Political chat about the Politics Forum - Page 18 - About the Forums

That's one reason but not the major reason being that I value overwhelmingly the traditional definition of marriage being a man and a woman. I'll give gay couples civil union though which brings all the same rights. Just not marriage.

Right, so pure unadulterated bigotry. Pretty much as expected.

01-21-2019 , 09:11 PM

#428

bundy5

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 8,141

Quote:

Originally Posted by will1530

Right, so pure unadulterated bigotry. Pretty much as expected.

Bigotry would be without saying civil union and a statement that I hate gays - so explain

01-21-2019 , 09:15 PM

#429

Bobo Fett

Carpe Diem

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 56,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

One thing I did want to say when I was asked for why I didn't support gay marriage and which may come as no surprise to any of you liberals and not that it was something that gay couples couldn't do before getting married is that I'm not a supporter of gay couples adopting. And it is not because I'm against them getting that equal right as hetro couples do to adopt but it is more because it is quite clear that on average a child's upbringing is going to be much more enriching if it has a male and female parent in its life (which you can see whenever these custody cases come to the courts that they will always try to keep a parent in a child's life even if it is quite limited and they can only have supervised visits with their child).

Now, as I said these rights for gay couples existed before marriage was legalised for them, but that legalisation of their relationship will mean many of them will be encouraged enough to adopt a child as a result and as I've said this may not be in the eventual best interests of the child and can lead to those problems that I have mentioned before.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

Research really had nothing to do with it. The only research that mattered that I could see was the reference to other countries that had passed similar laws recently.

People who aren't familiar with bundy's work in the Politics forum and wonder, with all his whining, if maybe he was unfarily treated - you need wonder no longer. If this is a standard sample of his work, the exile seems pretty solid.

01-21-2019 , 09:15 PM

#430

will1530

self-banned

Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 5,773

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

Bigotry would be without saying civil union and a statement that I hate gays - so explain

Separate but "equal" is 100% bigotry, as has been proven over and over again. And no you fool, you do not have to call a black person the n word to be accurately labeled a racist, and you don't need need to yell I hate F*** to be accurately labeled a bigot.

01-21-2019 , 09:16 PM

#431

well named

poorly undertitled

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 78,077

For reference, here is a good resource for research on outcomes associated with same-sex couples and child rearing:

http://whatweknow.inequality.cornell...sbian-parents/

01-21-2019 , 09:16 PM

#432

juan valdez

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5,686

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

Yeah - come back to me in 20 years and I'll be willing to have this debate with you. Until then I'll sit back and watch and of course read the occasional study on the social effects of SSM.

I'm definitely in favor of same sex marriage. I don't get how you worry about kids. Kids aren't... well you know this. Same sex couples adopt children or in other cases have donors. Having same sex parents is better than having 1 parent or the government paying someone to be your parent. I highly doubt same sex couples are as effective at parenting as traditional families on average but that's debatable and minor in the big picture

01-21-2019 , 09:18 PM

#433

bundy5

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 8,141

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobo Fett

Stick by that absolutely - as I've always said the debate here is what is in the best interests of a child and as the courts always prefer when dealing with separation that they want to keep both the father and mother in their lives as they can see the value of having that influence of the opposite sex on that child's upbringing.

01-21-2019 , 09:18 PM

#434

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 72,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

so, separate but equal

but heres the thing, marriage is a legal construct. so allowing for civil unions but not marriage opens the door for discrimination.

regardless, it seems that you are open to leaving it up to the church? so why would you be against a church that decides to suppport it and marry gays?

01-21-2019 , 09:19 PM

#435

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by juan valdez

You mean they don't **** their kids up quite so effectively?

01-21-2019 , 09:19 PM

#436

AlwaysFolding

Urban Pharmer

Join Date: Oct 2016 Posts: 19,980

I'm out. Sorry, jman, you'll have to meme on your own.

01-21-2019 , 09:22 PM

#437

prana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 8,513

Yeah guys. He doesn’t care about research. Courts dole out visitation between the parents so therefore no gay marriage. Logic.

01-21-2019 , 09:23 PM

#438

bundy5

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 8,141

Quote:

Originally Posted by juan valdez

You're welcome to be in favour of SSM but I've held this view for a number of years now and don't see any reason why this should change. Maybe it is because of my religious upbringing or respect for established institutions but I cannot fundamentally support something where there is no entitlement for it to change in the first place (i.e the institution of marriage was founded in religious scripture of it being between a man and woman).

01-21-2019 , 09:24 PM

#439

Bobo Fett

Carpe Diem

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 56,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

Not sure when courts became the experts on this, but for this to even be a valid argument, they would want to keep both the mother in father in the child's lives, but in same sex parental custody cases, not show any such preference. Is that the case, and if so, can you provide any evidence of this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

You're welcome to be in favour of SSM but I've held this view for a number of years now and don't see any reason why this should change. Maybe it is because of my religious upbringing or respect for established institutions but I cannot fundamentally support something where there is no entitlement for it to change in the first place (i.e the institution of marriage was founded in religious scripture of it being between a man and woman).

You probably should have gone with this rather than your claptrap about "it is quite clear that on average a child's upbringing is going to be much more enriching if it has a male and female parent in its life".

01-21-2019 , 09:24 PM

#440

juan valdez

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5,686

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

You mean they don't **** their kids up quite so effectively?

No I mean they probably **** them up in a different way

Men and women aren't the same (on average). Maternal and paternal behavior isn't the same. Similar but different roles at different stages of life. Most people suck at most things and people turn out alright. If a couple gals want to scissor each other and also have a family, good luck. There's nothing better in this world than a smiling baby. Give it your best shot

01-21-2019 , 09:25 PM

#441

All-In Flynn

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 10,923

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

Would you agree that this implies that courts are indifferent to maintaining access (and even joint custody) wherever possible in cases where same-sex couples divorce? Which is to say: would you agree that, if it could be shown that courts were not indifferent to that, the assumptions underlying your case would be falsified?

Last edited by All-In Flynn; 01-21-2019 at 09:25 PM. Reason: ponied, figure bobo's got this, stepping back

01-21-2019 , 09:26 PM

#442

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 72,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by juan valdez

lol shocking. just shocking analysis.

heres the thing tho, if you had any sort of rudimentary logic and analysis, it would be quite apparent that bolded is a long shot. but rather than putting even a cursory amount of thought into the types of gay couples that would on average go out of their way to find a way to raise a kid, you just allow your knee jerk opinion of gays=bad to show thru.

01-21-2019 , 09:26 PM

#443

bundy5

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 8,141

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobo Fett

There would be thousands of cases out there (where not suppressed) in any jurisdiction - I'm not doing your research for you. It is basic knowledge that the courts prefer to take this line for the child's sake.

01-21-2019 , 09:27 PM

#444

juan valdez

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5,686

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

I have no problem if your church wants to reject SSM but IMO the guberment should give equal rights.

01-21-2019 , 09:28 PM

#445

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 72,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

some religions allow for gay marriage tho. some allow for polygamy as well. I would imagine some have all kinds of crazy rlls too.

01-21-2019 , 09:29 PM

#446

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

There would be thousands of cases out there (where not suppressed) in any jurisdiction - I'm not doing your research for you.

LOL

"I am making a claim about what courts do and now place the burden on you to prove I'm wrong"

01-21-2019 , 09:30 PM

#447

bundy5

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 8,141

Quote:

Originally Posted by juan valdez

I have no problem if your church wants to reject SSM but IMO the guberment should give equal rights.

Even when the law was founded on religious teachings?

01-21-2019 , 09:31 PM

#448

prana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 8,513

Sharia law up in this.

01-21-2019 , 09:32 PM

#449

bundy5

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 8,141

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victor

some religions allow for gay marriage tho. some allow for polygamy as well. I would imagine some have all kinds of crazy rlls too.

We're talking mainstream ones

01-21-2019 , 09:32 PM

#450

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by bundy5

This isn't a theocracy, bro, and if it were, the Christian organization of society is of collective ownership of property and a staunch rejection of capitalism. Somehow that does not seem to be as important to you as making sure that the gays have lower status.

Page 18 of 74

First

8 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 28 38 68

Last

Closed Thread Subscribe

...

Page 18 of 74

First

8 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 28 38 68

Last