Homosexuals are rarely monogamous, often having as many as three hundred or more partners in a lifetime.
This statement is NOT based on fact it is based on hate speech plain and simple. Much like the literature that claims that homosexuals drink their own urine or are unable to control their sexual urges. Those statements are NOT based on any kind of fact and are purely fearmongering. If you actually believe this stuff I think we may have found our major stumbling block.
1. More than 10 thousand studies have concluded that kids do best when they are raised by loving moms and dads. They are less likely to be doping, drinking, flunking out of school, less likely to commit suicide, less likely to be in poverty, less likely to become juvenile delinquents and for the girls are less likely to become teen mothers. Kids coming from traditional healthy families are healthier both emotionally and physically years later than those without traditional parents.
As I've said before this same argument can be made against single parents as much as it can against homosexual parents so unless you are going to start saying that single parents should give up their kids please stop using these studies are arguments against gay marriage since they are irrelevant.
2. I've already given you evidence from Scandinavian countries that show that the homosexual marriage does destroy traditional marriages. These two cannot coexist because they represent opposite ends of the spectrum. There's lots of reasons behind this destruction of traditional marriages.
You have stated that couples divorced because gay marriage was legalized this indicates that the heterosexual marriages that these people were in were a sham to begin with. How strong in the marriage if it is based on lies? this doesn't speak to the "danger" of gay marriage but to how people were getting married for weak reasons to begin with.
3. Are you kidding? With the legalization of homosexual marriage the government schools will be required that marriage is no longer between a man and a women. Textbooks will have to be changed (some have already been changed) and they will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships into these schoolbooks. Equal space and status will have to be met and kids in kindergaten will be reading stories about having two mommies or two daddys.
Look I doubt anything like this will happen but even if it does it is merely teaching about tolerance for all members of society. You are perfectly welcome to teach your kids that homosexuality is a sin in it's proper place your home and your church. If anyone attempts to stop you from doing so they are violating your constitutional rights (as long as you aren't advocating violence which you don't strike me as the type to do that).
4. Traditional marriages have always been favored when it comes to placing a child into a home. Children will be put in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis. Even polyamourous couples won't be excluded. There will be no thought about fatherless or motherless children anymore.
Again I say so what? What a child needs is love more than anything and you can't tell me that a gay couple is going to love the child any less than a straight couple.
5. Well then foster parents, most of whom I've met are strong Christians, will be required to undergo "sensitivity training" to rid themselves of bias in favor of heterosexuality. We would have to affirm homosexuality to the children and teens as ok. Moral training when it comes to scriptures will be forbidden. This is already the current law in CA.
I really can't speak too much to this because I am not familiar enough with the fostering programs around the various states. My guess is that homosexuality would have to be treated in much the same way as race is treated, with tolerance. If you don't want to go along with that program then don't become a foster parent.
6. When millions of new dependents become eligible for coverage. Every HIV-positive patient needs only to find a partner to receive the same coverage as offered to an employee. Some are saying this will drastically increase our premiums and it may not be profitable for companies to stay in business. How about the American businesses who provide such insurance to their employees? Under Obama it will be mandatory to provide this or they could be fined daily. The entire health care system could actually collapse under the weight of it all.
This argument is irrelevant. If an HIV patient wants coverage today all they need to do if find someone to take sympathy on them and marry them to get them covered. So what? A person with HIV is on a truncated lifetime and would therefore arguably cost an insurance company less than a person being covered with various health problems but likely to live a long life. There are some companies that offer coverage to same-sex couples today and they aren't noticing any higher premiums as a result that I'm aware of. I work for one such company and while health care costs have certainly increased they have gone up in line with just about every other insurance program out there today.
7. It's already happened in Canada. There are dozens of examples showing that religious freedom is on the way out and soon. On 4/28/04 the Parliament passed Bill C-250 which criminalized speech or writings that criticize homosexuality. Anything thought to be homophobic is punishable by six months in prison or other severe penalties. Pastors have been jailed for preaching Romans 1. A man who owned a printing press in Canada was fined over $40,000 for refusing to print stationery for homosexual activist organization. In our country I already blogged on the story about the Christian photographer who was fined heavily by the courts (in our own country) because she said she refused the job to shoot a gay wedding. She just said no thank you and got hauled into court.
This is not Canada. Religious freedom will not be going away in this country, we have a constitutionally protected right to it. I'm not familiar enough with Canada's government but I believe they had other "tolerance" related legislation that goes a bit too far which is more at the heart of this issue than anything that would happen in this country. In your example of the photographer, I assume the case was thrown out eventually because she has the right to take whatever jobs she wants.
One homosexual marriage is legalized nationwide many changes will be made. Nonprofit organizations that refuse to hire homosexuals on religious grounds will lose their tax exemptions and some Christian collegs are already worrying about this.
I'm not sure if this would really happen. Again if these groups are religious in nature I would think that they would still qualify for the tax exempt status because they have a protect to practice their religion. But then I'm not familiar with the legal standings of tax exempt orgainizations.
8. I believe our founding fathers to this country are roaring and rolling over in their graves right now.
I agree. I think our founding fathers are definitely rolling in their graves (if that were possible) based on the things that have been carried out in their names, but for different reasons than you.
1. To me that would akin to legalizing sin.
I'm not criminlizing single parenting. I'm saying that having a mom and dad is most beneficial for a child regardless if we're talking homosexual or hetersexual single parenting.
"Legalizing sin" again this is a religious argument and doesn't apply to our government or laws. We have freedom of speech in this country which means that I can "take the lord's name in vane" which is a sin. So already have legalized sins in this country.
You may not be "criminalizing single parenting" but the arguments that you present against gay parents can just as easily be applied to single parents and are therefore irrelevant. If a single parent is worthy enough to raise a child than a gay parent is equally as worthy.
2. Yes, we are starting to see a shift in trend here but not nearly as bad as it will be when we start legalizing homosexual marriage. You have seen nothing yet.
You are proving bcshow's point with this statment. The point is that gay marriage isn't the cause of the "problem" and therefore that argument is irrelevant.
5. You mean like there once was on the books? Why were those put there to begin with?
Criminalizing homosexuality was done so on a religious basis which is why those laws were overturned and rightly so.
6. The whole thing maybe a moot point, I agree, when the universal health care becomes available. But with the whole acceptance of the lifestyle I would expect that we would continue to see a rise in HIV-Aids that will clog up the system. I never even heard of aids when I was a kid. It was not even on the radar back when I was growing up. Why all of a sudden?
Because it wasn't understood for quite a long time, and then when it did start cropping up it was seen as the "gay disease" and was trivialized and now we are paying the price. HIV-AIDS is transmitted through a number of different ways none are exclusive to homosexuals. You ask why it took so long to get noticed just look back 20-30 years when it first started and ask why more research wasn't put into it, why PSAs were put out to educate the public sooner?
7. You don't have to be gay to be murdered, beaten or humiliated. It's been happening to Christians for centuries. And I expect that will be on the rise once again.
So is it a rite of passage or something? A group of people need to be mistreated by the populace for X number of years before they are accepted members of society? If so what is that magic number I'm just curious as to when I can expect this crap to stop.
