No to civil unions? Wtf? I'm gay. I don't need it to be called "marriage." I don't understand the "need" of others for it to be so. But, NOT IN FAVOR OF CIVIL UNIONS??? Give me a break, Mitt, you flip-flopping, two-timing, lying, sack of crap!!! YOU are the one that that INTRODUCED "gay marriage" to the country!!! I support Palin. Too bad she isn't running. I'll write her in... I don't give a shit that it won't count. A vote for one of the turds that's is the race is a wasted vote anyway.
Mitt babe, if you're not in favour of gay marriage, no problem, dont marry a man. However some of us dont actually give a shit about Joseph Smith. Gay marriage may be anti-mormon, thats fine, Im not one. Kindly take your religion out of my throat, Id like to replace it with something better x
This is why Ron Paul is the only answer this guy flip flops too much he supports what Evers popular or winning ATM. And changes his book has proof of that he supported Obama care now he suddenly doesn't and now I hear him saying stuff Ron Paul says he's the say what they wana hear type of guy but can't deliver nor reply very well he stumbles well uh umm uh. Allot
Omg all he talks about is gay marriage there's so much worse things going on but that issue is all I hear from him and gringrich wana kill Muslims the other guy idk name wants to modernize aka sugar coat change there way to ours. But mitt acts like if gay marriage is legal that men will all suddenly be gay WTF not me I'm str8 and married I wouldn't mind 2 wives no more tho lol. But idc if gays WANa get married I don't agree or like it but they should he free to do so to each his own
"I support gay marriage. That's all I have to say about gay marriage... no. I'm not going to argue about it, because we have more important issues to discuss -- such as ending war, ending world hunger, ending hate, & ending the debt. No ... no, I'm serious. I'm not going to criticize love. If you want to argue about gay marriage, go talk to Patsy Robertson or Fred Phelps. They enjoy nothing better than talking about men's penises and where they put them." ~ presidential candidate of my choice
1) REAGAN MADE SOVIET UNION DISSAPERED AND OPENED EYES TO RUSSIA NOW THEY ARE BECOMING CAPITALISTIC COUNTRY
2) BUSH WAS DRUNK MADE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSED, KILLED 3000 AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MADE THE WHOLE COUNTRY TO HAVE POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, NOW EVERYBODY IS
PARANOID THANKS TO REPUBLICANS
3) SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON FUCKING LEWINSKY DRESS INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON EUROPEAN UNION CREATED EUROS
OLD FART RON PAUL WILL SELL USA TO CHINA HE HAS NO RESPECT FOR THE GOVERNMENT!
its stupid how doesn't even let him talk, and if you look at many churches it is sin to do drugs and drink but no one get flack for that, its a stupid argument. And is this topic going to help us out of a recession? I don't think so. so who cares?
RON PAUL says leave it up to the states, and I agree. We have more important things to worry about on a federal level. Mitt Romney is a tool. RON PAUL 2012!!!
I am an american who belives in gay marriage, and i am a little offended that he grouped all americans into a caterogry that belives marriage is between a man and a women. hoenstly hes such a dumb fuck. i mean who cares? were not asking you to marry a man, just let other people if they want to. It isnt gay people who ruin the sactity of marriage, its people who cheat and people who get drunk in begas and wake up married.
A mormon family. I'm an objective journalist!! Hardball? I think not.
Please forgive me for being LDS. I never meant to hurt any one by believing what may or may not happen when I die, in regards to a relationship with Deity that requires a faith in the unknown. I apologize for Using my constitutional right of "Freedom of religion". In the future I will be more mindful of my beliefs so as not to offend the world.
Romney is a Mormon. Their record is, erm, spotty:
"The negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, ...but this inequality is not of man's origin. it is the Lord's doing, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate [the mormon pre-existence]." Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 527 - 528
Yep, God has "eternal laws of justice," o astute one. Bruce R McConkie, however, was speaking his opinion in that book when he spoke about blacks, and later he retracted his statement.
You assume that just someone of the LDS faith said something at one point in history that it is a statement of belief of the entire church. Even if that person was the prophet at the time, not everything they said was, "Thus saith the Lord..." They had opinions too, and there's a difference.
There is a reason why one man is BORN BLACK and with OTHER DISADVANTAGES, while another is BORN WHITE with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there.
(Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, page 61)
Cain slew his brother....and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the FLAT NOSE AND BLACK SKIN...
Apparently you didn't read what I said. Neither of those statements are preceded by "Thus saith the Lord," and they aren't considered scripture. Stuff from books done on the side and from collections of peoples' notes doesn't hold a lot of clout.
You are blind. You must be. These books have the blessing of your church leadership, are published by your own church (Deseret) and are read and accepted by Mormons worldwide. You won't even admit to your own beliefs if it makes your man-made church look bad (which it obviously does).
Here's a nice quote:
"I say now, when they [his discourses] are copied and approved by me they are as good Scripture as is couched in this Bible . . . "
Brigham Young. Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 264
Too bad I don't have 26 volumes of Brigham Young's Journal of Discourses, so I can't check context on these quotes, but I do know they were compiled after his death and include things from people's notes and recollections that were not "copied and approved by" him.
Thousands of Christian denominations earnestly read the same Bible with contradictory interpretations. How easy is it, then, to wrongly interpret notes of what someone said on a thousand different occasions if you do it intentionally?
You may wonder why we still publish them, knowing they are imperfect. The answer is because they still contain a great deal of good teachings, and if you study with the Spirit of God, you will learn things that apply to your own life and situation, and the Spirit won't steer you wrong.
On the other hand, if you allow the spirit of malice, spite and hatred to guide your reading, not even the Bible would be able to teach you anything. Plenty of atheists have read the Bible out of spite.
SO? that doesn't really answer why two men or two women can't raise a child in the least.....and itr definetely doesn't answer why someone can't at least support civil unions ! If you don't support civil unions you ARE anti-gay, is that so hard to comprehend? Maybe gay marriage is a different story, but not civil unions !!!!!!
Being gay or straight adds to absolutely nothing when weighing someone's character. Ask Rush Limbaugh (he's gay, and has many more enemies than friends -- the average gay person is infinitely more popular!) "
If the Jesus Card fails to win a game, whip out the Gay Card. If you're still losing, play both cards together and see what happens. As we evolve socially, the politicians who play with these stacked decks are taking a bigger gamble than they bargained for. Remember Terri Shiavo!
That's a good question. I wish there was a new progressive party that be FOR gay marriage and everything the Democrats are not getting. Mitt Romney is one of the very reasons I will never be a Republican.
The point is there needs to be a new progressive party who aren't afraid to say they are for gay marriage, legalizing cannabis for medical use, to stop global warming, to address healthcare and education. I don't get why people are so uptight about gays getting married. Gays do not destroy the American family I know that.
Any kind of love is always a thousand times better than any kind of hate! If any of you encourage hate for religious or whatever reason, you are wrong!
Love is better than any kind of hate. Please don't think that those of us who believe that homosexuality is as sinful as adultery hate those who practice it. Many of us of faith subscribe to the adage "Hate the sin, but Love the sinner." I am saddened by and for those that engage in such sinful behavior, because I love them as God does.
Action speak louder than words. If you say you love them, then you should try to understand them. Homosexuality has always existed since the time of the cave man and it will continue to exist forever, whether we like it or not. That is a fact. Gays and lesbian pay taxes, like us, right? then they should have rights. (World) history has taught us it is always better to separate Church (including the Bible) and State. All men are created equal.
@saychoss That's a lie! You do hate them! and don't use the that adage or even the Bible to justify your hate and bigotry. Just mind your own business and stay out of people's bedroom (for it is disgusting)!
@euskadino -- What did Christians think of Romney issuing 378 marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2004-06? More than any other action by Romney, these special licenses demonstrated where his heart was on the same-sex marriage issue since they were purely discretionary. There was no mandate forcing Romney to issue such licenses. This calls into question his authenticity as an alleged social conservative candidate.
LMAO fat chance....who the fuck is going to vote for a mormon....i live in a town dominated 80% mormon(moron) and trust me you don't want one of these crazy fuckers running the country who believes god will save us before we can save ourselves
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"LMAO fat chance....who the fuck is going to vote for a mormon....i live in a town dominated 80% mormon(moron) and trust me you don't want one of these crazy fuckers running the country who believes god will save us before we can save ourselves"
Better to have a conservative Mormon than a Muslim terrorist who hates America
Are you seriously trying to compare obama to a muslim terrorist? Dude don't be a fucking ignorant idiot. Seriously, if you plan on having an argument first get educated...let me guess you are one of those bible belt morons who bases everythin on religion.....MORON
Marriage is not defined by religion. It has four disctinct and valid meanings.
America is governed by the Constitution.
Christianity is governed by the Bible.
Council of Churches and Episcopal Bishops of Northern California Support the overturn of Prop 8. Legal briefs were filed today declaring Prop 8, "unconstitutional and discriminatory."
It's Mitt Romeny's duty as a public servant to uphold the Constitution not proselytize a personal belief system.
If we are going to let everyone have the "right to marry", where do we stop? There are groups for (equine-man love) and (man-boy love) that would love to have their "love" declared "natural", should it?
This is not like the bans on inter-racial marriage of the past, because as natural humans we could reproduce, while "gays" can't via their lifestyles, that's the difference, otherwise we wouldn't be derisively called "breeders".
Give me a break. Those cultures were the same ones who mandated that women stay out of political/business discourse and probably lobbed off your head if you said the wrong thing about the government.
There is a simple solution to this: government must stop recognizing heterosexual marriage and customary law must develop within private institutions to allow any types of unions fit to occur.
How is that a solution at all? You're asking for rights to be stripped from one person so that you can get rights, which is just bullshit. Not only that, but you'll certainly cause riots among the hundreds of millions of Americans who aren't gay. That's only a solution if you love anarchy.
The simple solution to please all people and shut them up, so we can focus on more important issues like the economy, is to allow Civil Unions for gays in the Fed. Govt. and leave the rest up to the states.
^Ironically, I am an anarchist. But a political anarchist.
What I stated as the solution is the only solution that makes sense. Hetero marriage is considered sacrosanct because the State says so. Gay marriage is not because the State DOESN'T say so. Marriage should be stripped away because institutions and private people/individuals should form their own customs when it comes to relationships ("customary law"), not government.
FC, do you really think that a horse can legally enter into any binding contract without coersion or malfeaseance? How about a twelve year old boy? The answer is no, you dumbass you!
There already are civil unions allowed, why push for the "right to marry"? Could it be that a few want to push the boundaries until they can force conservative churches, mosques and temples to perform "gay marriages"?
So he is saying the primary purpose of marriage is creation, so what is a stright couple cant reproduce should they be allowed to marry, of course because they love each other! same for the homosexual couple!
Banning "gay marriage" protects the current cultural view that marriage is about family and not about sex (gay=homoSEXUAL) and adult relationships. Marriage is part of generations of cultural heritage. The idea and the institution are part of most people's core identity. The courts violate their right to be themselves by attempting to force a new definition of marriage onto them. You can get "married," by your definition, all you want, if you are gay. I will call it a "civil union," though.
''Banning "gay marriage" protects the current cultural view that marriage is about family and not about sex (gay=homoSEXUAL) and adult relationships.''
And being straight = heteroSEXUAL...
So you're actually saying that Gay-people only marry for SEX?
Well, I for one believe in EQUALITY. I think that's what America really needs...
For sex AND relationship, as I already said. Pay attention next time. And marriage is not called "heterosexual marriage," nor is it called, "straight marriage." It's called MARRIAGE. So... should we call women "men-women," so they can have equality in the work place? How about we stop discriminating against lead owners, by calling lead "gray gold." My "crazy" idea is that we call something unique by a unique name like "civil union" (or come up with a new word).
Why is anti-gay propaganda always "faith-based"? You need no Bible to know that equality is the right thing. You do need a Bible, along with a good brainwash and twisted talking to convince people that equality is wrong.
Live and let live. Perhaps those over zealous Chrsitians should try it sometime?
Equality is coming. The right wing extremists are actually speeding things up by being so strangely opposed to equality.
The Christian Taliban has long lost favor with mainstream America!
You're both idiots. Oh wait let me guess, and waterboarding is not torture right? It's simple, even for a few simpletons like yourselves. There is no 'sanctity of marraige' to protect. We straight people have destroyed it. The comparisons to pedophilia are absurd at best. Rape of a child vs. two consenting adults. Honestly, I thought the U.S. defeated fascism. Go on with your prejudices, it's more motivation for the Democrats to take back what is rightfully theirs in '08. YES WE CAN!!!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I couldn't agree with you more ashdude. Gay marriage is wrong and is illegal for a reason. I can really see polygamy and pedophilia legalized in the future for America. Go ahead pro-gays, mark my comment as spam, like how you silence everyone else against gay marriage. Closed-minded fools.
The solution, then, is to get rid of marriage altogether! That way, no one gets it. That seems to be the only way to stop the slippery slope you're arguing for. Otherwise, giving it to heterosexuals but not homosexuals is arbitrary.
The answer is simple. Government should take it's hands out of marriage. They can make laws that provide for rights for a domestic partnership for both hetro and homo sexual couples, but as for marriage they should leave that to the civilians and religious authorities. If gays want to have a ceremony it's up to them. But GOVERNMENT SHOULD STAY AWAY FROM MARRIAGE.
Gay marriage is wrong! it defies the whole idea of marriage and is blatant "spitting in the face" towards all the major world religions, we are made to reproduce its fucking obvious but still you persist in your ignorant society to accept everything! you want death penalty taken away too lmao ooh ye let murderers off lightly why dont u.... hhmmm the ironic thing is, the more educated you get, the more naive you become about society coz you have seen to much difference you fucktards!
So if you get married, should you have to reproduce? Since that's the "whole idea of marriage." Should people with a certain cancer who can't reproduce be able to marry?
you ahteist "educated" liberal american cunts! You have taken acceptance to far hhmmm what next? child molestation made legal? i wouldn't be suprised. you are all sick hhmmm another fact 48% of marriages end in divorce in the usa another sick fact! your society is fucked up, obese kids everywhere you look! lmao mitt romney has the right idea, wot a shame your trying to break him down, you can all burn in hell with ure fucked up lives!
Half of marriages end in divorce. And that's because of gay people, right? If no one wanted gay marriage, if they would just end the war on the family, then there would be no divorce, right?
woah America really is losing the plot. gay marriage is wrong! both science and religion depicts heterosexual couples through creating new life. You feel that by accepting these sick missguided people your being a "nice" liberal society, all you are doing is going back in time, america = 80% of all porn on the net (another form of sick lust your country is known for) you should all die of aids for your sins( and yes i believe the "unexplained" immune destroying virus is a punishment from god!
i agree i can understand the religious argument on same-sex marriage, but civil unions i dont get. where in the bible does it say oh by the way civil unions are bad too. That to me just says he doesn't think gay people should have any rights, period.
Just one more, since I just came across this. Google "daughter of lesbian moms" in the news section and read the first article. This is a response to your suicide anecdote. For every bad outcome there are thousands of good ones...
"I had my story all ready, annotated and everything. But I never got a chance to tell it. I never got a chance to tell those people with the stoic faces, just how amazing my gay moms are; that I am a good person — not despite the fact that my parents are gay but because my parents are gay..."
I think this discussion has gone on long enough. I'll let you have the last word. I won't respond unless you write something particularly offensive or ridiculous (I'm going to set the bar pretty high on this one, as most of the things you wrote were in these general categories).
John, you have effectively made me even more convinced why I don't believe in gay marriage in your description of sex of the gay couple...preferring a feeling over a deep respect for what that act brings about, a child. For some of us, sex is deeply respected. We know the union of love creates a child. It is a lot more than just "feeling good" and the result is a lot more than just a conglomeration of cells that have no connection to the original being.
Please spare me. Straight couples LOVE sex for sex's sake just as much as gay couples. It's laughable that you would suggest otherwise. Birth control, condoms, diaphragms, spermicide, etc., used by STRAIGHT couples so they can enjoy sex (not just about the physical feeling, but the emotional feeling of closeness and intimacy with one's partner). If you have a problem with recreational sex, start with straight people.
If gays' recreational sex is why you are against gay marriage, then you've effectively demonstrated your bigotry through your double standard in ignoring the recreational sex of straight people.
Those genetial are exactly how a child comes into the world. if you don't respect that, you don't respect the sanctity of the child. You have made my point excellently.
Funny, I don't remember caring about my parents' genitalia when I was growing up. In fact, it was the last thing I wanted to think about. How a child physically comes into the world does not have anything to do with the importance of his parents' genitalia after he is born.
You are arguing sex has nothing to do with having children, it is just an animalistic act that doesn't include the emotional or psychologica person. And because you prefer the way something "feels,the way a child comes into the world doesn't matter as long as you have access to them.
I didn't say sex wasn't emotional or psychological. Just that you can't say that every person fits into the same emotional or psychological template based on his or her sex.
Though I can see how my posts may have been misleading at some points. My point is that sex is not necessarily determinate of mental and psychological (or physical) compatibility.
Also, note that although sex is obviously connected with children, it's function is not exclusively to conceive children. People, gay and straight alike, have sex just for fun and intimacy all of the time. Despite the Catholic church's stance on such sex, society at large does not have a problem with it (at least in straight couples).
Okay, so your argument has deterioted to we only have physical differences and our emotional and psychological has nothing to do with sex. And also, I am hearing, the way I want to have sex matters more to me than having a child in a protected instution that gives them the best shot at having both their mother and their father in the relationship. You have argued my point better than anyone could have.
People have emotional differences, but they are not necessarily connected to sex. That's correct. And nice try at placing my argument over your framework; by suggesting that I think sex is more important than having a child in a protected institution, you assume your original premise, which I vehemently disagree with, that having two gay parents harms a child. The way I want to have sex doesn't have anything to do with how I would raise a child with my gay partner.
If you say that men and women are fundamentally different which is why someone would prefer to be gay rather than straight, then why should a child not have the opportunity to be raised in a household with these two fundamentally different types. Why short-change them on the experience. This doesn't even bring into the picture the need to be connected to your roots.
Don't you see, for all your arguing that gay and straight couples are the same is the same argument that there is no excuse to be gay then. You basically say, there is no reason for me not to reproduce biologically and let the child have both parents, I just don't want to.
Some men like to have a penis put into their anus when they have sex. They can't physically do this with a woman. Some women like to play with female breasts or to lick a clitoris. They cannot do this with a man. That's gay people's excuse for being gay. That does not mean men and women are any different mentally or emotionally or that both are needed to raise a child. Does that answer your question directly enough?
John, you are beginning to argue against yourself, if a gay couple and a straight couple are one and the same, than I could argue that no gay couples should have children at all. Since it takes a man an a woman to have a child, gay couples would have no excuse to find someone of the opposite sex...a feminine male could find an emasculated female and still reproduce letting child have the best case scenario..no adoption and both biological parents in the home.
As I said, men and women are physically different. If you need me to explain the mechanics of sex and why some men prefer to have sex with other men rather than women, I can do so. I think you are smart enough to figure this out though and realize why your argument doesn't hold up.
John, it makes me question if you have ever raised a biological child. Just as parents pass down a medical history, they also pass down a psychological history. You are connected to your child in more ways than you can imagine. And a child knows and feels that.
I have not raised a biological child. I'm 24 years old. I don't think this makes me any less capable of engaging in this discussion. As for your family medical and psychological history argument, you can make the same argument against straight couples who are unable to have children and want to conceive one through IVF. Again, not a gay issue.
If that was true, the number of adoptive children in therapy would be way down. And like I said because men and woman are fundamentally different, you are starting the child in a one-down position when he/she doesn't get both perspectives growing up.
Again, I refer you to the studies that say children are no worse off not having both genders as parents. Children interact on a daily basis with all different kinds of people. They are exposed to both sexes whether they have both as parents or not. Again, allowing gay marriage isn't going to increase the number of adopted children, just change where they are adopted to. The same number of children will need to be adopted whether gays are able to marry (or adopt) or not.
John, if we are fundamentally mentally and socially the same I can argue just as much that there should be no such things as gay couples. We could just as easily state, then if you want a child, go find someone (because sex doesn't matter) who you can have a biological child with and let the chid have both his parents there with him at home.
That's an interesting point. I've never heard that before and it took me aback for a second. However, it breaks down when you consider that some gay men take on more of a socially "feminine" role and some gay men take on more a socially "masculine" role.
My point simply was that both sexes are capable of taking on either these roles. Obviously, just as you can have a straight marriage where neither partner is much of a cook/housework type of person (woman not taking on "feminine" role) you can have a gay couple where neither partner takes on a particular specific gender role. Again, we can argue whether both gender roles need to be there strongly, but there is no difference between gay and straight couples.
Step children suffer, adoptive children often suffer with feelings of rejection and foster children (they are finding) do better to be connected with their families. Blood does matter. We weren't made to come out of a vacuum.
Step children have known another parent who is now removed from their lives. Children born directly into a gay family have only known their two gay parents, so they will not feel the loss of a parent that a step child would feel.
Now think about this: Whether gay people marry or not, children that need to be adopted will still need to be adopted. They will feel the same feelings of rejection whether adopted by a gay or straight family. Unfortunately, all we can do as a society is give them a loving family, gay or straight, and hope for the best.
Blood does matter. And men and women are fundamentally different. If not, there is no argument to being gay in the first place. Because it takes a man and a woman to have a child, a child should be raise by these two fundamentally different types of people. Preferably their own child because blood does matter.
Boy, I post comments that seem to disappear. Good response. Touche! But you would have to agree that men and women are fundamentally different or there would be not argument to be gay in the first place. Because it takes a man and a woman to have a child, it is only fair to the child to be raised by a man and a woman. And because a child is so connected to their biological roots, preferably by their biological parents. It is best for the child and should be protected.
Yeah, YouTube is not good at organizing the comments right away. They go in and out. Anyway, I would agree that men and women are physically different, but I don't think they are "fundamentally" emotionally or mentally different. We socialize people to think and behave a certain way, but we are fundamentally the same.
Somehow, as a society, we have come to accept that visitation rights or alimony or child support are enough to meet the needs or the children. Look at how our society is doint. It doesn't work! And a gay marriage automatically puts a biological parent out of the home. We have accepted so many "bandaids" to the marriage problem, we are beginning to thing absentee parents are acceeptable.
Between the divorce rate and out-of-wedlock born children, we are beginning to think that children are somehow created and brought into society to "fulfill" the needs of an adult. We forget why we have the institution of marriage. It is to protect the safety of children. A child does best with both his mother and his father caring for him/her in a legal instituation that makes it difficult to bail on their responsiblity to that child or their spouse.
A child does best with two loving parents who are able to marry and get the benefits that come along with that from the government and pass those along to their children. People like you stand in the way of that for thousands of children across the country.
How could any rational adult even consider the possibility of gay marriage? Marriage should be reserved for a man and woman. The subject should not be open for debate.
We both know that if a divorce take place here on earth, it didnt take place in the one after this, thus more wifes then one become possible. The first wife is of course asked. but still.
Marriage is not just about love between two adults, it is an institution designed to protect children. Since there is no way getting around that it takes a man an a woman to have a child, we should protect the child by protecting marriage.
Gay people have chldren? Maybe a man or a woman has a child, but I can guarentee, it is not with their gay partner. Automatically the child is born into a relationship that does not include his mother or his father. Look at statistics for children who are adopted or of single parents. Children need their parents.
I guess I should expect this from someone who tries to put forth false patriotism by putting "Amarika" in his name (spelled dreadfully wrong of course), but again, gay coulpes are raising children, whether conceived through IVF or adopted (children, mind you, who have NO family, but I suppose they are better off in foster care, right?).
To deny those children, who are legally adopted in most states by their gay parents, the benefits of having their parents married is harmful to those children and completely contrary to your logic. You are saying that because children are generally (theoretically) better off with both biological parents that we should take benefits away from real children in real life just to uphold that "ideal." Makes no sense.
I understand that it cannot always be the best case scenario, but because it takes a man and a woman to have a child, a child should have his/her best access to this family. Children are not there to satisfy the desires of adults.
Children of gay parents are not being raised by their biological parents (same as many, many children of straight parents), like it or not. Again, to deny them benefits is just a labored rationalization for people's disgust for gay people. don't take it out on the kids.
That is always the argument, because of trying to help the worst case scenarios (children without parents in the picture at all) we should not try to legally uphold or promote the best case scenario. And my name is actually not derived to mean America...it has do with something else completely.
All reputable studies (i.e., ones not conducted by a right wing Christian group or Paul Cameron) show that children raised by two gay parents do just as well as children raised by a man and a woman. All studies that say "children do best when raised by a married mother and father" are studies that did NOT INCLUDE GAY PEOPLE. Make sure you get this right because people love to cite these studies.
Your talking to someone whose real life experience...let's see, friend raised by a gay couple committed suicide 10 years ago..and she was a college graduate. And knows personally a therapist who became a college professor. His take, don't believe what you read in statistics. Studies show what they want. His experience would say just the opposite of your "studies."
Of course things are no uniform across the board. There are going to be cases where things go badly for whatever reason. But by your logic, we shouldn't have straight marriage either because children of straight marriages commit suicide.
Studies that include gay people show that it's the number of parents (two) and the commitment that affect children's outcomes. In this regard, two committed gay parents are no less the ideal than two committed straight parents.
Once again, studies show what they want. Take a Ph.D. level course in statistics and you will see what I mean. Once again, you are arguing skin color vs what it takes to conceive a child. Divorce is harmful, many adopted children feel rejected and struggle (not all) and they find foster children do better if they find a biological relative to connect them to. Real life says you are connected to your roots. It means something.
Again, of course you can find a distinction in anything. Sexuality and race are not exactly the same, obviously. But the exact same "family values" arguments were made against interracial marriage. Those arguments were based on misinformation, fear, and bigotry, and so are today's arguments against gay marriage. In that way, race and sexuality are similar.
By the way, I love how you assume your answer to be true, and if a study agrees with you, you will reference it, but if a study disagrees with you, you will say how we can't trust studies. Which is it? Why even do studies?
Gay couples who have adopted children who have no other place to go already have protections in place. This is not the reason gay couples desire to be "married." They want to legitimize a gay marriage to be equal to a marriage between a man and a woman...for the arguments below, we should preserve what a "marriage" means and is.
Mitt Romney is kind of using the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' motto to conceal his true beliefs. He, like many gays and lesbians, are fearful that if people really get to know who and what they are....they mat lose their jobs, careers, and maybe even the presidency.
GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY IS STRONG NEW LEADERSHIP FOR THE 21ST CENTURY. AMERICANS UNITE TO DEFEAT THE ENEMIES WITHIN OUR COUNTRY BY ELECTING A REPUBLICAN AT ANY COST. NO DEMONcrats FOR ANY ELECTED OFFICES.
I would like to point out that I am an American and I feel that marrage should be between two people that love eachother regardless. I don't need him telling me what I think.
Romney thinks of Mormonism, only. It would cause a great spiritual warfare in our own country if he is elected. The God of the Bible is very far from the Mormon god. Latter Day Saints use the name of Jesus Christ... but their beliefs are VERY far from Huckabee's Baptist (Christian) beliefs. Both candidates are bigots toward gays and are not totally truthful with our Nation under God (who is indivisible).
Mormons gave up polygamy, then they gave up racial discrimination, and soon they will give up their anti-gay stance...why? They bow to the pressure of the majority. As the social winds change, so do the views of the Mormon Church!
Mitt Romney: Mysoginistic, homophobic, racist, arrogant, hypocrite, polygamist piece of Wall Street Gangster scum.
FreeMason34 1 hour ago
Thank you for posting this, politicalmediacenter.
writersblock26 3 days ago
shellymic 1 week ago
@shellymic typo...ugh: "...that's IN the race..."
shellymic 1 week ago
Mitt once more is a lying bastard!
His father, grandfather & great-grandfather all lived in a settlement where polygamy was practiced!
DillonDee1 3 weeks ago
Mitt babe, if you're not in favour of gay marriage, no problem, dont marry a man. However some of us dont actually give a shit about Joseph Smith. Gay marriage may be anti-mormon, thats fine, Im not one. Kindly take your religion out of my throat, Id like to replace it with something better x
MarkUk55 3 weeks ago 2
This is why Ron Paul is the only answer this guy flip flops too much he supports what Evers popular or winning ATM. And changes his book has proof of that he supported Obama care now he suddenly doesn't and now I hear him saying stuff Ron Paul says he's the say what they wana hear type of guy but can't deliver nor reply very well he stumbles well uh umm uh. Allot
Kronicilln3ss 3 weeks ago
Omg all he talks about is gay marriage there's so much worse things going on but that issue is all I hear from him and gringrich wana kill Muslims the other guy idk name wants to modernize aka sugar coat change there way to ours. But mitt acts like if gay marriage is legal that men will all suddenly be gay WTF not me I'm str8 and married I wouldn't mind 2 wives no more tho lol. But idc if gays WANa get married I don't agree or like it but they should he free to do so to each his own
Kronicilln3ss 3 weeks ago
"I support gay marriage. That's all I have to say about gay marriage... no. I'm not going to argue about it, because we have more important issues to discuss -- such as ending war, ending world hunger, ending hate, & ending the debt. No ... no, I'm serious. I'm not going to criticize love. If you want to argue about gay marriage, go talk to Patsy Robertson or Fred Phelps. They enjoy nothing better than talking about men's penises and where they put them." ~ presidential candidate of my choice
eastariel 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOP DESTROYED USA
1) REAGAN MADE SOVIET UNION DISSAPERED AND OPENED EYES TO RUSSIA NOW THEY ARE BECOMING CAPITALISTIC COUNTRY
2) BUSH WAS DRUNK MADE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSED, KILLED 3000 AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MADE THE WHOLE COUNTRY TO HAVE POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, NOW EVERYBODY IS
PARANOID THANKS TO REPUBLICANS
3) SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON FUCKING LEWINSKY DRESS INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON EUROPEAN UNION CREATED EUROS
OLD FART RON PAUL WILL SELL USA TO CHINA HE HAS NO RESPECT FOR THE GOVERNMENT!
democratsaresmart 2 months ago
He's got my vote!
mdsmalls11 3 months ago
its stupid how doesn't even let him talk, and if you look at many churches it is sin to do drugs and drink but no one get flack for that, its a stupid argument. And is this topic going to help us out of a recession? I don't think so. so who cares?
TH3V3RN 4 months ago
chris matthews is the bill o'reilly of the left.
1Manny93 4 months ago
leaders have no right to impose their personal views on others. ron paul 2012
sk8sk8ss 5 months ago
@woodydavidson420 Just one more reason to vote Ron Paul.
peaceliberty4all 6 months ago
Another delusional Joseph Smith disciple ... Cant wait til the circus leaves town
2020starman 7 months ago
RON PAUL says leave it up to the states, and I agree. We have more important things to worry about on a federal level. Mitt Romney is a tool. RON PAUL 2012!!!
woodydavidson420 7 months ago 2
wow sick
cherese17 9 months ago
Religious people should not be allowed to get married. Their insanity should be contained and quarantined.
rationalsalvation 11 months ago 2
DONT ALLOW THIS LIEING MORMON IN THE WHITE HOUSE !!!!
MrMormonslayer 1 year ago
@MrMormonslayer Don't allow people who can't spell to tell you what to do.
AprilSkye143 11 months ago
Some gay people support the institution of marriage. More power to them.
jdcinsf 1 year ago
I like Romney... but not this view...
YoungIvyScholar 1 year ago
The Religious Right will never allow a Mormon to be their candidate for President. Mormonism is considered a cult by most christians.
mrthor2u 1 year ago
Your looking at thee Next PresiDent of the U. S. A.............
FireYourJOB 1 year ago
I am an american who belives in gay marriage, and i am a little offended that he grouped all americans into a caterogry that belives marriage is between a man and a women. hoenstly hes such a dumb fuck. i mean who cares? were not asking you to marry a man, just let other people if they want to. It isnt gay people who ruin the sactity of marriage, its people who cheat and people who get drunk in begas and wake up married.
xojaiserxo 1 year ago
Mitt Romney will be the NexT PresiDent of the USA>>>>>>>>>
FireYourJOB 1 year ago
mitt romney = dumb fuck
jtolls 1 year ago
A mormon family. I'm an objective journalist!! Hardball? I think not.
Please forgive me for being LDS. I never meant to hurt any one by believing what may or may not happen when I die, in regards to a relationship with Deity that requires a faith in the unknown. I apologize for Using my constitutional right of "Freedom of religion". In the future I will be more mindful of my beliefs so as not to offend the world.
Haider of Mann
haidermann1 1 year ago
Romney is a Mormon. Their record is, erm, spotty:
"The negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, ...but this inequality is not of man's origin. it is the Lord's doing, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate [the mormon pre-existence]." Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 527 - 528
thesignsoflife7 2 years ago
Dude, that statement was retracted by the author. That should say, "Mormon Doctrine, 1st edition"
TheBalefire 2 years ago
Dude, read the quote.
It says - "eternal laws ".
Mormons have been putting words in the Lord's mouth for 180 years, pretending they speak for Him and making up their own theology as they go along.
Do you have any idea who God is???????
You think you can just say, "Oh we don't believe that any more" and just walk away from blaspheming Him??
thesignsoflife7 2 years ago
Yep, God has "eternal laws of justice," o astute one. Bruce R McConkie, however, was speaking his opinion in that book when he spoke about blacks, and later he retracted his statement.
You assume that just someone of the LDS faith said something at one point in history that it is a statement of belief of the entire church. Even if that person was the prophet at the time, not everything they said was, "Thus saith the Lord..." They had opinions too, and there's a difference.
TheBalefire 1 year ago
There is a reason why one man is BORN BLACK and with OTHER DISADVANTAGES, while another is BORN WHITE with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there.
(Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, page 61)
Cain slew his brother....and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the FLAT NOSE AND BLACK SKIN...
(Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, pages 290-291)
Not official statements?? Are you so blind?
thesignsoflife7 1 year ago
Apparently you didn't read what I said. Neither of those statements are preceded by "Thus saith the Lord," and they aren't considered scripture. Stuff from books done on the side and from collections of peoples' notes doesn't hold a lot of clout.
TheBalefire 1 year ago
You are blind. You must be. These books have the blessing of your church leadership, are published by your own church (Deseret) and are read and accepted by Mormons worldwide. You won't even admit to your own beliefs if it makes your man-made church look bad (which it obviously does).
Here's a nice quote:
"I say now, when they [his discourses] are copied and approved by me they are as good Scripture as is couched in this Bible . . . "
Brigham Young. Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 264
thesignsoflife7 1 year ago
Too bad I don't have 26 volumes of Brigham Young's Journal of Discourses, so I can't check context on these quotes, but I do know they were compiled after his death and include things from people's notes and recollections that were not "copied and approved by" him.
Thousands of Christian denominations earnestly read the same Bible with contradictory interpretations. How easy is it, then, to wrongly interpret notes of what someone said on a thousand different occasions if you do it intentionally?
TheBalefire 1 year ago
You may wonder why we still publish them, knowing they are imperfect. The answer is because they still contain a great deal of good teachings, and if you study with the Spirit of God, you will learn things that apply to your own life and situation, and the Spirit won't steer you wrong.
On the other hand, if you allow the spirit of malice, spite and hatred to guide your reading, not even the Bible would be able to teach you anything. Plenty of atheists have read the Bible out of spite.
TheBalefire 1 year ago
so? you need a woman yeah, to have a BIOLOGICAL child, of course, not to adopt a child
Claronium780 2 years ago
SO? that doesn't really answer why two men or two women can't raise a child in the least.....and itr definetely doesn't answer why someone can't at least support civil unions ! If you don't support civil unions you ARE anti-gay, is that so hard to comprehend? Maybe gay marriage is a different story, but not civil unions !!!!!!
Claronium780 2 years ago
Being gay or straight adds to absolutely nothing when weighing someone's character. Ask Rush Limbaugh (he's gay, and has many more enemies than friends -- the average gay person is infinitely more popular!) "
If the Jesus Card fails to win a game, whip out the Gay Card. If you're still losing, play both cards together and see what happens. As we evolve socially, the politicians who play with these stacked decks are taking a bigger gamble than they bargained for. Remember Terri Shiavo!
polkadotbox2 2 years ago
Mitt Romney excludes 10% or more of the American population. He is a hateful person and I would NEVER vote for an imbecile like him.
philip0460 2 years ago
WHY exactly are some people so hateful and anti-gay and not EVEN support Civil Unions !?!
Claronium780 2 years ago
That's a good question. I wish there was a new progressive party that be FOR gay marriage and everything the Democrats are not getting. Mitt Romney is one of the very reasons I will never be a Republican.
RealTime88 2 years ago
The point is there needs to be a new progressive party who aren't afraid to say they are for gay marriage, legalizing cannabis for medical use, to stop global warming, to address healthcare and education. I don't get why people are so uptight about gays getting married. Gays do not destroy the American family I know that.
RealTime88 2 years ago
I'm voting for Mitt if he runs again. He really isn't the best politician but that is why I like him. He would be a great leader.
1kemistry 2 years ago
Great comment euskadino. Saychoss your heart's in the right place, but pardon me, but your head's up your ass.
MrSalamander7 2 years ago
So glad this ignorant Mitt Romney breed is dying
CaMaverick 2 years ago
Wow, Chris Matthews shows again why he is an ignorant moron.
tmacvink 2 years ago
Keep one thing in mind you all!
Any kind of love is always a thousand times better than any kind of hate! If any of you encourage hate for religious or whatever reason, you are wrong!
euskadino 2 years ago 10
Love is better than any kind of hate. Please don't think that those of us who believe that homosexuality is as sinful as adultery hate those who practice it. Many of us of faith subscribe to the adage "Hate the sin, but Love the sinner." I am saddened by and for those that engage in such sinful behavior, because I love them as God does.
saychoss 2 years ago
Action speak louder than words. If you say you love them, then you should try to understand them. Homosexuality has always existed since the time of the cave man and it will continue to exist forever, whether we like it or not. That is a fact. Gays and lesbian pay taxes, like us, right? then they should have rights. (World) history has taught us it is always better to separate Church (including the Bible) and State. All men are created equal.
euskadino 2 years ago
@saychoss That's a lie! You do hate them! and don't use the that adage or even the Bible to justify your hate and bigotry. Just mind your own business and stay out of people's bedroom (for it is disgusting)!
euskadino 2 days ago
@euskadino Disagreement of an agenda certainly ain't hate!
JndBStudios 4 months ago
@JndBStudios and I never said it is
euskadino 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What candidate doesn't participate in the, "Who is the best Christian contest?"
Christian, Ron Paul, who won the Values Summit poll 2012!
Want safety in America, protect Israel, wipe out Muslims?
MUST SEE VIDEO /watch?v=BHrkc6EB6h0
Gay marriage? Ron Paul says "Yes" /watch?v=l1gzs27HswQ
Ron Paul re: pot and black/Latino Americans and racism:
/watch?v=nhP5PwG5Sks
vechorik 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@euskadino -- What did Christians think of Romney issuing 378 marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2004-06? More than any other action by Romney, these special licenses demonstrated where his heart was on the same-sex marriage issue since they were purely discretionary. There was no mandate forcing Romney to issue such licenses. This calls into question his authenticity as an alleged social conservative candidate.
vechorik 2 months ago
wat eva ignorant twat
asmaibra 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I wanted you for Pres, Mitt. Perhaps you will be our savior in 2012
ma7799 3 years ago
LMAO fat chance....who the fuck is going to vote for a mormon....i live in a town dominated 80% mormon(moron) and trust me you don't want one of these crazy fuckers running the country who believes god will save us before we can save ourselves
SechyoolarYOOESAY 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"LMAO fat chance....who the fuck is going to vote for a mormon....i live in a town dominated 80% mormon(moron) and trust me you don't want one of these crazy fuckers running the country who believes god will save us before we can save ourselves"
Better to have a conservative Mormon than a Muslim terrorist who hates America
ma7799 2 years ago
Are you seriously trying to compare obama to a muslim terrorist? Dude don't be a fucking ignorant idiot. Seriously, if you plan on having an argument first get educated...let me guess you are one of those bible belt morons who bases everythin on religion.....MORON
SechyoolarYOOESAY 2 years ago 2
I'm glad Romney didn't get the repug nomination. Americans might have been just stupid enough to vote him into office.
ReligiousZombie 3 years ago
instead they selected a Muslim terrorist that dances around the topic without answering the question
ma7799 3 years ago
Marriage is not defined by religion. It has four disctinct and valid meanings.
America is governed by the Constitution.
Christianity is governed by the Bible.
Council of Churches and Episcopal Bishops of Northern California Support the overturn of Prop 8. Legal briefs were filed today declaring Prop 8, "unconstitutional and discriminatory."
It's Mitt Romeny's duty as a public servant to uphold the Constitution not proselytize a personal belief system.
Isabella8466 3 years ago 6
Romney is the most articulate politician on the same-sex issue. Romney in 2012!
JCPinCA 3 years ago
what culture ever allowed gay marriage?
none, until now, ask why
If we are going to let everyone have the "right to marry", where do we stop? There are groups for (equine-man love) and (man-boy love) that would love to have their "love" declared "natural", should it?
This is not like the bans on inter-racial marriage of the past, because as natural humans we could reproduce, while "gays" can't via their lifestyles, that's the difference, otherwise we wouldn't be derisively called "breeders".
FC275 3 years ago
Give me a break. Those cultures were the same ones who mandated that women stay out of political/business discourse and probably lobbed off your head if you said the wrong thing about the government.
There is a simple solution to this: government must stop recognizing heterosexual marriage and customary law must develop within private institutions to allow any types of unions fit to occur.
coffeeintheface 3 years ago 2
How is that a solution at all? You're asking for rights to be stripped from one person so that you can get rights, which is just bullshit. Not only that, but you'll certainly cause riots among the hundreds of millions of Americans who aren't gay. That's only a solution if you love anarchy.
The simple solution to please all people and shut them up, so we can focus on more important issues like the economy, is to allow Civil Unions for gays in the Fed. Govt. and leave the rest up to the states.
CircusofPython 3 years ago 2
"That's only a solution if you love anarchy."
^Ironically, I am an anarchist. But a political anarchist.
What I stated as the solution is the only solution that makes sense. Hetero marriage is considered sacrosanct because the State says so. Gay marriage is not because the State DOESN'T say so. Marriage should be stripped away because institutions and private people/individuals should form their own customs when it comes to relationships ("customary law"), not government.
coffeeintheface 3 years ago
FC, do you really think that a horse can legally enter into any binding contract without coersion or malfeaseance? How about a twelve year old boy? The answer is no, you dumbass you!
taylorbbob 3 years ago
There already are civil unions allowed, why push for the "right to marry"? Could it be that a few want to push the boundaries until they can force conservative churches, mosques and temples to perform "gay marriages"?
So, what should marriage be for?
Nature and the Bible agree, man and woman.
Take a stand, vote "Yes" on 8.
FC275 3 years ago
So he is saying the primary purpose of marriage is creation, so what is a stright couple cant reproduce should they be allowed to marry, of course because they love each other! same for the homosexual couple!
marcosmcm 3 years ago
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
mrpaco3 3 years ago
Could someone give me at least 1 reason for banning same-sex marriage wich is NOT based on some 2000 year old fairy-tale?? (the bible)
RickyPrescott 3 years ago
Banning "gay marriage" protects the current cultural view that marriage is about family and not about sex (gay=homoSEXUAL) and adult relationships. Marriage is part of generations of cultural heritage. The idea and the institution are part of most people's core identity. The courts violate their right to be themselves by attempting to force a new definition of marriage onto them. You can get "married," by your definition, all you want, if you are gay. I will call it a "civil union," though.
namordecai 3 years ago
''Banning "gay marriage" protects the current cultural view that marriage is about family and not about sex (gay=homoSEXUAL) and adult relationships.''
And being straight = heteroSEXUAL...
So you're actually saying that Gay-people only marry for SEX?
Well, I for one believe in EQUALITY. I think that's what America really needs...
RickyPrescott 3 years ago
For sex AND relationship, as I already said. Pay attention next time. And marriage is not called "heterosexual marriage," nor is it called, "straight marriage." It's called MARRIAGE. So... should we call women "men-women," so they can have equality in the work place? How about we stop discriminating against lead owners, by calling lead "gray gold." My "crazy" idea is that we call something unique by a unique name like "civil union" (or come up with a new word).
namordecai 3 years ago
Why is anti-gay propaganda always "faith-based"? You need no Bible to know that equality is the right thing. You do need a Bible, along with a good brainwash and twisted talking to convince people that equality is wrong.
Live and let live. Perhaps those over zealous Chrsitians should try it sometime?
Equality is coming. The right wing extremists are actually speeding things up by being so strangely opposed to equality.
The Christian Taliban has long lost favor with mainstream America!
thursdaysrecords 3 years ago
Oh my god when it wasn't 'I believe' it was what everyone believes. Obviously minorities mean nothing to this man.
WizkidDreamer28 3 years ago
You're both idiots. Oh wait let me guess, and waterboarding is not torture right? It's simple, even for a few simpletons like yourselves. There is no 'sanctity of marraige' to protect. We straight people have destroyed it. The comparisons to pedophilia are absurd at best. Rape of a child vs. two consenting adults. Honestly, I thought the U.S. defeated fascism. Go on with your prejudices, it's more motivation for the Democrats to take back what is rightfully theirs in '08. YES WE CAN!!!
randomness091 3 years ago 8
Check out Ron Paul's stance! Obama has failed you.
woodydavidson420 7 months ago
@randomness091 Check out Ron Paul's stance. Obama has failed us.
woodydavidson420 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I couldn't agree with you more ashdude. Gay marriage is wrong and is illegal for a reason. I can really see polygamy and pedophilia legalized in the future for America. Go ahead pro-gays, mark my comment as spam, like how you silence everyone else against gay marriage. Closed-minded fools.
DarkLouis 3 years ago
You're following a common illogical fallacy known as the "slippery slope fallacy"
Look it up on google.
MohoinTX 3 years ago
You're following a common illogical fallacy known as the "slippery slope fallacy"
Look it up on google.
MohoinTX 3 years ago
The solution, then, is to get rid of marriage altogether! That way, no one gets it. That seems to be the only way to stop the slippery slope you're arguing for. Otherwise, giving it to heterosexuals but not homosexuals is arbitrary.
balvarez01 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The answer is simple. Government should take it's hands out of marriage. They can make laws that provide for rights for a domestic partnership for both hetro and homo sexual couples, but as for marriage they should leave that to the civilians and religious authorities. If gays want to have a ceremony it's up to them. But GOVERNMENT SHOULD STAY AWAY FROM MARRIAGE.
angelmezzanine 3 years ago
Gay marriage is wrong! it defies the whole idea of marriage and is blatant "spitting in the face" towards all the major world religions, we are made to reproduce its fucking obvious but still you persist in your ignorant society to accept everything! you want death penalty taken away too lmao ooh ye let murderers off lightly why dont u.... hhmmm the ironic thing is, the more educated you get, the more naive you become about society coz you have seen to much difference you fucktards!
ashdude2791 3 years ago
So if you get married, should you have to reproduce? Since that's the "whole idea of marriage." Should people with a certain cancer who can't reproduce be able to marry?
macarion 3 years ago
you ahteist "educated" liberal american cunts! You have taken acceptance to far hhmmm what next? child molestation made legal? i wouldn't be suprised. you are all sick hhmmm another fact 48% of marriages end in divorce in the usa another sick fact! your society is fucked up, obese kids everywhere you look! lmao mitt romney has the right idea, wot a shame your trying to break him down, you can all burn in hell with ure fucked up lives!
ashdude2791 3 years ago
Half of marriages end in divorce. And that's because of gay people, right? If no one wanted gay marriage, if they would just end the war on the family, then there would be no divorce, right?
macarion 3 years ago
woah America really is losing the plot. gay marriage is wrong! both science and religion depicts heterosexual couples through creating new life. You feel that by accepting these sick missguided people your being a "nice" liberal society, all you are doing is going back in time, america = 80% of all porn on the net (another form of sick lust your country is known for) you should all die of aids for your sins( and yes i believe the "unexplained" immune destroying virus is a punishment from god!
ashdude2791 3 years ago
Should it be illegal to have a child if you aren't married?
macarion 3 years ago
i agree i can understand the religious argument on same-sex marriage, but civil unions i dont get. where in the bible does it say oh by the way civil unions are bad too. That to me just says he doesn't think gay people should have any rights, period.
Caligurl1985 4 years ago
hahaha all i can do is laugh..mitt romney is such a moron.
lonelily9 4 years ago 2
no, he's a mormon.
ha, just kidding, i dont like his point of view
quiznos 4 years ago 2
v=peFGA_HN3Yc&feature=PlayList&p=FD9F88028457D175&index=0
WATCH THE TRUTH ABOUT MITT ROMNEY! INCREDIBLE YOUTUBE VIDEO!!!!
patriciaoday 4 years ago
Just one more, since I just came across this. Google "daughter of lesbian moms" in the news section and read the first article. This is a response to your suicide anecdote. For every bad outcome there are thousands of good ones...
J0hn3577 4 years ago
"I had my story all ready, annotated and everything. But I never got a chance to tell it. I never got a chance to tell those people with the stoic faces, just how amazing my gay moms are; that I am a good person — not despite the fact that my parents are gay but because my parents are gay..."
J0hn3577 4 years ago
I think this discussion has gone on long enough. I'll let you have the last word. I won't respond unless you write something particularly offensive or ridiculous (I'm going to set the bar pretty high on this one, as most of the things you wrote were in these general categories).
J0hn3577 4 years ago
John, you have effectively made me even more convinced why I don't believe in gay marriage in your description of sex of the gay couple...preferring a feeling over a deep respect for what that act brings about, a child. For some of us, sex is deeply respected. We know the union of love creates a child. It is a lot more than just "feeling good" and the result is a lot more than just a conglomeration of cells that have no connection to the original being.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Please spare me. Straight couples LOVE sex for sex's sake just as much as gay couples. It's laughable that you would suggest otherwise. Birth control, condoms, diaphragms, spermicide, etc., used by STRAIGHT couples so they can enjoy sex (not just about the physical feeling, but the emotional feeling of closeness and intimacy with one's partner). If you have a problem with recreational sex, start with straight people.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
clarification: "...so they can enjoy sex, WITHOUT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT KIDS..."
J0hn3577 4 years ago
If gays' recreational sex is why you are against gay marriage, then you've effectively demonstrated your bigotry through your double standard in ignoring the recreational sex of straight people.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
I can't even tell you how much I agree with you. :)
fuzzysnail47 4 years ago
Those genetial are exactly how a child comes into the world. if you don't respect that, you don't respect the sanctity of the child. You have made my point excellently.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Funny, I don't remember caring about my parents' genitalia when I was growing up. In fact, it was the last thing I wanted to think about. How a child physically comes into the world does not have anything to do with the importance of his parents' genitalia after he is born.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
You are arguing sex has nothing to do with having children, it is just an animalistic act that doesn't include the emotional or psychologica person. And because you prefer the way something "feels,the way a child comes into the world doesn't matter as long as you have access to them.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
I didn't say sex wasn't emotional or psychological. Just that you can't say that every person fits into the same emotional or psychological template based on his or her sex.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Though I can see how my posts may have been misleading at some points. My point is that sex is not necessarily determinate of mental and psychological (or physical) compatibility.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Also, note that although sex is obviously connected with children, it's function is not exclusively to conceive children. People, gay and straight alike, have sex just for fun and intimacy all of the time. Despite the Catholic church's stance on such sex, society at large does not have a problem with it (at least in straight couples).
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Okay, so your argument has deterioted to we only have physical differences and our emotional and psychological has nothing to do with sex. And also, I am hearing, the way I want to have sex matters more to me than having a child in a protected instution that gives them the best shot at having both their mother and their father in the relationship. You have argued my point better than anyone could have.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
People have emotional differences, but they are not necessarily connected to sex. That's correct. And nice try at placing my argument over your framework; by suggesting that I think sex is more important than having a child in a protected institution, you assume your original premise, which I vehemently disagree with, that having two gay parents harms a child. The way I want to have sex doesn't have anything to do with how I would raise a child with my gay partner.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
If you say that men and women are fundamentally different which is why someone would prefer to be gay rather than straight, then why should a child not have the opportunity to be raised in a household with these two fundamentally different types. Why short-change them on the experience. This doesn't even bring into the picture the need to be connected to your roots.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
not fundamentally different; PHYSICALLY different. Get it right.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
The only way you've caught me in an inconsistent argument is if you think that a person's genitalia alone are important to a child.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Don't you see, for all your arguing that gay and straight couples are the same is the same argument that there is no excuse to be gay then. You basically say, there is no reason for me not to reproduce biologically and let the child have both parents, I just don't want to.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Some men like to have a penis put into their anus when they have sex. They can't physically do this with a woman. Some women like to play with female breasts or to lick a clitoris. They cannot do this with a man. That's gay people's excuse for being gay. That does not mean men and women are any different mentally or emotionally or that both are needed to raise a child. Does that answer your question directly enough?
J0hn3577 4 years ago
John, you are beginning to argue against yourself, if a gay couple and a straight couple are one and the same, than I could argue that no gay couples should have children at all. Since it takes a man an a woman to have a child, gay couples would have no excuse to find someone of the opposite sex...a feminine male could find an emasculated female and still reproduce letting child have the best case scenario..no adoption and both biological parents in the home.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
As I said, men and women are physically different. If you need me to explain the mechanics of sex and why some men prefer to have sex with other men rather than women, I can do so. I think you are smart enough to figure this out though and realize why your argument doesn't hold up.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
John, it makes me question if you have ever raised a biological child. Just as parents pass down a medical history, they also pass down a psychological history. You are connected to your child in more ways than you can imagine. And a child knows and feels that.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
I have not raised a biological child. I'm 24 years old. I don't think this makes me any less capable of engaging in this discussion. As for your family medical and psychological history argument, you can make the same argument against straight couples who are unable to have children and want to conceive one through IVF. Again, not a gay issue.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
If that was true, the number of adoptive children in therapy would be way down. And like I said because men and woman are fundamentally different, you are starting the child in a one-down position when he/she doesn't get both perspectives growing up.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Again, I refer you to the studies that say children are no worse off not having both genders as parents. Children interact on a daily basis with all different kinds of people. They are exposed to both sexes whether they have both as parents or not. Again, allowing gay marriage isn't going to increase the number of adopted children, just change where they are adopted to. The same number of children will need to be adopted whether gays are able to marry (or adopt) or not.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
John, if we are fundamentally mentally and socially the same I can argue just as much that there should be no such things as gay couples. We could just as easily state, then if you want a child, go find someone (because sex doesn't matter) who you can have a biological child with and let the chid have both his parents there with him at home.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
That's an interesting point. I've never heard that before and it took me aback for a second. However, it breaks down when you consider that some gay men take on more of a socially "feminine" role and some gay men take on more a socially "masculine" role.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
My point simply was that both sexes are capable of taking on either these roles. Obviously, just as you can have a straight marriage where neither partner is much of a cook/housework type of person (woman not taking on "feminine" role) you can have a gay couple where neither partner takes on a particular specific gender role. Again, we can argue whether both gender roles need to be there strongly, but there is no difference between gay and straight couples.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Step children suffer, adoptive children often suffer with feelings of rejection and foster children (they are finding) do better to be connected with their families. Blood does matter. We weren't made to come out of a vacuum.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Step children have known another parent who is now removed from their lives. Children born directly into a gay family have only known their two gay parents, so they will not feel the loss of a parent that a step child would feel.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Now think about this: Whether gay people marry or not, children that need to be adopted will still need to be adopted. They will feel the same feelings of rejection whether adopted by a gay or straight family. Unfortunately, all we can do as a society is give them a loving family, gay or straight, and hope for the best.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Blood does matter. And men and women are fundamentally different. If not, there is no argument to being gay in the first place. Because it takes a man and a woman to have a child, a child should be raise by these two fundamentally different types of people. Preferably their own child because blood does matter.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
You can make the conclusory statement that blood matters, but where are you getting that from?
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Boy, I post comments that seem to disappear. Good response. Touche! But you would have to agree that men and women are fundamentally different or there would be not argument to be gay in the first place. Because it takes a man and a woman to have a child, it is only fair to the child to be raised by a man and a woman. And because a child is so connected to their biological roots, preferably by their biological parents. It is best for the child and should be protected.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Yeah, YouTube is not good at organizing the comments right away. They go in and out. Anyway, I would agree that men and women are physically different, but I don't think they are "fundamentally" emotionally or mentally different. We socialize people to think and behave a certain way, but we are fundamentally the same.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
By the way, if your name has nothing to do with America, then I owe you an apology.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Somehow, as a society, we have come to accept that visitation rights or alimony or child support are enough to meet the needs or the children. Look at how our society is doint. It doesn't work! And a gay marriage automatically puts a biological parent out of the home. We have accepted so many "bandaids" to the marriage problem, we are beginning to thing absentee parents are acceeptable.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
So does IVF for straight people. They still have two parents in the home.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Between the divorce rate and out-of-wedlock born children, we are beginning to think that children are somehow created and brought into society to "fulfill" the needs of an adult. We forget why we have the institution of marriage. It is to protect the safety of children. A child does best with both his mother and his father caring for him/her in a legal instituation that makes it difficult to bail on their responsiblity to that child or their spouse.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
A child does best with two loving parents who are able to marry and get the benefits that come along with that from the government and pass those along to their children. People like you stand in the way of that for thousands of children across the country.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
How could any rational adult even consider the possibility of gay marriage? Marriage should be reserved for a man and woman. The subject should not be open for debate.
foxrat123 4 years ago
Right, bigots win, end of discussion. Drop dead.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
What about eternity mr Romney.
We both know that if a divorce take place here on earth, it didnt take place in the one after this, thus more wifes then one become possible. The first wife is of course asked. but still.
joolwi 4 years ago
Mitt Romney is absolutely right on this issue.
foxrat123 4 years ago
Marriage is not just about love between two adults, it is an institution designed to protect children. Since there is no way getting around that it takes a man an a woman to have a child, we should protect the child by protecting marriage.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Gay people have children. By not allowing them to marry, you're hurting their children. Do you see where your logic fails? (probably not).
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Gay people have chldren? Maybe a man or a woman has a child, but I can guarentee, it is not with their gay partner. Automatically the child is born into a relationship that does not include his mother or his father. Look at statistics for children who are adopted or of single parents. Children need their parents.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
I guess I should expect this from someone who tries to put forth false patriotism by putting "Amarika" in his name (spelled dreadfully wrong of course), but again, gay coulpes are raising children, whether conceived through IVF or adopted (children, mind you, who have NO family, but I suppose they are better off in foster care, right?).
J0hn3577 4 years ago
To deny those children, who are legally adopted in most states by their gay parents, the benefits of having their parents married is harmful to those children and completely contrary to your logic. You are saying that because children are generally (theoretically) better off with both biological parents that we should take benefits away from real children in real life just to uphold that "ideal." Makes no sense.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
I understand that it cannot always be the best case scenario, but because it takes a man and a woman to have a child, a child should have his/her best access to this family. Children are not there to satisfy the desires of adults.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Children of gay parents are not being raised by their biological parents (same as many, many children of straight parents), like it or not. Again, to deny them benefits is just a labored rationalization for people's disgust for gay people. don't take it out on the kids.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
That is always the argument, because of trying to help the worst case scenarios (children without parents in the picture at all) we should not try to legally uphold or promote the best case scenario. And my name is actually not derived to mean America...it has do with something else completely.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
All reputable studies (i.e., ones not conducted by a right wing Christian group or Paul Cameron) show that children raised by two gay parents do just as well as children raised by a man and a woman. All studies that say "children do best when raised by a married mother and father" are studies that did NOT INCLUDE GAY PEOPLE. Make sure you get this right because people love to cite these studies.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Your talking to someone whose real life experience...let's see, friend raised by a gay couple committed suicide 10 years ago..and she was a college graduate. And knows personally a therapist who became a college professor. His take, don't believe what you read in statistics. Studies show what they want. His experience would say just the opposite of your "studies."
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Of course things are no uniform across the board. There are going to be cases where things go badly for whatever reason. But by your logic, we shouldn't have straight marriage either because children of straight marriages commit suicide.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Studies that include gay people show that it's the number of parents (two) and the commitment that affect children's outcomes. In this regard, two committed gay parents are no less the ideal than two committed straight parents.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Once again, studies show what they want. Take a Ph.D. level course in statistics and you will see what I mean. Once again, you are arguing skin color vs what it takes to conceive a child. Divorce is harmful, many adopted children feel rejected and struggle (not all) and they find foster children do better if they find a biological relative to connect them to. Real life says you are connected to your roots. It means something.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Again, of course you can find a distinction in anything. Sexuality and race are not exactly the same, obviously. But the exact same "family values" arguments were made against interracial marriage. Those arguments were based on misinformation, fear, and bigotry, and so are today's arguments against gay marriage. In that way, race and sexuality are similar.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
By the way, I love how you assume your answer to be true, and if a study agrees with you, you will reference it, but if a study disagrees with you, you will say how we can't trust studies. Which is it? Why even do studies?
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Of course studies can be manipulated on the surface, but if you scrutinize them you can tell if they are good or not.
J0hn3577 4 years ago
Gay couples who have adopted children who have no other place to go already have protections in place. This is not the reason gay couples desire to be "married." They want to legitimize a gay marriage to be equal to a marriage between a man and a woman...for the arguments below, we should preserve what a "marriage" means and is.
aMaRiKa7 4 years ago
Exactly what protections to they have?
J0hn3577 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL 2008
arazz716 4 years ago
God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve
DBDH011 4 years ago
Original
J0hn3577 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Mitt Romney is kind of using the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' motto to conceal his true beliefs. He, like many gays and lesbians, are fearful that if people really get to know who and what they are....they mat lose their jobs, careers, and maybe even the presidency.
Mitt can't speak truthfully about anything.
TheReporterOfTruth 4 years ago
Um... hello? Separation of church and state!?!?
grantsherman23 4 years ago 2
governor mitt romey is a narrow minded bastard
ziggycheese 4 years ago
GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY IS STRONG NEW LEADERSHIP FOR THE 21ST CENTURY. AMERICANS UNITE TO DEFEAT THE ENEMIES WITHIN OUR COUNTRY BY ELECTING A REPUBLICAN AT ANY COST. NO DEMONcrats FOR ANY ELECTED OFFICES.
BraveNoble 4 years ago
I would like to point out that I am an American and I feel that marrage should be between two people that love eachother regardless. I don't need him telling me what I think.
sakurarose8955 4 years ago 3
Romney thinks of Mormonism, only. It would cause a great spiritual warfare in our own country if he is elected. The God of the Bible is very far from the Mormon god. Latter Day Saints use the name of Jesus Christ... but their beliefs are VERY far from Huckabee's Baptist (Christian) beliefs. Both candidates are bigots toward gays and are not totally truthful with our Nation under God (who is indivisible).
loosershate 4 years ago
Did anyone watch the Hardball interview with his campaign manager? Classic it just proves what a lieing fraud he is.
bgabbs69 4 years ago
Mormons gave up polygamy, then they gave up racial discrimination, and soon they will give up their anti-gay stance...why? They bow to the pressure of the majority. As the social winds change, so do the views of the Mormon Church!
thursdaysrecords 4 years ago