Homosexuals and the demise of the family?

[Sunstone]

One of the arguments made against homosexual marriage is that it would lead to the demise of the family. In this thread, I'm only concerned with that one argument, and not concerned with any other aspect of homosexuality. What do you make of the argument? Is there any substance behind it? If so, what evidence is there for it?

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[Mathematician]

Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents.

They're somehow relating the birth of childeren to homosexuals now? haha, this is too good.


No, I do not think it affects the family like people seem to think. Homosexuals are capable of experiencing love like you and me, and they're able to manage a family by sustaining a job, sending their childeren to education schools, and putting food on the table. They might pass up a few verses in the Bible, but that's their right!

 

[Unedited]

There's nothing that says a family can't consist of two mothers or two fathers instead of a mother and a father. Or just one mother, or just one father. Or an aunt and a grandmother. Granted, two mothers or two fathers would have to adopt instead of having their own children, but being as there are so many children needing homes, I'd see that as a good thing for the family.

 

[Pah]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

Unless I've read that incorrectly, it said homosexual marriage "locked in" an ongoing trend. The bulk of the paper dealt with heterosexual "living together" families.

While there is a correspondence to the years of acceptance of gay marriage , homosexuality as the cause, of the decline is not given as fact. Traditional heterosexual marriage, as an institution, is failing all on it's own. The failure would be the same if no homosexual marriage were allowed.

 

[Prima]

Here are arguements...and my responses

1 - It's not a healthy, balanced parental situation
A - What's not healthy about it? Is having two caring homosexual parents better than having two uncaring heteros simply because they're the same gender?

2 - It will create a bad environment for the child
A - the only bad environment it might create is that of the child getting picked on by other kids. And in that case, it's the other kids' faults - not the parents

3 - this will lead to the demise of the family because next, people will be allowed to have goats as parents!
A - We already do, they're called stubborn old conservatives.

 

[Druidus]

3 - this will lead to the demise of the family because next, people will be allowed to have goats as parents!
A - We already do, they're called stubborn old conservatives.

To quote a friend of mine:

Why is it that whenever someone suggests allowing marriage to multiple partners, same-sex marriage, or lowering the age of consent, that you Anti's always say, "What next? Marriage to goats?"

I mean, honestly... why would you even think this? How is that related to anything? Are you anxious to legallize marriage to goats? Are you secretly masturbating to goat porn, or having secret sex out of wedlock with goats, and are ashamed of yourself? I figure that since Christians and other similar people think any kind of sex is okay WITHIN wedlock, that this is why they're opposed to legalizing marriage of gays and other groups... including animal/human relationships.

So, Anti's, are you secretly wishing for the day you can have sex with your squirrelfriend or billyfriend without going to Hell?

:biglaugh:

 

[almifkhar]

i think that when one refers to homesexuals and the demise of family, i think that what they are really saying is that a homosexual couple cannot create a baby together. for example if men decided today like how what happened to greek civilation back in the day, that sex with a woman was nasty, the family would basically cese to exist which in turn leads to less and less babies being born. the book called sex in history speaks about this topic. today, there are other ways to get a baby, but just consider that if the vast majority of men thought along these lines, there would be less babies to adopt. not all women want to be a carry a baby that is not going to be theirs either, and not all men want to donate the seed. the homosexual couple could also run into the problem of say finding a man or woman to donate the seed, who then decides later on that they want to be part of the childs life. then there are three parents to deal with, and who is to say that the homosexual couple wants to deal with other person being around, and one has to wonder how this would effect the child, after all step parent/step child relationships can be quite rocky. i don't believe that it is an easy decission either way around. mommy or daddy being gay is the last thing to consider here.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

See what happens when you allow same sex marriage?! People get divorced while their children are still children instead of spending 20 years in a miserable and loveless marriage and producing children who decide there's no way they're getting married because their parents marriage was so obviously a disaster.
What an appalling result of letting gay people wed. As we're all very aware, no-one in any country that doesn't allow gay marriage get's divorced before their children are adults.
Honestly, I've yet to see anything that supports the notion that same sex marriage will produce some cataclysmic family shattering event that isn't already happening somewhere. The article cited above is a case to point. Everything they've attributed to gay marriage is already happening in spades.

 

[Original Freak]

that sums it up for me

 

[Pah]

i think that when one refers to homesexuals and the demise of family, i think that what they are really saying is that a homosexual couple cannot create a baby together. for example if men decided today like how what happened to greek civilation back in the day, that sex with a woman was nasty, the family would basically cese to exist which in turn leads to less and less babies being born. the book called sex in history speaks about this topic. today, there are other ways to get a baby, but just consider that if the vast majority of men thought along these lines, there would be less babies to adopt. not all women want to be a carry a baby that is not going to be theirs either, and not all men want to donate the seed. the homosexual couple could also run into the problem of say finding a man or woman to donate the seed, who then decides later on that they want to be part of the childs life. then there are three parents to deal with, and who is to say that the homosexual couple wants to deal with other person being around, and one has to wonder how this would effect the child, after all step parent/step child relationships can be quite rocky. i don't believe that it is an easy decission either way around. mommy or daddy being gay is the last thing to consider here.

Fifty percent of homosexual men have fathered children, seventy-five percent of lesbians gave birth to children. In Japan ninety-five percent of homosexual men have fatherd children. Economics being the way it is there is no "shortage" of donated sperm or womb.

 

[jamaesi]

[size=+2]Traditional Marriage in America Comes Crashing to an End![/size]

Thousands of formerly ardent Christians filed for divorce this morning, as others raped their children and household pets, after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that gay people are citizens too.

"My marriage is over," spoke one upset Christian as he dry-humped the fender of a parked car. "My marriage isn't worth anything," he insisted. "I feel no connection to my wife and children and I just want to do whatever I please, when it pleases me to do it." With that he turned to a passing elderly woman and shouted for her to reveal her "tits."

This same scene is being repeated over and over again, on every street in every city and town in America. Once devoted parents and spouses, America's Christians are denouncing any bonds between themselves and their families as they embark on a binge of sex, drugs and socialism.

"We warned you that this would happen," insisted one anti-human rights activist. "We told you that gay citizens enjoying equal rights would destroy marriage, the family and even Christianity itself. And now it's happened," he said. "You should have listened to us. If you had, I wouldn't of had to have sex with three different strange men in a public restroom this morning."

The fallout from today's decision is enormous and far reaching. So big is the change that swept America this morning that it may be days before a true accounting of the damage is complete. As things stand, one unconfirmed report has Bob Jones Jr., of Bob Jones University, defecating on his bible upon hearing the news, while other witnesses have come forward to report that they had seen Pat Robertson, former leader of the Christian Coalition and the host of the 700 club, enjoying sex with a chair.

Congress was quick to pass an appropriations bill funding the thousands of new orphanages needed to care for the abandoned children. It is hoped that this is only a temporary measure and that Christians will yet accept the financial responsibility for their families, even if they no longer love them and insist on masturbating in public.​

: P
(obviously this isn't making fun of all Christians- it mentions BOB JONES and the 700 Club so no one get offended, I don't mean to offend any of the fine people here)


Two heterosexuals happily married wouldn't hurt me with I was in a committed loving relationship with another girl- oh wait, did I strike upon the whole problem?

"Anyone who has a problem with love never got enough of it."


So yeah, I don't get the DRAMA and ANGST and PROBLEMS and GENERAL EMONESS that me getting hitched to another girl would obviously cause. Anyone care to fill me in?

 

[thundermouse]

DEMISE? it is not demise, for i am thundermouse and i am the sun that everyone revolves around.

 

[jamaesi]

i think that when one refers to homesexuals and the demise of family, i think that what they are really saying is that a homosexual couple cannot create a baby together. for example if men decided today like how what happened to greek civilation back in the day, that sex with a woman was nasty, the family would basically cese to exist which in turn leads to less and less babies being born. the book called sex in history speaks about this topic. today, there are other ways to get a baby, but just consider that if the vast majority of men thought along these lines, there would be less babies to adopt. not all women want to be a carry a baby that is not going to be theirs either, and not all men want to donate the seed. the homosexual couple could also run into the problem of say finding a man or woman to donate the seed, who then decides later on that they want to be part of the childs life. then there are three parents to deal with, and who is to say that the homosexual couple wants to deal with other person being around, and one has to wonder how this would effect the child, after all step parent/step child relationships can be quite rocky. i don't believe that it is an easy decission either way around. mommy or daddy being gay is the last thing to consider here.

With six or seven BILLION of us running around, I think that worrying about a human shortage is a little... well, silly.

Homosexuals can always adopt.

 

[Prima]

Indeed, with the number of orphans and orphan refugees, there are plenty of kids who need a loving home. And when we let people get married who don't want children and who don't plan on having kids, it's similar.

 

[almifkhar]

pah, jamaesi, please reread what i was saying. i am not saying that homosexuals are the demise of family, and i was not saying that homosexuals cannot create their own children, they cannot create their own children as a couple was the point. wether or not one supports the idea of homosexuals parenting children is to me not really the issue. the issue is that they as a couple cannot get together and create life, they have no choice but to turn to someone of the opposite sex to do it, wehter it be by invetro, adoption, actual sex with the opposite sex, or what ever idea comes next. i think that this is a issue that does not have a easy answer, and the effects have not been shown for the long haul either way. this was what i wanted the people to consider.

 

[Prima]

this was what i wanted the people to consider.

They did, indeed, consider it, and I agree with their conclusion...I don't think it's as much of an issue as some people would like to make it.

 

[Pah]

pah, jamaesi, please reread what i was saying. i am not saying that homosexuals are the demise of family, and i was not saying that homosexuals cannot create their own children, they cannot create their own children as a couple was the point. wether or not one supports the idea of homosexuals parenting children is to me not really the issue. the issue is that they as a couple cannot get together and create life, they have no choice but to turn to someone of the opposite sex to do it, wehter it be by invetro, adoption, actual sex with the opposite sex, or what ever idea comes next. i think that this is a issue that does not have a easy answer, and the effects have not been shown for the long haul either way. this was what i wanted the people to consider.

Actually, there have been studies - three I believe - where there has been offspring from two females and (in an other) two males producing offspring. It is not as strange as it sounds. Nature has many ways of propogating. Asexually (female only) and when a female changes to a male. The queen bee is of another type.

 

[Original Freak]

Actually, there have been studies - three I believe - where there has been offspring from two females and (in an other) two males producing offspring. It is not as strange as it sounds. Nature has many ways of propogating. Asexually (female only) and when a female changes to a male. The queen bee is of another type.

There is one type of fish, I just read about it in a book I got for my son from the Library, where they are all born Female. The largest fish in the group is male and when he dies the largest female turns into a male. If only I could remember the name of that fish...I'll try to find it tonight if I remember.

 

[fromthe heart]

I don't feel homosexual couples are any danger to the family structure as it has always been. I do see swings to differences in life styles are changing but the family unit of which I came into the world will go on despite gays in society.