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.
The comparison involves sharing a property, not sameness of situation.
The one property has 3 different situations that cause that property, and I addressed all 3 situations.

Unless there are more situations that cause that property, I’ve pretty much made the argument that they’re saying something I’m sure they don’t want to say because they’re making a comparison that doesn’t fit their agenda.
 
😃
The one property has 3 different situations that cause that property, and I addressed all 3 situations.

Unless there are more situations that cause that property, I’ve pretty much made the argument that they’re saying something I’m sure they don’t want to say because they’re making a comparison that doesn’t fit their agenda.
Their argument revolves around the property abstracted away from the state of affairs that brought it about. The fact of infirtility is all that matters, not the rest, to the case. The rest of the cases aren’t relevant to the reasoning of the argument. The property of being infirm is not relevant, the property of infirtility is. These properties aren’t the same, not analytically entailed to one another.
 
well, gay marriage is practically the same thing as a younger couple who can’t have children at all. it’s not something they would’ve chosen.
 
for homosexuals, homosexual marriage is natural, whereas you don’t. your view on this is simply based on your dated beliefs.
 
God save us from pantsuit, feminist nuns!
First of all, homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, usually the result of trauma, neglect, abuse or all three. “Marriage” was never a priority and even now a surprisingly small number out of a minority to begin with about 1-2% actually make the effort to marry in countries where this is available. Why? Because their relationships are admittedly fluid and open and even women go back and forth from being lesbian and straight. Just imagine the effect this lack of commitment has on children.
But not only that, their sexual practices are unhealthy and ridden with STD’s even after the abolition of discrimination or persecution. Their lifespans are considerably shorter and AIDS is still a scourge despite all the health resources available to them.
Children need a mother and father, period, preferably their biological parents.
No culture in history has EVER had same sex marriage. It is not the nature of such relationships to marry anyway. Marriage is for procreation and to preserve family ties over generations. This is the meaning of history. Designer babies, surrogacy, and in vitro fertilization sever the rightful relationship of children to parents. It is only selfish individuals who regard children as little more than puppies who would do that to them in order to satisfy their own needs for having little people around.
 
no it is NOT a result of anything bad. it’s just a way someone is, like being left-handed, and you need to recognize that.
 
some women think they’re straight but are lesbian, some go the other way around. so what? it shouldn’t be any of your business what they do in their personal lives.
 
no it is NOT a result of anything bad. it’s just a way someone is, like being left-handed, and you need to recognize that.
Sez you, but NOT what THEY say about it:
UNDERCOVER VIDEO OF GAYS ADMITTING THEY ARE NOT “BORN THAT WAY”
youtube.com/watch?v=2h5pI7KASjU

There is NO gene for homosexuality, so there is NO physical basis for it. In so many cases as in the above video they admit they were inducted into that lifestyle by an older person.
Over 4 decades I have been around the block more than a few times. It has been revealed to me on more than one occasion that there was an abusive father or even older brother.
Now that my aunt is dead, a very troubled person, I can speak about her own mistreatment by my grandfather. She was attracted to women, had her own violent marriage and passed down her abuse to her only daughter. Abuse by a man frequently sends girls into the arms of other women for solace but as this is reactive behavior, it compounds the problem.
 
some women think they’re straight but are lesbian, some go the other way around. so what? it shouldn’t be any of your business what they do in their personal lives.
Yeah, if it would only stop there but the movement is to implode society by redefining marriage. I would be VERY happy not to hear about homo issues 24/7.
 
But not only that, their sexual practices are unhealthy and ridden with STD’s even after the abolition of discrimination or persecution.
Lesbian couples have fewer STDs than straight ones. And same sex marriage reduces the incidence of STDs even in SS male couples.
No culture in history has EVER had same sex marriage.
Not true. Many Native American tribes had and have same sex marriage, as have many other cultures throughout history.
 
Lesbian couples have fewer STDs than straight ones. And same sex marriage reduces the incidence of STDs even in SS male couples.Not true. Many Native American tribes had and have same sex marriage, as have many other cultures throughout history.
I don’t know what you are trying to prove with some marginal facts about marginal practices in marginal cultures. OUR culture has had the institution of marriage for two millennia and it has been the overwhelming positive factor in keeping society healthy and responsible. Any other cultures that slid from a secure definition of monogamous heterosexual marriage disappeared in two generations after it was permitted according to Unwin. He did not set out to prove that conventional marriage is important for society but the overwhelming evidence convinced him.

As for the health risks in lesbianism besides violence which is quite high, you can find it all over the internet. One site says: “Lesbians are also at higher risk for STDs and other health problems than heterosexuals.1 However, the health consequences of lesbianism are less well documented than for male homosexuals. This is partly because the devastation of AIDS has caused male homosexual activity to draw the lion’s share of medical attention. But it is also because there are fewer lesbians than gay men,2 and there is no evidence that lesbians practice the same extremes of same-sex promiscuity as gay men. The lesser amount of medical data does not mean, however, that female homosexual behavior is without recognized pathology. Much of the pathology is associated with heterosexual activity by lesbians.
Among the difficulties in establishing the pathologies associated with lesbianism is the problem of defining who is a lesbian.3 **Study after study documents that the overwhelming majority of self-described lesbians have had sex with men.**4 Australian researchers at an STD clinic found that only 7 percent of their lesbian sample had never had sexual contact with a male.5
Not only did lesbians commonly have sex with men, but with lots of men. They were 4.5 times as likely as exclusively heterosexual controls to have had more than 50 lifetime male sex partners.6 Consequently, the lesbians’ median number of male partners was twice that of exclusively heterosexual women.7 Lesbians were three to four times more likely than heterosexual women to have sex with men who were high-risk for HIV disease-homosexual, bisexual, or IV drug-abusing men.8
Bacterial vaginosis, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, heavy cigarette smoking, alcohol abuse, intravenous drug use, and prostitution were present in much higher proportions among female homosexual practitioners.10 Intravenous drug abuse was nearly six times as common in this group.11In one study of women who had sex only with women in the prior 12 months, 30 percent had bacterial vaginosis.12 Bacterial vaginosis is associated with higher risk for pelvic inflammatory disease and other sexually transmitted infections.13”
factsaboutyouth.com/posts/female-homosexual-behavior/
 
Lesbian couples have fewer STDs than straight ones. And same sex marriage reduces the incidence of STDs even in SS male couples.
But…lesbians have higher incidents of alcohol and drug abuse as well as a much higher suicide rate than their straight sisters. Hardly a safe choice of a lifestyle.
Not true. Many Native American tribes had and have same sex marriage, as have many other cultures throughout history.
Native American and other primitive cultures had same-sex WEDDINGS. Their concept of MARRIAGE only included those who could reproduce. There always was a differentiation.
 
But not only that, their sexual practices are unhealthy and ridden with STD’s even after the abolition of discrimination or persecution. Their lifespans are considerably shorter and AIDS is still a scourge despite all the health resources available to them.
Are you saying that people with unhealthy sexual practices should not be allowed to marry?
 
Are you saying that people with unhealthy sexual practices should not be allowed to marry?
Look, I am sick and tired of this contrived social engineering agenda to implode the traditional nuclear family so as to impose a more dictatorial control over individuals. You can nit pick all you want but marriage was NEVER a priority for those who were just asking to live and let live. Furthermore, boy and girl couples were not breaking down the church or the justice of the peace’s doors to get married either since cohabitation is the norm these days rather than the exception. Common law arrangements are recognized after a certain amount of time and even in cases of inheriting property. So what really is the problem?
Marriage is to formalize a procreative unit EVEN if it does not produce children as in the case with an aunt and uncle of mine. They were still upright people devoted to one another and provided in their way good female and male role models.
But as long as you mentioned unhealthy sexual practices, well, what can we do about them, except not recognize or elevate them to the status of what is healthy and good for society, particularly children.
 
Look, I am sick and tired of this contrived social engineering agenda to implode the traditional nuclear family so as to impose a more dictatorial control over individuals. You can nit pick all you want but marriage was NEVER a priority for those who were just asking to live and let live. Furthermore, boy and girl couples were not breaking down the church or the justice of the peace’s doors to get married either since cohabitation is the norm these days rather than the exception. Common law arrangements are recognized after a certain amount of time and even in cases of inheriting property. So what really is the problem?
Marriage is to formalize a procreative unit EVEN if it does not produce children as in the case with an aunt and uncle of mine. They were still upright people devoted to one another and provided in their way good female and male role models.
But as long as you mentioned unhealthy sexual practices, well, what can we do about them, except not recognize or elevate them to the status of what is healthy and good for society, particularly children.
👍👍👍
 
well, gay marriage is practically the same thing as a younger couple who can’t have children at all. it’s not something they would’ve chosen.
Clearly you didn’t read the first post.
for homosexuals, homosexual marriage is natural, whereas you don’t. your view on this is simply based on your dated beliefs.
Not really. It is them “playing hetero” as a homosexual activist I knew back in my college days would say. He hated the idea of SSM (which was starting to be legalized in other countries) and said “we don’t need a piece of paper to tell us we love each other.”

It is a partial rejection of the homosexual subculture in order to advance a different agenda: to shut down freedom of speech, religion and opinion.
 
First of all, homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, usually the result of trauma, neglect, abuse or all three.
:bowdown2:

Don’t ever let anyone tell you you’re irrational. You do you.
But…lesbians have higher incidents of alcohol and drug abuse as well as a much higher suicide rate than their straight sisters.
Correlation or causation? If you grew up with SSA in a global culture where the widely held views are that SSA is wrong, immoral, worthy of discrimination, worthy of violence, worthy of imprisonment, worthy of execution, etc. etc. etc., even “intrinsically disordered” or “profoundly disordered,” and had been marginalized your whole life because of your SSA, don’t you think there’s just a smidgen of a chance you might look for a way out that wasn’t necessarily approved by the Catechism of the Catholic Church?
 
First of all, homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, usually the result of trauma, neglect, abuse or all three.
To say that homosexuality is “usually the result of trauma, neglect or abuse or all three” is an overly broad generalization that is not supported by the evidence. I know lots of gay men and lesbians who grew up in perfectly normal, loving homes and suffered no trauma or abuse and there is nothing as yet to prove any causal link between homosexuality and the things that you mention. According to the American Psychiatric Association:
What causes Homosexuality/Heterosexuality/Bisexuality?
No one knows what causes heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality. Homosexuality was once thought to be the result of troubled family dynamics or faulty psychological development. Those assumptions are now understood to have been based on misinformation and prejudice. Currently there is a renewed interest in searching for biological etiologies for homosexuality. However, to date there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for homosexuality. Similarly, no specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse. Sexual abuse does not appear to be more prevalent in children who grow up to identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual, than in children who identify as heterosexual.
psychiatry.org/lgbt-sexual-orientation
 
But as long as you mentioned unhealthy sexual practices, well, what can we do about them, except not recognize or elevate them to the status of what is healthy and good for society, particularly children.
I didn’t bring up unhealthy sexual practices. You did. In the context of marriage, which is what the thread is about.

If you think that gay people shouldn’t be married because you believe they indulge in unhealthy sexual practices, does that mean that you think anyone at all should be banned from marriage if they do the same?

If not, then one might ask why not. If so, then one might ask how you find out that a couple is likely to have unhealthy sex.

These are quite reasonable questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top