- Aug 1, 2002
- 22,826
- 10,715
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- NMFC
If three people are at the table eating are they not diners as well? If you split hairs you split hairs.
Don't ask me ask Malcolm X - its his tortured metaphor
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If three people are at the table eating are they not diners as well? If you split hairs you split hairs.
If three people are at the table eating are they not diners as well? If you split hairs you split hairs.
Any politician advocating discrimination should be jailed.
I would prefer the debate was; do we want to have anti-discrimination laws or not?
Don't ask me ask Malcolm X - its his tortured metaphor
Anti discrimination is discrimination.
The people who bang on about discrimination actually love it, they just want the right sort of people to be ...
"
By and large, marriage has historically been recognised as exclusively a relationship between a male and a female. As such, it's not unreasonable for some people to believe that this is a fundamental aspect of the social construct. For such a person, redefining marriage to include gay couples is like redefining green to mean blue.
If you believe the concept of gay marriage makes no logical sense than you can hardly be in favour of it, even if you wish to see that gay couples have equal rights before the law.
A refusal to modernise is the case for reform not an argument against
It is extremely unreasonable to hold what some people have historically believed in a secular society as having higher meaning & purpose.
Exactly the same erroneous beliefs were cast aside no matter how firmly held with little regard for the angst it may cause the holder of said belief in the slavery, apartheid, woman's right to vote, racial and female equality discussions.By and large, marriage has historically been recognised as exclusively a relationship between a male and a female. As such, it's not unreasonable for some people to believe that this is a fundamental aspect of the social construct. For such a person, redefining marriage to include gay couples is like redefining green to mean blue.
If you believe the concept of gay marriage makes no logical sense than you can hardly be in favour of it, even if you wish to see that gay couples have equal rights before the law.
No it's not. Change for the sake of change is absurd.
.
How firmly one holds a view has little if anything to do with it's validity.
If anyone cares, Wyatt Roy has just spoken out in favour of the issue.
Both political leaders in the country are starting to look more and more out of step with public opinion. I can see why Abbott is opposing the issue, but for the life of me I see no benefit politically for Gillard taking the stance she has, it makes no sense. A reversal of her stance would, in my opinion do her more good than harm politically.
Was he in favour of gay marriage?
I favour the BoJo line, at least he has a rational argument unlike so many
"if gay marriage were OK – and I was uncertain on the issue – then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men, or indeed three men and a dog"
Wouldn't be surprised if that happens sooner rather than later.
An interim report found there was no statistical difference between children of same-sex couples and the rest of the population on indicators including self-esteem, emotional behaviour and the amount of time spent with parents.
However, children of same-sex couples scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion, measuring how well a family gets along.
Researchers said the difference between the two groups on these measures was so strong it would only occur by chance less than one in 10,000 times.
Children of same-sex couples thriving: study
not surprising. they want kids. they put the effort into them. lots of other kids are the products of cheao but expensive farks. the gheys, their cheap farks dont produce babies. thats how it should be. getting your jollies should not be like a lay by, where you gotta pay it off. that is just not fair.
the gheys
Children of same-sex couples thriving: study
I think we should wait for the fulll report with peer review before drawing too many conclusions from this research. Why did they even produce an interim report?
The study participants were volunteers and the data collected by an online questionaire. Both aspects could lead to great deal of bias.
How many crappy parents are going to take the trouble to sign up then say their kids are struggling? On the other hand same gay couples have an interest in signing up and saying how well adjusted their kids are. What measures were taken to ensure the accuracy of the information given?
Also the headline is incorrect. The study includes any families where at least one of the parents is same-sex attracted - or at least said they were. This could include biological male female parents that occasionally had a threesome - or had thought about it.
However, children of same-sex couples scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion, measuring how well a family gets along.
Researchers said the difference between the two groups (Heterosexual & Homosexual) on these measures was so strong it would only occur by chance less than one in 10,000 times.
Well I'm sure you'd like it to say gay parents are crap parents but this study is not the only one that has been done on this subject and they all pretty much show that gay couples make terrific parents. No matter how you'd like to rationalise it and discredit it to suit your homophobic world view, research on this front just doesn't show what you want it to. Unless of course it is conducted by a Christian organisation then you might get studies showing gays make bad parents. Try looking there it will make you feel happier I know.
But you should read this bit again:
However I know anything I say here wont persuade you, or your homophobic beliefs.
You evaluated this research based on a newspaper article which really shows what a towering intellect you are (sarcasm intended). You refute the research (you have only read about in an article in the media) based on your own homophobic bias, not because you ever examined the research carefully. Just another day in the homophobic world of CC eh?I missed where you actually contradicted anything I stated. You are the one who appears to be rationalising to suit your worldview.
I agree with you that research sponsored by Christian groups could suffer from bias. Each piece of research should be evaluated on its merits. This one doesn't appear to stand up.
. No matter how you'd like to rationalise it and discredit it to suit your homophobic world view, research on this front just doesn't show what you want it to.
But one arguement against same sex marriage is that gay people don't make good parents or their sexuality will damage or warp the child. I don't disagree that any child that has two loving parents (regardless of their sexuality) is in a good position to have a healthy childhood. But it seems when it is pointed out by research that same-sex couples raise happy kids just as much as hetero couples it's only propaganda in your eyes. Even when one parent is the biological parent of the child you cannot see beyond your own homophobic world view. You are the deluded one. Deluded by your prejudice.There is a huge amount of research that shows that children of two biological parents do far better, so much in fact that it has been argued the entire black/white income differential can be explained by this.
You delude yourself with blatant propaganda if you want to but don't expect others to be equally as gullible.