Should the state marry gay lovers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mulepadre
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I probably shouldn’t post on research data I remember reading but can’t remember where and who. That being said I’ll bet dollars to donuts that there is enough research data to support the hypothesis that a sexual environment that confuses the biological function of gender will inherently cause gender identity confusion for a child.
Every single person I know who had/has gender identity confusion grew up in a stable, mother/father household. I actually know more straights with divorced parents than I do not-straights.
 
Every single person I know who had/has gender identity confusion grew up in a stable, mother/father household. I actually know more straights with divorced parents than I do not-straights.
Pathia, I would think so, and me too since I don’t know personally any same gender couples raising kids.🤷

The emotionally distant father** /** dominating man hating mother combo is the classic environment for confusing the sexual identity of boys. I would expect there to be alot of data surrounding M/F couples that produced homosexuals
 
Pathia, I would think so, and me too since I don’t know personally any same gender couples raising kids.🤷

The emotionally distant father** /** dominating man hating mother combo is the classic environment for confusing the sexual identity of boys. I would expect there to be alot of data surrounding M/F couples that produced homosexuals
No one except groups like NARTH present this argument. It is antique Freudian non-sense.
 
Pathia, I would think so, and me too since I don’t know personally any same gender couples raising kids.🤷

The emotionally distant father** /** dominating man hating mother combo is the classic environment for confusing the sexual identity of boys. I would expect there to be alot of data surrounding M/F couples that produced homosexuals
And completely unfounded with no studies that have ever even remotely said that it is true. I’m trying to find the quote, but there are studies, if done to the entire country something like 70% of the country will say ‘I have a bad relationship with my parents when I was a teenager’. So when that high of a percentage says that, then of course most gays are going to say it too. Correlation != Causation. Why do so many teens have bad relationships with their parents? Because they’re teenagers 😛

Things like fetal testosterone seem to have a big effect:

wthrockmorton.com/2009/01/28/fetal-testosterone-predicts-sexually-differentiated-childhood-behavior-in-girls-and-in-boys/

And abuse in childhood seems to have no effect, while sexual abuse does not increase lesbianism, but does seem to increase homosexuality in men, slightly, but not dramatically.

wthrockmorton.com/2009/01/20/sexual-abuse-and-sexual-orientation-a-prospective-study/

Note: Throckmorton is a therapist that completely severed himself from NARTH and the other groups that claim to ‘cure’ homosexuality, because he could never find any evidence that it worked. He is still Christian and believes it is a sin, and will council folks on how to reconcile being gay and Christian and work towards celibacy. That is to say, he’s not part of the ‘gay agenda’

It is likely that it is environment, that does not mean JUST family environment. Just like many conditions, there are likely genes that make one more susceptible to it, combined with hormones in the womb, combined with a social environment. Any one will may not, but a combination of 2 or 3 will.
 
And completely unfounded with no studies that have ever even remotely said that it is true. I’m trying to find the quote, but there are studies, if done to the entire country something like 70% of the country will say ‘I have a bad relationship with my parents when I was a teenager’. So when that high of a percentage says that, then of course most gays are going to say it too. Correlation != Causation. Why do so many teens have bad relationships with their parents? Because they’re teenagers 😛

Things like fetal testosterone seem to have a big effect:

wthrockmorton.com/2009/01/28/fetal-testosterone-predicts-sexually-differentiated-childhood-behavior-in-girls-and-in-boys/

And abuse in childhood seems to have no effect, while sexual abuse does not increase lesbianism, but does seem to increase homosexuality in men, slightly, but not dramatically.

wthrockmorton.com/2009/01/20/sexual-abuse-and-sexual-orientation-a-prospective-study/

Note: Throckmorton is a therapist that completely severed himself from NARTH and the other groups that claim to ‘cure’ homosexuality, because he could never find any evidence that it worked. He is still Christian and believes it is a sin, and will council folks on how to reconcile being gay and Christian and work towards celibacy. That is to say, he’s not part of the ‘gay agenda’

It is likely that it is environment, that does not mean JUST family environment. Just like many conditions, there are likely genes that make one more susceptible to it, combined with hormones in the womb, combined with a social environment. Any one will may not, but a combination of 2 or 3 will.
I would expect a behavior as ancient as homosexuality to have a gene or two developed by now. I also would expect that a combination of that and environment to play a part in a confused sexual identity. sexual feelings for the same gender isn’t subject to choice in the measure that even requires it to be pertinant to this kind of discussion IMHO.

OTOH that doesn’t make it something that is naturally ordered.
 
You know what. I’m bowing out of these discussions because I think we spend far too much time on the topic. Peer pressure these days forces one to often to declare that they are not interested in the opposite sex and then they are castigated for having leanings towards the same sex. Maybe if we didn’t put this presssure on the children to declare one way or the other they would be better able to go back to keeping it secret and not press the issue. If society didn’t spend so much time wondering why a young man hasn’t married when he’s fully able, we could focus on more important things.
 
“Contrary to nature” is your religious belief that I do not share…homosexual relationships are part of the natural world we live in as another sexual orientation…not the “norm” that most others share in…but a natural and benign variation of human sexuality.
Thank you. I’m so glad you used the word ‘benign’, because there seem to be so many people who assume that homosexual behaviour is inherently harmful.

Well, it isn’t - at least no more so than heterosexual behaviour. Throughout the animal kingdom, many species engage in homosexual behaviour, and it doesn’t seem to threaten their survival in any way. It’s possible that it may even have evolved as some kind of natural check to population numbers, but that is merely idle speculation on my part, as I don’t have any factual information to back it up. In any case, the hatred and fear of homosexuality has largely been a product of the patriarchal nature of society - male homosexuality was considered aberrant only because it was thought to be unnatural for a man to be submissive (as one partner technically is in an act of sexual intercourse). Lesbianism has been largely ignored throughout most of history, 'cause, well, no-one really thought it was possible for two women to engage in anything resembling penetrative sex - and because women were meant to be submissive anyway, nobody really cared.

The point is that I see no harm in allowing gay couples to marry - to publicly declare their love and commitment to each other before friends and family. The ritual of the marriage ceremony is important to many people as a means of formalising their relationship - the legal rights and benefits that come with marriage are nice, but the real prize is the recognition of couplehood that comes from a wedding. That, I think, is what is desired by gay couples who wish to marry.
 
Well, it isn’t - at least no more so than heterosexual behaviour. Throughout the animal kingdom, many species engage in homosexual behaviour, and it doesn’t seem to threaten their survival in any way.
I don’t see the harm in it either as long as believing that the bond between same gender sexual partners is disordered and not the same thing as the bond between a man and a woman is not attacked as some antiquated remnant of a brutish patristic mentality. .No offense but those kinds of accusations are projections of what the person who uses them denies about their own feelings. Like the accusation that religious beliefs are being pushed on to people. The only morals being pushed are the ones that are forcing new definitions for words like ‘marriage’
 
I don’t see the harm in it either as long as believing that the bond between same gender sexual partners is disordered and not the same thing as the bond between a man and a woman is not attacked as some antiquated remnant of a brutish patristic mentality. .No offense but those kinds of accusations are projections of what the person who uses them denies about their own feelings. Like the accusation that religious beliefs are being pushed on to people. The only morals being pushed are the ones that are forcing new definitions for words like ‘marriage’
As far as homosexuality in the animal kingdom is concerned, the jury appears to be still out regarding its purpose, but it seems apparent from the observations of some biologists that it serves an important social bonding function amongst animals that practise it. Check out a couple of articles I found (not from Wikipedia, I might add!)

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html

While one can’t claim that heterosexual and homosexual relationships are the same - any more than you can claim that everybody’s marriage is the same! - it requires a particularly narrow view of sexuality to describe homosexuality as ‘disordered’. As to the hatred and fear, how else does one explain the fact that homosexual acts (but only between males) were once punishable by death - and still are in some cultures, and even to this day, homosexual people are beaten up and killed because some people can’t tolerate their sexuality?

In that they share the same basic concept of love and desire to share a life together, heterosexual and homosexual couplings are qualitatively similar. Just because they can’t produce children without assistance (or interference, as some would have it), that’s not a reason to deny homosexual couples the recognition of their relationship. If humans were in danger of extinction, it might be a problem, but I doubt that’s going to be the case any time soon - unless we continue along to path of making our world uninhabitable.
 
As far as homosexuality in the animal kingdom is concerned, the jury appears to be still out regarding its purpose, but it seems apparent from the observations of some biologists that it serves an important social bonding function amongst animals that practise it. Check out a couple of articles I found (not from Wikipedia, I might add!)
Hetrosexual and homosexual couplings are different qualitatively. They are only the same quantitatively. The bond experienced by a mother and son, if properly ordered would be a maternal bond, but, can be experienced as a husband wife bond if the exclusivity unique to the bond between spouses is attached to it. This mother would be making a quasihusband out of her son because the environment experienced by them is being defined by the exclusivity proper to spouses. The son will have feelings relative to the mother that are only proper for husbands to feel. That two people of the same gender can give each other an environment that has the qualities proper to a pairbond and that they can experience a quasihusband wife bond doesn’t make it the same as a functional pairbond. The harm is in the denial that it is an imitation.
 
Two people of the same gender can create an environment unique to pairbonding and that environment can enable the experience unique to a pairbond but the defining factor that makes a union a pairbond is that it fulfills the purposes that make a pairbond necessary. To deny the differences that make them distinct is a disservice to what they really are.
 
I probably shouldn’t post on research data I remember reading but can’t remember where and who. That being said I’ll bet dollars to donuts that there is eneogh research data to support the hypothesis that a sexual environment that confuses the biological function of gender will inherently cause gender identity confusion for a child.
Actually, I’ve read pretty much every peer-reviewed study on the toopic (for a research paper on gender development) and this has never been proven.
 
Technically, it would promote monogomy. I’m torn with this one. As for adoption, that’s a seperate issue.
 
If having monogendered parents made people queer, then every single child who grew up in a single parent home would be gay. Kids walk in on their parents all the time, period. I know I disturbed my parents more than once, while they were making love.
Pathis,

I believe he is really talking about the environment in which a child grows up in. Not necessarily the supposed negative effects of such an environment.

If I could encourage the use of the term IDAEL as opposed to NORM (or normative) I think it is more appropraite. NORM refers to what is usual in occurrence, and not necessarily what is preferrable. It was the NORM in america 200 years ago to have slaves. However, it was never the IDEAL. My reasoning is that same-sex parents COULD raise a child in a caring environment (as I have stated before that grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. could), but that it is not the IDEAL. I am not asking proponents of same-sex parents to agree wiht my reasoning - onhly that we can assert that the IDEAL is a mother and a father raising a child together. I mean, IDEALLY, I would like ther to be no divorce, as a child has a right to be parented by both a mother and a father in an intact home. But we live in a fractured world and must deal with the disordered situations that are contrary to God’s will. This isn’t about homesexuality being sinful or not - it is about what is best for children. And I believe that I have stated that unless every traditional couple in the world has the opportunity to adopt before all other forms of parents - single, straight, or otherwise - then no non-traditional exemptions should be made.

It’s not about kid’s walking in on their parents - same-sex or not.
 
You know what. I’m bowing out of these discussions because I think we spend far too much time on the topic. Peer pressure these days forces one to often to declare that they are not interested in the opposite sex and then they are castigated for having leanings towards the same sex. Maybe if we didn’t put this presssure on the children to declare one way or the other they would be better able to go back to keeping it secret and not press the issue. If society didn’t spend so much time wondering why a young man hasn’t married when he’s fully able, we could focus on more important things.
I understand, GJ, and am sorry to see you go. Even though we disagree a bit more than we agree, I have always appreciated your contributions.

Feel free to Pm me anytime if you are on another forum.

Good luck!

The Smiter:thumbsup:
 
miamiherald.com/277/story/892447.html

Still think I’m full of it? People keep telling me that ‘that can’t happen’ Well, here…it did. She had power of attorney and was refused visitation rights.
I don’t know what that law is protecting but it should have provisions for other situations.
I wonder what happens if a person has only one close friend. Would the dying person be denied their only friends presence for so long? Those last hours are very precious I would think.

I am against lumping homosexual unions with heterosexual unions because it would add more confusion to the increasingly misunderstood bonds of family

OTOH It wouldn’t be fair if homosexual unions aren’t treated with the dignity that deeply felt relationships deserve.
 
miamiherald.com/277/story/892447.html

Still think I’m full of it? People keep telling me that ‘that can’t happen’ Well, here…it did. She had power of attorney and was refused visitation rights.
Admittedly, Pathia, Florida IS behind the times with respect to this kind of arrangement. I am in California and we have some of the strongest civil union legislation and end-of-life arrangements that can be made and they all pretty much stand up in our courts.

But do not castigate every state or person because a few are not as legally and/or legislatively sophisticated.

This is not my stating that I am in agreement with same-sex marriage - but unions and solidly crafted legal preparations to protect the rights of individuals - I am always in favor.
 
But do not castigate every state or person because a few are not as legally and/or legislatively sophisticated.

This is not my stating that I am in agreement with same-sex marriage - but unions and solidly crafted legal preparations to protect the rights of individuals - I am always in favor.
I have been denied in several states (Or rather my partner has been denied visiting me). No one seems to believe me, because I didn’t have the money or the resources to sue and make a big media event about it. It’s happened in VA, Ohio and North Carolina.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top