|
|
|
Vorn, I've checked out his sources and they're mainly opinion pieces, so I personally don't think they're particularly useful as objective, scientific sources. I've only had a chance to check out a few of the 'scientific' sources used within those links (I do have a life, after all  ) and they were of questionable content and seem to be unsupported by the scientific community at large. Though again I haven't checked them all, so some may be supported by other scientific studies.
| Autobon wrote: |
| Despite what homosexual activists would like us to believe, the state does not endorse marriage due to people's feelings for one another. It endorses marriage largely because of benefit it brings to children and in turn society. Society receives no benefit by changing the definition of marriage to include homosexual relationships, in fact it is harmed. Study after study shows that the best outcome for both children and society depends on a stable marriage between a man and a woman, and heterosexuality and homosexuality should never be legally equated. |
| Quote: |
| The literature (including the literature on which opponents to marriage of same-sex couples appear to rely) indicates that parents' financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union. As the CPA stated in 2003, the stressors encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent. The CPA recognizes and appreciates that persons and institutions are entitled to their opinions and positions on this issue. However, CPA is concerned that some are mis-interpreting the findings of psychological research to support their positions, when their positions are more accurately based on other systems of belief or values. CPA asserts that children stand to benefit from the well-being that results when their parents' relationship is recognized and supported by society's institutions. -link redacted. Now .1 in other post. |
Gay couples can adopt, thus helping the kids and society. And allowing gay marriage would help the economy.
Links redacted. Now .2 in other post.
| Quote: |
| What would happen to society if everyone lived faithfully in traditional marriage? Our country would thrive with a drastic reduction in numerous social problems liberals claim to want to fix, including illegitimacy, crime, welfare, and abortion. Instead they promote deviant lifestyles that have proven to be highly detrimental to personal health, raise illegitimacy and out of wedlock births, increase poverty and government dependence, among many other negative effects on society. |
As was pointed out in the above video, that is an a priori hypothesis. However:
| Quote: |
The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.
- Link redacted. Now .3 in other post. |
The thing is, just because a marriage is faithful, that doesn't mean it's healthy. And gay marriages can also be faithful. And gay marriage may improve public health, as a study suggests: link redacted. Now .4 in other post.
| Quote: |
| Life Is The Path wrote: |
| The things is, that's very offensive to gay people, because homosexuality is consensual between two adults and occurs between two beings |
Then why do we still look down on incest or polygamy? Since such things can happen between consenting adults, do you support legalizing it? Why stop at homosexuality? |
That has already been answered by Vorn. I personally have no problem with polygamy, though my girlfriend is more than enough for me.
| Quote: |
| Bestiality is something that happens without consent. And paedophilia, well, I'm sure I don't need to elaborate on the wrongness of paedophilia. |
| Quote: |
| The homosexual community has a long track record with promiscuity, STD epidemics wholly apart from AIDS, etc. It is a highly destructive lifestyle, especially compared with traditional marriage. However many homosexual activists like to bring out the "born this way" argument, even though there is zero conclusive research on the subject. |
Research for the born this way argument:
Links redacted. Now .5 in other post.
| Quote: |
| LGBTQ people are neither more nor less sexually promiscuous than heterosexual people. Some heterosexuals and gays and lesbians are involved in long term, monogamous relationships while others may have multiple partners. Some remain celibate. - link redacted. Now .6 in other post. |
| Quote: |
| Please help me to understand, why do you not like bestiality and pedophilia? Is it their fault they have these feelings? Aren't those people just born that way? By your own rules, shouldn't you consider their sexual desires to be equal to yours so long as they don't physically hurt someone? |
A rapist can be as gentle as he or she likes, but that doesn't equate to consent.
| Quote: |
| Yet society seems to understand that these practices are perverted in and of themselves, regardless of whatever "feelings" someone might have. At the same time we glorify homosexuality, which is inherently detrimental to the survival of human race, statistically proven to promote rampant spread of disease, shorten lifespans, hugely increase promiscuity and infidelity, etc. in its community. Kind of weird how that works. |
Homosexuality, in and of itself, doesn't promote disease, but that is linked to other factors, such as, say, not using a condom (which is common for heterosexual people). Infidelity and promiscuity also don't stem from homosexuality, but is common in heterosexual people, too (just look at Henry VIII, Ghengis Khan and Charlemagne).
_________________
I am a Star Wars fan. That doesn't mean that I hate or love Jar Jar. That doesn't mean I hate or love Lucas, or agree or disagree 100% with him. That doesn't mean I prefer the PT over the OT, or vice versa. That doesn't mean I hate the EU, or even love all of it. These are not prerequisites. Being a man is not a prerequisite. Being a geek is not a prerequisite. The only prerequisite is that I love something about Star Wars. I am a Star Wars fan.
Last edited by Life Is The Path on Mon May 14, 2012 6:46 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
. What I wrote is still there when I go to edit it and quote it, but it's not showing up.