Do you realize there are health risks involved, not just statisically (STDs & AIDS) but also anal fissures, bacterial infection, anal cancer & colon rupture? If 2 people understand these real risks & want to do it anyway - fine - but when kids get involved (as in legalizing gay marriage) I have a problem with it. Why would you want children to be adopted by couples practicing unhealthy practices when children imitate their parents?
Following the same line of reasoning, people who consume alcohol or smoke tobacco products should be banned from marrying and raising kids. The negative health consequences of both of those activities are extremely well documented. Furthermore, it's well documented that children mimic these behaviors.
Oh ... and what about the health risks associated with eating trans-fats, distracted driving, insufficient exercise?
Why are the health risks associated with homosexuality the
only health risks that matter?
Children have a RIGHT to be raised by the 2 opposite sexes that created them.
I know a lot of children being raised by single mothers (or fathers). Are you intending to force them to get married against their will?
A child has the right to be raised by
one single woman, but not the right to be raised by
two women?
How does banning gay marriage remotely preserve this right? A single woman has the legal right to shack up with a man for a night in order to get pregnant. She's not even legally obligated to inform him that he's the father.
What's your proposed solution? Mandatory paternity tests and mandatory marriages for the parents?
Gay marriage denies them either a mother or father,
So does divorce with one parent being granted sole custody. I'm not hearing any push from conservatives to ban this.
And if a parent dies young ... Are you intending to ban death? Are you going to ban widows and widowers from raising their own children?
devaluing both parents, saying mothers or fathers are not really important.
That's an illogical conclusion to draw. I don't have children. Does that imply that children aren't really important?
when studies & common sense show that children need BOTH a mother & father...
I'll start with common sense.
Countless children have grown up with only
one parent, and the vast majority of these children became happy, healthy, productive members of society. Therefore, common sense shows that you don't
need both a mother and a father. Some children have even grown up as wards of the state, with neither mother nor father, and still managed to be happy, healthy, productive members of society.
As for your studies:
- Dr. A. Dean Byrd was LDS and was a proponent of conversion therapy (attempting to convert homosexuals into heterosexuals)
- Glenn T. Stanton is a director at Focus on the Family, a prominent anti-homosexual organization; his education focused on philosophy and religion
- Bill Muehlenberg has degrees in philosopy and theology and carries out a ministry in pro-faith and pro-family activism
Is that your idea of unbiased sources?
And one scholarly work ... well ... the 57 word abstract to a scholarly work which suggests that there is some benefit to having two parents (provided both of them are actively
involved in child-rearing), but doesn't provide any degree of magnitude for comparison, nor does it provide the degree of certainty associated with the results.
It certainly
doesn't imply that having a mother and father is
necessary. (Just a
little exaggeration on your part, eh?)
For a moment, let's pretend that the study conclusively shows that children do much better when their mother and father are actively involved in child-rearing.
Does that mean you advocate banning marriages where one parent is too busy to be involved in the child-rearing (like soldiers who get deployed overseas...)?
Normalizing & even encouraging children to explore homosexuality obviously causes more to experiment with homosexuality.
And?
I'm straight. If kids want to explore heterosexuality, fine. If they want to explore homosexuality, fine.
Also, others' rights have been infringed upon in favor of supporting gay rights.
*In April 2008, an Albuquerque photographer was fined over $6,000 for refusing to be hired to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony.
*In May, 2008, a black administrator was fired from the U of Toledo, Ohio, for writing an editorial objecting to the comparison of black discrimination to same-sex marriage.
*On November 19, 2008, eHarmony, a Christian-based matching service was forced by New Jersey's Division on Civil Rights to provide website matching services for homosexuals.
You're complaining because someone infringed upon their
right to discriminate?
What law gives me the legal right to discriminate? Can it be used to legally discriminate against religious fundamentalists?
