Refuting the infertility argument used to promote Same Sex Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter BobCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Marriage to me means committing to a lifetime with another person in an intimate relationship forsaking all others. Tough gig, if you think about it. But lots of people seem keen on the idea. Some people like to make it official and have the paperwork squared away as well. Some people like to invite all their friends and relations to celebrate the fact. I’m not too fussed about the last two, but that’s what the term ‘marriage’ would appear to be in the context in which we are using it.
WOW!. Now here is something we can wholeheartedly agree upon.👍👍👍

The problem arises in the gay community…in that they have no intention of committing to a lifetime relationship and forsake all others.

In San Francisco over 50% of gays claiming to be in a long term relationship have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners. Those who are legally married have “open relationship” terms spelled out in their marriage contracts or agree to open relationships in their “marriage” vows.

Seems to me that over half of the gays who want to call their relationship a marriage have no intention of respecting fidelity. As one gay couple put it: “In 1900, the average life span for a U.S. citizen was 47. Now we’re living so much longer, ‘until death do us part’ is twice as challenging.”

Frankly I think this makes a mockery of marriage. Your thoughts…
 
In San Francisco over 50% of gays claiming to be in a long term relationship have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners. Those who are legally married have “open relationship” terms spelled out in their marriage contracts or agree to open relationships in their “marriage” vows.

Frankly I think this makes a mockery of marriage. Your thoughts…
Very sloppy! 😦 I know it sensational but unfortunately not true.

If you want to be credible you need to do at least a minimal amount of fact checking.

No, the SF study did NOT illustrate that half of gay marriages are “open”
By: Timothy Kincaid
The sensational (but as I’ll illustrate, flatly untrue) statement that monogamy is not a central feature for many gay relationships is exciting and sure to elicit conversation. But it just wasn’t defamatory enough for those who wish to portray gay people as sex-crazed and incapable of commitment.
All were men. Contrary to James’ breathless reporting (and the example with which he started his article) the researchers said nothing about lesbian relationships. They were excluded.
The study was conducted in several phases and the details of each is not available, but the sampling methods were consistent. The breakout for Study 2 found that only 13% of participants identified as being married (perhaps the 2004 San Francisco variety) and only a third had made any sort of public commitment.
It is ludicrous to suggest that a study which includes three month long relationships without any public commitment is informative about marriage. The average length of the relationships was 7 years (more or less) but the median length was about three years earlier (half of the relationships were less than 4 years in length), suggesting that there were a few very long relationships and many much shorter ones.
The way this study has been reported, it has been suggested that gay relationships are more likely to be open than straight relationships, but no comparison was made and I’m not aware of any study that looked at the level of fidelity in three-month-old heterosexual relationship and pretended that they were representative of straights as a whole.
As the research was not applied separately by relationship structure or length, this study says nothing about gay marriage or even domestic partnerships. And any use of the results which makes (or even implies) a comparison to straight relationships is bogus and irresponsible.
 
Very sloppy! 😦 I know it sensational but unfortunately not true.

If you want to be credible you need to do at least a minimal amount of fact checking.

No, the SF study did NOT illustrate that half of gay marriages are “open”
By: Timothy Kincaid
Right …we said over 50% of gay RELATIONSHIPS
Quote:
The sensational (but as I’ll illustrate, flatly untrue) statement that monogamy is not a central feature for many gay relationships is exciting and sure to elicit conversation. But it just wasn’t defamatory enough for those who wish to portray gay people as sex-crazed and incapable of commitment.
All were men. Contrary to James’ breathless reporting (and the example with which he started his article) the researchers said nothing about lesbian relationships. They were excluded.
But it is a good example and shows the problem is not limited to gay male couples
"When Rio and Ray married in 2008, the Bay Area women omitted two words from their wedding vows: fidelity and monogamy.
“I take it as a gift that someone will be that open and honest and sharing with me,” said Rio, using the word “open” to describe their marriage.
Love brought the middle-age couple together — they wed during California’s brief legal window for same-sex marriage. But they knew from the beginning that their bond would be forged on their own terms, including what they call “play” with other women.**
nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html?_r=1&

The study was conducted in several phases and the details of each is not available, but the sampling methods were consistent. The breakout for Study 2 found that only 13% of participants identified as being married (perhaps the 2004 San Francisco variety) and only a third had made any sort of public commitment.

It is ludicrous to suggest that a study which includes three month long relationships without any public commitment is informative about marriage. The average length of the relationships was 7 years (more or less) but the median length was about three years earlier (half of the relationships were less than 4 years in length), suggesting that there were a few very long relationships and many much shorter ones.

The way this study has been reported, it has been suggested that gay relationships are more likely to be open than straight relationships, but no comparison was made and I’m not aware of any study that looked at the level of fidelity in three-month-old heterosexual relationship and pretended that they were representative of straights as a whole.

As the research was not applied separately by relationship structure or length, this study says nothing about gay marriage or even domestic partnerships. And any use of the results which makes (or even implies) a comparison to straight relationships is bogus and irresponsible.

Of course Tim is not pleased with this type of information being made public. I am sure he is worried that discussing the subject could undermine the legal fight for same-sex marriage.

Another take on the study: sfgate.com/lgbt/article/Many-gay-couples-negotiate-open-relationships-3241624.php
 
according to DignityUSA, “Catholic teaching has recently emphasized the “unitive” aspect of sex—loving, caring, interpersonal sharing. Surely, the personal, not the biological, is the prime meaning of sex among human beings.”
Not even close. Just because you or others FEEL something should be or because there is law----like there should be marriage “equality” doesn’t mean it can actually happen.

Think the words of progressives and a few wayward conservatives can fight millions of years of natural law?

I think not.

That’s why in the end so-called gay “marriage” will lose.
 
Right …we said over 50% of gay RELATIONSHIPS

Of course Tim is not pleased with this type of information being made public. I am sure he is worried that discussing the subject could undermine the legal fight for same-sex marriage.

Another take on the study: sfgate.com/lgbt/article/Many-gay-couples-negotiate-open-relationships-3241624.php
Here is the statement you made and that I responded to:
Zoltan Cobalt:
In San Francisco over 50% of gays claiming to be in a long term relationship have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.
Emphasis added.

Without the facts there is no credibility. On the other hand, Tim did an excellent job of presenting the facts…

**Facts: The breakout for Study 2 found **

only 13% of participants identified as being married

only a third had made any sort of public commitment

only male couples

The way this study has been reported, it has been suggested that gay relationships are more likely to be open than straight relationships, but no comparison was made

Many of the relationships were only 3 months. No study has looked at the level of fidelity in three-month-old heterosexual relationship and pretended that they were representative of straights as a whole.​

The facts do not justify your conclusions.

The legal fight is important but the fight for the hearts and minds of our families, friends, neighbors and many religions including many mainstream protestant denominations has already been won. All that is left are some technical details.
 
The legal fight is important but the fight for the hearts and minds of our families, friends, neighbors and many religions including many mainstream protestant denominations has already been won. All that is left are some technical details.
:rotfl:

Good relationships should stand on their own merits and should not have to be “won over”.
 
Here is the statement you made and that I responded to:

Emphasis added.

Without the facts there is no credibility. On the other hand, Tim did an excellent job of presenting the facts…

**Facts: The breakout for Study 2 found **

only 13% of participants identified as being married

only a third had made any sort of public commitment

only male couples

The way this study has been reported, it has been suggested that gay relationships are more likely to be open than straight relationships, but no comparison was made

Many of the relationships were only 3 months. No study has looked at the level of fidelity in three-month-old heterosexual relationship and pretended that they were representative of straights as a whole.​

The facts do not justify your conclusions.

The legal fight is important but the fight for the hearts and minds of our families, friends, neighbors and many religions including many mainstream protestant denominations has already been won. All that is left are some technical details.
You are right. The NYT article was not accurate.

It was 47% not 50% who claimed to be in a long term relationship but had sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

Sorry about the 3% difference.
 
As I said if you wish to defend hate groups its your choice.
SPLC Statement on Dr. Ben Carson
It looks like the SPLC has appointed itself thought police. In fact, they are more hateful than the groups they smear. These group is really dangerous. They may have been useful going after KKK but now they are just as bad, if not worse. This was a lame attempt at back pedalling:

"We’ve also come to the conclusion that the question of whether a better-researched
profile of Dr. Carson should or should not be included in our “Extremist Files” is
taking attention from the fact that** Dr. Carson has, in fact, made a number of
statements that express views that we believe most people would conclude are
extreme. They are described below.**
We laud Dr. Carson for his many contributions to medicine and his philanthropic
work, and we, like so many others, are inspired by his personal story. Nevertheless,
particularly because Dr. Carson is such a prominent person, we believe that his
views should be closely examined.

“Marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established pillar of society
and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA [North American Man/Boy
Association, a group advocating pedophilia], be they people who believe in
bestiality—it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition.”
—Interview on Fox News’ “Hannity,” March 26, 2013
“I mean, [our government and institutions] are very much like Nazi Germany.
… You know, you had a government using its tools to intimidate the population.
We now live in a society where people are afraid to say what they really believe.”

frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-southern-poverty-law-center-stands-up-for-hamas-2/
wo years ago the Southern Poverty Law Center named me, a bar sign and a brand of gun lubricant as hate groups. It wasn’t the punch line to a joke about a Minister, a Rabbi and a Priest. Instead it was another tribute to the research skills of the country’s wealthiest, dumbest and laziest civil rights group.

Morris Dees began in the mail order business and ended up in the mail order civil rights business. Every month elderly retirees receive envelopes covered with pictures of Klansmen burning crosses…Their checks bulk up the Southern Poverty Law Center’s $245 million endowment, a few pennies from which are used to hire DailyKos diarists who turn out **poorly researched attacks on “hate groups.” **.Left-wing cultural revolutionists have a loose definition of “hate,” but they can usually get the “groups” part right. The Southern Poverty Law Center can’t even do that…There are random attacks on celebrities like former Homicide star Richard Belzer and former Saturday Night Live star Victoria Jackson. Belzer is deemed guilty of promoting JFK conspiracy theories and Jackson called the TV show Glee “sickening.”

It’s not exactly the KKK, and Belzer, who is Jewish, was unhappy to be implicitly associated him with the Nazis. “As a Jewish person whose grandfather represented Israel at the United Nations before it was a state and an uncle, who as a member of the Resistance, fought the Nazis in World War Two, I am deeply hurt and offended,” he wrote.

But Belzer was not the only Jewish person targeted by the SPLC in an issue exploiting the Kansas City shootings around a Jewish community center. Instead the SPLC decided to launch into a full-throated defense of Hamas supporters and attacks on Jews opposed to Hamas and its domestic front groups…
 
The problem arises in the gay community…in that they have no intention of committing to a lifetime relationship and forsake all others.
In San Francisco over 50% of gays claiming to be in a long term relationship have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners. Those who are legally married have “open relationship” terms spelled out in their marriage contracts or agree to open relationships in their “marriage” vows.
Seems to me that over half of the gays who want to call their relationship a marriage have no intention of respecting fidelity. As one gay couple put it: “In 1900, the average life span for a U.S. citizen was 47. Now we’re living so much longer, ‘until death do us part’ is twice as challenging.”
Frankly I think this makes a mockery of marriage. Your thoughts…
I know I will get flak for this but I have NEVER seen a monogamous gay relationship and I have been familiar with plenty.Oftentimes, the guys go out cruising together and bring someone home. I read somewhere (maybe I can find it again) it is based on male psychology, a kind of safety valve for the hunting instinct.
One can only imagine what it is like with women’s hormones times 10 and who gets to be queen of the roost. Psychologically and not only physically, are same sexes are not complimentary and clash with one another. This is probably the base reason their relationships as a rule don’t last very long and if they do, have the option of venting steam outside.
 
I know I will get flak for this but I have NEVER seen a monogamous gay relationship and I have been familiar with plenty.
I know of many monogamous gay relationships. Maybe you just haven’t looked very hard. :rolleyes:
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zamyrabyrd View Post
I know I will get flak for this but I have NEVER seen a monogamous gay relationship and I have been familiar with plenty.
I know of many monogamous gay relationships. Maybe you just haven’t looked very hard. :rolleyes:
Well, Zamy, according to the study, thorolfr and I have been kicking around…45% of the respondents CLAIMED to be in a monogamous relationship. So there must be some. Of course we don’t know how long these monogamous relationships last and new ones begin…but that’s for a different survey. I would venture to say that the vast majority of gays are not involved in any sort of relationship and just prefer to “cruise”.
 
It looks like the SPLC has appointed itself thought police. In fact, they are more hateful than the groups they smear. These group is really dangerous. They may have been useful going after KKK but now they are just as bad, if not worse. This was a lame attempt at back pedalling:
When an organization makes a mistake they apologize and move on.

If you want to hang your hat on a hate organization I have no objections. You are entitled to all the hate you desire.
 
You are right. The NYT article was not accurate.

It was 47% not 50% who claimed to be in a long term relationship but had sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

Sorry about the 3% difference.
If you want to hang your credibility on NYT’s news article without any facts go right ahead. I won’t argue with you. It your credibility.
 
I know of many monogamous gay relationships. Maybe you just haven’t looked very hard. :rolleyes:
No use. Its their story and they are sticking to it. Its like a faith belief that they will never let go of regardless of the facts or how much evidence their is to the contrary.

🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top