Why don't we come up with a new version of marriage for gay people?

[Elizabeth502]

Its an interesting claim. Do you have a link to his or her discussion of this?

The broadcast was on a radio talk-show that, as I recall, occurred just before or just after the CA vote. The attorney was discussing options with the host. On this particular station, the broadcast archives are available only within 7 days of broadcast, so clearly we’ve passed that time period now.
Sorry!

 

[fix]

You are right, it isn’t as if there are only two alternatives, but that doesn’t mean that children being parented by a “good” same sex couple aren’t better off than those parented by a “bad” traditional one. There are a lot worse situations that a child can wind up in, and we ought to put more effort into correcting the worst possible situations, as opposed to spending time trying to eliminate an option that a lot of the time, still comes out all right.

Ideally, every child would have a good mother and a good father, but that is not the case right now.

Placing children in the environment of a homosexual “union” is doing moral violence.

 

[Lujack]

Placing children in the environment of a homosexual “union” is doing moral violence.

It is doing moral violence because they are not ideal parents. Putting them with worse parents would do worse moral violence.

 

[fix]

It is doing moral violence because they are not ideal parents. Putting them with worse parents would do worse moral violence.

But, that is not the issue.

 

[Lujack]

But, that is not the issue.

What is the issue?

 

[fix]

What is the issue?

The issue is protecting children. The list of solutions does not include homosexual parenting.

 

[Lujack]

The issue is protecting children. The list of solutions does not include homosexual parenting.

The end goal is that all children have ideal parents. We are allowed to take intermediate steps, and wasting our efforts on banning same-sex parenthood, efforts that could be better spent in other areas, is not a good intermediate step.

 

[fix]

The end goal is that all children have ideal parents. We are allowed to take intermediate steps, and wasting our efforts on banning same-sex parenthood, efforts that could be better spent in other areas, is not a good intermediate step.

Not sure I follow. Children have rights. They ought to be protected. No steps, inbetween or not, include homsexual unions or the equivalent.

 

[Lujack]

Not sure I follow. Children have rights. They ought to be protected. No steps, inbetween or not, include homsexual unions or the equivalent.

Any less-than-ideal pair of parents does moral violence against the child. The ultimate goal of providing every child with good parents is a distant one, and can’t be accomplished in one fell swoop. The intermediate goals should start with the worst moral violence, and work their way upward.

That means our first point of emphasis should be towards bad parents of all sorts, then same-sex parents.

 

[fix]

Any less-than-ideal pair of parents does moral violence against the child.

This is not true.

The ultimate goal of providing every child with good parents is a distant one, and can’t be accomplished in one fell swoop. The intermediate goals should start with the worst moral violence, and work their way upward.

That means our first point of emphasis should be towards bad parents of all sorts, then same-sex parents.

No, I do not agree. The goal is child protection. No one doubts the merit of not allowing certain persons from adopting. The law provides for this now. What we speak of here is getting the law to prohibit more deviations, not less.

 

[cristininha]

All children and families, including the children being brought up in homosexual parenting families must be protected, particularly from those who promote ideologies only to dehumanize, divide and harm them.

 

[Elizabeth502]

All children and families, including the children being brought up in homosexual parenting families must be protected, particularly from those who promote ideologies only to dehumanize, divide and harm them.

Can’t agree more. I wonder if you understand the full import of your words. It is precisely that eliminating one gender from the parenting set dehumanizes the other gender by devaluing that gender (making that gender not just a second-class-parent, but irrelevant to parenting), dehumanizes the other gender by that separation & devaluation, and harms children by denying their dual birthright.

 

[palmas85]

I think two points need to be made. First, homosexuals are not demanding that churches be forced to marry them. The second point is that homosexuals are demanding equal civil rights. The secular legal contract of marriage carries a vast number of legal, economic and social rights. This is what they want.

Gays are not seeking something similar to the legal contract of marriage, but called something else, because any such thing would necessarily be less than marriage. Such unions would lack the legal history of marriage and would require an ongoing legal struggle to force equal recognition (by employers, insurance companies, sheriff’s departments etc.) of of this new non-marriage marriage.

No, what they want is for everyone to accept their disordered lifestyles as being acceptable and they see marriage as one more way to accomplish that. It is not and hopefully never will be.

 

[russell007]

Since the Church is against gay marriage because marriage is the union between a man and woman, why don’t we come up with a union that is not called marriage that is between the same sexes? The Church states that homosexual activity is “unnatural” but God made them homosexual! Plus I read somewhere (I think it was on here) that humans have something in their brain that gives them emotions or something about sex while for animals it is just instinct. I know that same sex marriage isn’t exactly procreation but the couple could adopt a child that could really use a good home. What harm does that do? In my opinion, two people who love each other very much does not degrade the sanctity of marriage, people who cheat and treat their spouse badly do. Also, is it ok in the Church’s eyes for a homosexual to have a partner that they love as long as they are not married and they never have sex? Anyway, for those of you who are strictly against gay marriage, I think there are WAY BETTER things to worry about in today’s world than two people loving each other. Don’t we need more love in this world?! Anyway, that’s just my opinion and I am proud of it.

Gods ways are not our ways said John.

Leviticus 18:22 tells us God sees homosexuality as an abomination.

Same line of thinking.If a thief or murderer “have something in their brain that gives them emotions” (as you so elloquently put it) that cause them
to steal and murder should we make allowances for them as well?
Hey they were born that way why should we put them in jail or show prejuduce towards them?

Love is love it comes from the same heart you can love your kids wife husband etc… Its how we exspress love physically towards them that makes the difference.

I can love my best friend but that doesnt mean to exspress it in a sexual manner. Were not animals.

In my opinion this all stems from liberism, being pollitically correct,individualism, exspress yourself concepts.

God and the church are not a democracy nor pollitically correct.
The ten commandments are not suggestions.

Gods mercy is what saves us Doesnt mean he thinks sin is ok think about it.

Purgatory is full of folks with good intentions.

Bottom line is the act of same sex is considerd impure and is a mortal sin, an obomination. This is the truth of God (Its not something I just made up).

 

[Nino]

Good be proud…I am proud I married a lovely Irish American gal who looked like Jane Russell and still does…we have 7 children and now over 15 grandchildren!!! Its old hat to state a falsehood then quote it as authentic…God did NOT make people who could only mate with other people of the same sex…that means God is NOT infallible.that he makes mistakes…this of course is the name of the game…only big brother is never wrong! Why would these natural folks make AIDS an honor to contact it…it is a horrible disease…recall how Rock Hudson…I like to call AIDS.the Rock Hudson disease…how ole lady killer Rock looked as he wilted away.this is sad…would God make Folks in such a way that they contact a disease so horrible…last year its reported some 300,000 homosexuals died from Aids.a STD…like VD etc…it is caused by behavior. Only the RCC is never PC…PC is like Orwell warned us…its whatever our rulers say it is…2+2=5 they say…ie; Earth warming nonsense…then it is…same as homosexuals…not that they probably grew up in a fatherless home and thus fell in love with their mommy…this is what we were taught in college back in the 70s…a mommy complex…anyway…Jesus did not compromise thats why He was murdered…neither shall we!.Nino

 

[Dale_M]

Why would these natural folks make AIDS an honor to contact it…

I’m sorry, but I don’t understand. I think you are saying that a group of people are proud to become infected with HIV. Is this what you meant? If so, why do you believe it to be true?

Nino:

last year its reported some 300,000 homosexuals died from Aids.

Huh? Do you have a citation for this? The most recent data I have seen is that in 2005 the total number of AIDS deaths in the US was 17,011.
kff.org/hivaids/upload/3029-071.pdf
In 2006, the estimated number of AIDS deaths was 14,627
cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#ddaids.
And that includes everyone, not just homosexuals.

 

[Trader]

The Church already has a name for a proper relationship between two people who are not married to each other: FRIENDSHIP. Jesus died for his friends.

Friends can have a health care power of attorney for each other.
Friends can inherit through a will, be business partners, or share property together. Friends can be of the same sex or opposite sex.

Friends truly love each other.

Friendship does not include acts of sodomy, adultery or fornication. People who want someone else to sin with them whether that sin is sexual, or doing drugs together, or shoplifting together are not friends. They are expressing a profound hatred for themselves and for each other.

 

[holy_wood]

Its easy to make passionate claims on here without any evidence to back it up so for all you U.S. citizens out their who wish to read scholarly peer-reviewed findings related to the issue of gay-marriage, parenting, relationships, ect. I suggest marriagedebate.com, familyfacts.org, as well as heritage.org

The link below directs you to a 39 page argument from the University of St. Thomas Law Journal which argues for why gay marriage will weaken the institution of marriage. I HIGHLY suggest reading it.

marriagedebate.com/pdf/UST_fall2004.pdf

The above is actually critiquing the majority opinion in the Massachusettes case that allowed same-sex marriage; for something that gets to the point try…
What is Marriage For? The Public Purpose of Marriage Law

For all you people out their who believe that gay and lesbian relationships are no different than heterosexual relationships I suggest reading…http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/353528.pdf

**“Relationship Outcomes and Their Predictors: Longitudinal Evidence from Heterosexual Married, Gay Cohabiting, and Lesbian Cohabiting Couples” **

Source:** Kurdek, Lawrence A. Journal of Marriage and the Family Vol. 60, Number . August, 1998. Page(s) 553-568.**

Findings: Compared with heterosexual cohabiting or married couples, male homosexual couples and lesbian couples were more likely to experience the dissolution of a cohabiting relationship.
Sample or Data Description: 236 married, 66 gay cohabiting, and 51 lesbian cohabiting couples from two separate longitudinal studies.
**
Gay Parenting?**

I suggest reading **Do Mothers and Fathers Matter?
**
The Html link is located Here for copy and paste.
Can you trust the Studies relating to gay parenting?
**
** Report on Homosexual Parenting Shown to be Biased

The link to Dr. Quick’s analyses in the article is broken **here **is the proper link.
I understand its a lot of reading but this is what separates the educated from the ignorant. Its your choice but if you support or oppose gay marriage you will benefit greatly from reading the links I have posted.

If you want specific studies for a particular concern just PM me and I’ll see if I have it saved on my computer somewhere. And if the links don’t work PM me your e-mail and I’ll attach the file for you to read.

This might also interest you…

**[Divorce-Risk Patterns in Same-Sex „Marriages“ in Norway and Sweden](http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=%22Divorce-Risk+Patterns+in+Same-Sex+Marriages+in+Norway+and+Sweden%22Andersson%2C+Gunnar&fr=ffds1&u=www.uni-koeln.de/wiso-)**

Based on data from legally registered same-sex partnerships in Sweden, homosexual male couples were 1.5 times as likely (50 percent more likely) to “divorce” as married opposite-sex couples. Lesbian couples were 2.67 times as likely (167 percent more likely) to “divorce” as heterosexual married couples over a similar period of time. When controls for demographic characteristics associated with increased risk of divorce were added to the analysis, male homosexual couples were 1.35 times as likely (35 percent more likely) to divorce, and lesbian couples were three times as likely (200 percent more likely) to divorce as heterosexual married couples were.
**
Sample or Data Description:** Longitudinal information from population registers in Norway and Sweden
**
Source: **Andersson, Gunnar, Noack, Turid, Seierstad, Ane, and Weedon-Fekjaer, Harald Working Paper Vol. Presented at Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Number . April 1-3, 2004. Page(s) 1-28.

 

[Annn]

Can’t agree more. I wonder if you understand the full import of your words. It is precisely that eliminating one gender from the parenting set dehumanizes the other gender by devaluing that gender (making that gender not just a second-class-parent, but irrelevant to parenting), dehumanizes the other gender by that separation & devaluation, and harms children by denying their dual birthright.

In another thread, you made these same points without providing any research to back up your assertion that two same sex parents are worse than two opposite gender parents. DO you have some now?

 

[truagape]

I can’t add to that…

There is NO SUCH THING as ‘marriage’ between homosexuals…it’s STERILE, and it’s UNNATURAL!

Why is it so hard to understand?

Perhaps the same thing the Pharisees failed to understand: THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW