination not education.

Lisa

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Yes’ I’m afraid so although it’s usually cloaked in “anti-bullying” or “diversity” programs. Here’s a quote from a recent Washington Post article (WaPo is VERY liberal)

"School officials say it’s important to start early, before children’s perceptions of gay life are dominated by playground put-downs.

Two national gay rights organizations have proposed new elementary teaching guides. Under the banners of “Ready, Set, Respect!” and “Welcoming Schools,” they offer lesson plans and tips for introducing diverse families, challenging gender stereotypes and countering hurtful language. (One popular tip sheet: What do you say to “That’s so gay?”)

In elementary schools, a growing number of openly gay — and legally married — parents are also pushing for change. They want their families to be reflected in classroom discussions and on back-to-school-night bulletin boards"

There are school sponsored events, “gay days” with innocuous titles to fog the real agenda…i.e. anti-bullying, diversity, tolerance are the supposed objectives but the programs serve to normalize homosexuality and sponsors are homosexual activist groups.

Again it’s indoctrination not education.

Wow. I’m surprised that’s happened in the USA, considering the fact that it’s a lot more religious than the United Kingdom, where I’ve seen no signs of this stuff going on.

 

[marymary1975]

Here are some examples of same-sex couples having their lives practically effected because they don’t have the came legal rights as married opposite-sex couples:
urban.org/uploadedpdf/410939_cost_of_marriage_inequality.pdf (note the subtitle, “Lack of Marriage License May Cost Tens of Thousands of Dollars When Partner Dies, Increases Risk of Losing One’s Home”)
reason.com/24-7/2012/12/17/montana-supreme-court-denies-same-sex-be
articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-11-22/news/bs-md-co-samesex-police-20111122_1_health-benefits-arbitrator-first-union-contract
articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/22/local/la-me-richard-adams-20121223
bankrate.com/finance/taxes/3-tax-traps-same-sex-couples-can-avoid-1.aspx

This make me wonder, are you in favor of the government forming a legal institution for same-sex couples that is functionally identical to civil marriage, but under a different name?

First of all with regard to the health insurance issue, yes it is true that married couples can get the other spouse under one’s employer health plan. However, we have Obamacare and under Obamacare if one can’t get under the other health plan, the other can very easily get health insurance from another source. Also, not all married couples can actually get their spouse under his/her employer’s insurance. It depends on the size of the company, number of employees, policies of the insurer and many other factors so calling this a “benefit” of married couples is not accurate as many married couples also can’t obtain this “benefit.” So the only real difference between married and unmarried couples is that married may get health insurance from the same provider while unmarried have to get two different providers. In the end, both do have access to health insurance so I don’t see what is the big issue here.

Second, with regard to the argument that one gets sick and the other one doesn’t get access to the hospital etc. There is a very simple solution called Health Care Proxy. A Health Care Proxy will give access to the other person to medical records, can visit the hospital, take medical decisions, etc. So when gay marriage activist through the argument that one partner cannot take medical decisions over the other, that is incorrect. Moreover, this argument is terribly misleading for everybody because people now think that the “magic” of marriage is going to give one spouse automatically rights when it comes to the medical area to the other one. This is completely wrong because HIPPA laws do apply to spouses too! Many married couples also face the same issues that homosexuals claims because been married doesn’t grant you any magical rights over HIPPA or over hospital policies (which have very little to do with the law, hospitals can create their own policies) so actually a Health Care Proxy is something both married and unmarried people need.

The articles you posted talk about SS Benefits, 401k, IRAs, etc. There is another very simple solution for all those issues and is something call Estate Planning! Estate Planning is something that is precisely done to avoid all these problems. Then again, this is another terribly misleading argument that creates the incorrect belief in people that marriage is going to give them a magical power and they are not going to face any of these issues. Married couples can face these same issues and that is why even married people early on have Estate Planning done.

With regard to homes, that requires a long explanation and I am not going to sit here to give a law class. However, I am going to sum it up saying that there are different kinds of tenancies and pretty much everything depends on what kind of tenancy the couple chooses – BTW yes, you do get to choose the kind of tenancy you want so if someone chooses a kind of tenancy that does not favor their situation, I am sorry but it is their responsibility to do the research. Also, one statement that surprised me was the one that said same sex couples still are making their mortgage payments while heterosexuals don’t. The person who wrote that either is talking about other countries or has zero knowledge about real estate situation in the US because in this country very few, and when I say very few I actually mean it, very few people in the US own a house free from mortgages, and with the way that the real estate market and the economy are in the US, a huge number of heterosexual married people have either lost their houses or own them underwater so starting by that, that article is completely wrong.

The only issue that does not actually has a solution, granted, is the immigration issue. However, if you take into account that when it comes to Immigration the laws of USCIS boil down as to what each officer likes or don’t like, the whole issue takes a whole new perspective. Immigration do not want anymore people in this country and knowing them I can assure you that even if gay marriage was legalized, Immigration is going to find a way to deny and deport spouses of homosexuals. Heterosexual married couples do also face deportation issues more than what you think. Immigration denies everyday green card to spouses of Americans and they have the most unfair, discriminatory and cruel laws in the world. If you think that legalizing SSM is going to resolve the Immigration problem your perception is incorrect.

 

[marymary1975]

But, yeah, I didn’t see anything in his post that suggested this was being taught in primary schools. But, yeah, it’s bad. If it happens.

Yeah. Very bad. If it is actually happening.

Yeah, agreed.

What you and Lisa are saying is exactly my problem with this issue. My six year old came home asking me one day what it meant that is Ok for two girls to pleasure each other. I almost fainted! When I asked her where did she hear that she said the teacher had taught them that at school and she didn’t understand what the teacher meant. As Lisa says, one thing is teaching at Middle Schools about Biology but a 6 year old whose mind is far and away from the sexuality subject, this is plain and simple wrong and cannot understand how people can think that there is nothing wrong about it. This has nothing to do with bullying, this is sexualizing children, this is teaching children that they should behave in a sexual way with their friends and this is very problematic. Obviously, I took my daughter out of that school.

 

[LisaA]

What you and Lisa are saying is exactly my problem with this issue. My six year old came home asking me one day what it meant that is Ok for two girls to pleasure each other. I almost fainted! When I asked her where did she hear that she said the teacher had taught them that at school and she didn’t understand what the teacher meant. As Lisa says, one thing is teaching at Middle Schools about Biology but a 6 year old whose mind is far and away from the sexuality subject, this is plain and simple wrong and cannot understand how people can think that there is nothing wrong about it. This has nothing to do with bullying, this is sexualizing children, this is teaching children that they should behave in a sexual way with their friends and this is very problematic. Obviously, I took my daughter out of that school.

Exactly and thank you for the well written post on various legal issues.

The problem with introducing these concepts is that it pushes CHILDREN toward familiarization with topics way beyond their age or ability to understand. Children are remarkably uninterested in Heather’s two mommies’ sex life. And there is no reason to get them thinking, talking or acting on these subjects. FWIW I have the same opinion of discussing man/woman sexual relations. IOW it’s just totally inappropriate at these young ages, confusing at best and destructive at worst. But for the most part heterosexual married couples do not feel compelled to have their relationships part of five year olds’ classroom work. It’s clearly agenda driven rather than having the children’s best interest at heart.

As to your child’s experience, I wish I could say I’m shocked. But nothing surprises me anymore. And as was earlier stated, parents have very few rights even to KNOW about what is happening in schools, much less given the opportunity to opt their child out of the discussion.

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

Wow. I’m surprised that’s happened in the USA, considering the fact that it’s a lot more religious than the United Kingdom, where I’ve seen no signs of this stuff going on.

Trust me Regular Atheist, our country may be more religious than European countries but school is a place where religion is NOT ALLOWED anymore.

Amazingly enough I survived in an era where we quoted from the Bible during the Christmas pageant, sang hymns in music class, and learned about Easter in school. Now instead of learning about Christianity or Judaism we get the religion of Leftism from early ages on. THAT is acceptable, Judeo-Christian values and teachings are not.

Lisa

 

[edwest2]

Warning: some graphic details.

westernjournalism.com/middle-schoolers-subjected-to-graphic-gay-indoctrination/

thecoloradoobserver.com/2012/04/critics-question-high-school-diversity-day-as-indoctrination/

rescueyourchild.com/The_Problem.html

As any parent knows, children, as they age, gradually develop the ability to discern certain things, and they are not prepared, at a young age, to correctly understand certain things, both on an emotional and intellectual level.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Bradski]

And with regard to countries like Spain, Argentina, etc. all those are countries that just legalized gay marriage within the past five years, it hasn’t been long enough to see any consequences yet which is not the case in countries like Denmark which has been legal since 1989 or Norway in 1993. You cannot expect to see results in two years that have taken 20 years in other countries.

And I repeat, the statement that matters are now worse in Scandinavian countries since SMM is plainly wrong. The facts are there to be seen. If you want to interpret what you would class as an improvement to reasons other than SSM then that is entirely your prerogative.

In fact, you may be right that SSM is not the reason for any improvement. But it is plainly incorrect to say that matters are worse. It becomes so very easy to slide in a statement that backs one’s position with zero back up and then proceed as if it has been accepted.

Again, the situation in Scandinavia has not deteriorated in any way that could be attributed to SSM. The fact that things have improved (as presumably you would view them) could be down to the general acceptance of SSM or they could not. But they are not demonstrably worse because of SSM.

 

[maximus]

Warning: some graphic details.

westernjournalism.com/middle-schoolers-subjected-to-graphic-gay-indoctrination/

thecoloradoobserver.com/2012/04/critics-question-high-school-diversity-day-as-indoctrination/

rescueyourchild.com/The_Problem.html

As any parent knows, children, as they age, gradually develop the ability to discern certain things, and they are not prepared, at a young age, to correctly understand certain things, both on an emotional and intellectual level.

Peace,
Ed

This is why we and many others in our area home-school.

 

[LisaA]

And I repeat, the statement that matters are now worse in Scandinavian countries since SMM is plainly wrong. The facts are there to be seen. If you want to interpret what you would class as an improvement to reasons other than SSM then that is entirely your prerogative.

In fact, you may be right that SSM is not the reason for any improvement. But it is plainly incorrect to say that matters are worse. It becomes so very easy to slide in a statement that backs one’s position with zero back up and then proceed as if it has been accepted.

Again, the situation in Scandinavia has not deteriorated in any way that could be attributed to SSM. The fact that things have improved (as presumably you would view them) could be down to the general acceptance of SSM or they could not. But they are not demonstrably worse because of SSM.

Which still is irrelevant with respect to our country and to the thread.

Lisa

 

[edwest2]

This is why we and many others in our area home-school.

I am glad to hear about it.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Ignatius]

Or so says my uncle.

What I explained was that gay marriage hurts society in many ways, being:

-Children being taught “gay rights” in public school (why not teach them religious freedom in general too then?)

-Future generations growing up with the idea that marriage can be anything, opening the gates to further future problems

-The imposing of the gay agenda onto Christians and the forcing of us to conform to their definition

-Only adds to the the further underpopulation of the world (hes a scientist and he insists that the earth is already overpopulated)

-The further desensitization and degradation of societys mentalities, whether gay or straight since its more than just gays who support gay marriage

Am I leaving anything out? And correct me if Im wrong at all too. Thanks.

Here’s a great video exposition on the subject from right here at Catholic Answers:
catholic.com/video/how-redefining-marriage-affects-your-religious-liberty

 

[Bradski]

Which still is irrelevant with respect to our country and to the thread.

Say what? Check the title of the thread. It’s about whether SSM actually harms society or not. What better way than to investigate whether a specific society that has allowed SSM for a number of years has actually been harmed. Anything else is opinion and conjecture.

And the undeniable fact is that SSM has not harmed Scandinavian countries in any way that could stand up to any reasonable investigation.

We are hearing so much about what shouldn’t happen or what mustn’t happen and any number doom-and-gloom scenarios, but the fact remains that it is not harmful in any measurable way whatsoever. If you believe otherwise, then please, as I asked earlier, be specific and we can investigate your claim.