Added: 2 years ago
From: timtheloner
Views: 157
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (12)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • i just feel that i can do tons better than this. *Sighs*

  • With regard to the uncited studies on same-sex couple-based parenting vs. opposite-sex couple-based parenting, actually at least a few of those DO exist. HOWEVER, strong suspicion and doubt have been cast on: 1) adequacy of representative samples, 2) OBJECTIVITY of researchers conducting the studies, 3) adequacy of research METHODS applied to this particular issue, BLAH BLAH BLAH. Also, the APA/APA (according to DEFENDANT's deponents prior to full trial in California) SUPPORT gay marriage!!!

  • There needs to be a TV show called 'Everybody Hates Kenballer00'.

  • Totally, because you can't be single to have kids! Oh No! There is no such thing as single parents! Banning gay marriage will TOTALLY make it illegal for gay couples to raise children. Because oh course, NO unmarried gay couples are raising children right now!

    If you are stupid enough to believe this, then you shouldn't be allowed to have children.

  • 7:45... Multiple times, he uses the term 'rear children' in his email. Of course, homosexual partners can rear children too - there are plenty of orphans out there (as you mention in your earlier video).

    Earlier, he claims that research shows that children reared by heterosexual partners are better-off than those reared by homosexual couples. But I was not in the slightest bit surprised that he doesn't actually cite what research that is, what it actually showed or, who did it or when.

  • @SpasmodicMonk

    if you want me to cite you a study showing the inferiority of same sex parents, i would be more than happy to enlighten you

  • 7:16...

    History has shown us no such thing. What historical references are there comparing homosexual and heterosexual parenting outcomes?

    When he states 'by sheer common sense', I assume he means 'according to my own personal distaste of homosexuals'.

    The whole "gay marriage" 'debate' strikes me as typical religious thinking.

    Step 1: Draw a conclusion

    Step 2: Look for evidence to support conclusion

    Step 3: If you can't find any, make appeal to emotion and authority to support your claim

  • exactly!

  • It is my opinion that government needs to stay out of the marriage business altogether. Relatinships are a human right. Marriage is a religious right that comes attached to a civil right. Civil "marriage" unions are of course that civil right, and being civil, need to belong to all consenting adult couples without discrimination. For the last decade I have held the conviction that by removing the WORD marriage from those civil unions (for all couples) this whole issue would be resolved.

  • However there are those bigots who would not be happy even with that. There are those who (rightly) feel that civil unions (as they are currently understood) are a downgrade from civil 'marriage'. What I advocate though is more upgrading the meaning of 'civil union' to replace completely the civil aspect of marriage.

  • "Even if a particular man or woman cannot or do not want to have a child, them getting married does not damage this general understanding."

    Thats icing on the cake of stupidity right there. In all that he said, nothing was solidly stated on why same-sex marriage shouldn't exist. I mean fuck.. reproductive POTENTIAL?!?! Marriage is about having babies? By that logic, I think all marriages that don't produce a child within a two year time limit should be considered null and void. *nods*

  • Wow...  bigots say the darnedest things, don't they? I love how you throw all the facts back in his face.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more