Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Do you agree with Same-sex marriage? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Do you agree with Same-sex Marriage?
    Yes!
    355
    77.34%
    NO!!!
    104
    22.66%

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Biased, empty sources. This is what happens when one chooses sources to suit their own opinion.

    Here are some stating the opposite (not saying they're not biased - it's simply to show how easy it is to rebut yours):

    Whatever you say gay marriage is never going to be natural and its going to be odd till moralitysocie
    http://www.goldencradle.org/how-do-c...-adoption-fare
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...esearch-shows/
    https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyl...ZQK/story.html

    Bla bla bla... When one of your researchers calls homosexuality a "deviation" and "not normal" and whatnot, it's evident how biased it is.

    Case dismissed.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Whatever you say gay marriage is never going to be natural and its going to be odd till morality and logical (not emotional) people remains
    Case dismissed
    Have a nice time
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cammy10)
    Calm down girl
    Ok I will start with giving evidence of my last statement
    Last statement stats evidences

    Custody Appeals Study: Cameron and Cameron5 and Cameron and Harris6 did the most unique studies of homosexual parenting to date: an analysis of child custody appeals cases. These were based on intensive examination of the real life of the parents and their children — that is, not based on answers to questionnaires as with Regnerus, but subject to cross-examination in court. The latter study examined 78 custody appeals decisions involving 79 homosexual parents and 142 children. The 142 children were exposed to a thousand child-years of homosexual parenting and found:

    parents recorded as lying or engaging in criminality or homosexuality were more apt to be recorded as harming children;
    homosexual parents as compared to heterosexual parents were more frequently recorded as lying and/or engaging in criminality;
    in 54 (70%) cases the homosexual parent and/or his associates was recorded as having exposed the children to harm(s) (e.g., neglect, seduction, emotional distress, hypersexualization), as opposed to the heterosexual parent in 4 (5%) cases; and
    homosexuals were responsible for 111 (97%) of the 115 harms to children in the appeals court record. In 78 heterosexual vs. heterosexual comparison cases, the 141 children were exposed to 12 harms, harms that occurred in 11 (14%) cases.

    Link : http://www.familyresearchinst.org/20...best-evidence/

    Now statements of kid who lived with homo parents . They all spoke against gay marriage because of their devastating experience.
    Link : http://cnsnews.com/news/article/laur...-federal-court
    Link 2 : https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/no...-should-know-i

    Now know to your infertility statement
    Most of the infertile may not now that they cannot have children before they get married and even if they know 60% of them get fertile after 6th months without any medical assistance not to mention that they only 3 to 5 % of total heterosexual partners as compared to 100% in gay partners . (Please don't come with lesbian taking sperm from a donour its of a male not her lesbian partner .)

    Evidence: "After six months of trying, 60% of couples will conceive without medical assistance.
    (Infertility As A Covered Benefit, William M. Mercer, 1997)

    And even if they can't they can provide an adopted children with a male father and a mother which have to look to as a role model which gay parents could not provide as stated by homo child's themselves .
    (Original post by cammy10)
    Whatever you say gay marriage is never going to be natural and its going to be odd till morality and logical (not emotional) people remainsCase dismissedHave a nice time
    It's the cherry picking of dodgy studies and trotting out the tired not natural argument which is why those opposed to gay marriage have thoroughly lost the debate in the more progressive societies. Of course, they may debate it on the internet, but out there in the real world, society has moved on.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quantex)
    It's the cherry picking of dodgy studies and trotting out the tired not natural argument which is why those opposed to gay marriage have thoroughly lost the debate in the more progressive societies. Of course, they may debate it on the internet, but out there in the real world, society has moved on.
    There never was a debate the government just did it


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    I've explained this too many times on TSR. If God wanted gay men then he would of created two men instead of a man and a woman.

    But guess what? A woman and a man were created because they can conceive, and it's the natural way.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Then why do gay people exist? You need to stop letting your belief in your imaginary friend mask your personal bigotry. Grow some balls and just own it as it your own.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    Then why do gay people exist? You need to stop letting your belief in your imaginary friend mask your personal bigotry. Grow some balls and just own it as it your own.
    Free will and environmental influences


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I don't see how a man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman would have any impact or effect on my life. Everyone should have the choice to live their life according to their views.Therefore, of course, I agree with it.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BrokenLife)
    I don't see how a man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman would have any impact or effect on my life. Everyone should have the choice to live their life according to their views.Therefore, of course, I agree with it.
    I'd like to torture baby pets, that doesn't effect you, is that ok?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    I'd like to torture baby pets, that doesn't effect you, is that ok?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And what point are you trying to make exactly?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BrokenLife)
    And what point are you trying to make exactly?
    Exactly the one I just made


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BrokenLife)
    And what point are you trying to make exactly?
    I assume his point is that condoning things just because they don't affect you is a flawed philosophy. He used the example of him torturing pets to illustrate this.


    To the OP, yes, I agree that it should be allowed. The key ideological difference between this and the pet torture example is that gay marriage is consensual.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Men you really look retard. On which you are its just getting me confused opposing and accepting at the same time it's bit confusing
    And btw moral values are the same as they were in the past.kindness and helping others was considered in the past and now so not much has changed except you have more gay people shouting on news and TVs.and programs beings aired to show that they can live like a normal family but it's real life not scripted tv shows.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Free will and environmental influences


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    how is it based on free will?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    how is it based on free will?
    You were asking how religion would answer people being gay. My answer is in the eyes of the church man was given free will


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    You were asking how religion would answer people being gay. My answer is in the eyes of the church man was given free will


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    1) this is the first time I've said anything to you - you might be thinking of somebody else
    2) are you saying that your religion is merely your opinion regarding marriage, or are you saying that your opinion should mean that gay marriage shouldn't be legal in a modern society? I'm curious about your view - do you think people ought to have the liberty to go against your religion (some christians, even a majority in this country, agree with gay marriage's legal status) or do you think that they shouldn't? and on what grounds would it be if so? I personally don't think there are any religious grounds regarding matters of public policy, seeing as religion is a private matter, or perhaps should be seen as such in 2015
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    1) this is the first time I've said anything to you - you might be thinking of somebody else
    2) are you saying that your religion is merely your opinion regarding marriage, or are you saying that your opinion should mean that gay marriage shouldn't be legal in a modern society? I'm curious about your view - do you think people ought to have the liberty to go against your religion (some christians, even a majority in this country, agree with gay marriage's legal status) or do you think that they shouldn't? and on what grounds would it be if so? I personally don't think there are any religious grounds regarding matters of public policy, seeing as religion is a private matter, or perhaps should be seen as such in 2015
    What Catholicism says is right or wrong shouldn't mean anything to the law in a secular country, laws are made on the behest of the voting public in a democratic nation. I was merely explaining how Christianity would explain some people being gay.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cammy10)
    Whatever you say gay marriage is never going to be natural and its going to be odd till morality and logical (not emotional) people remains
    Case dismissed
    Have a nice time
    Yes, because what you say out of a book written thousands of years ago is logical and moral. I like how you tried to be "oh, I have my sources wow wow" and then when I posted opposite sources you're all like "I don't care what you say. I only care about what I say. I am right. Always".

    Give me a break.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    I'd like to torture baby pets, that doesn't effect you, is that ok?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Go for it. If you get caught it will benefit the rest of us.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Ignore
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This is messed up ignore the post
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cammy10)
    Calm down girl
    Ok I will start with giving evidence of my last statement
    Last statement stats evidences

    Custody Appeals Study: Cameron and Cameron5 and Cameron and Harris6 did the most unique studies of homosexual parenting to date: an analysis of child custody appeals cases. These were based on intensive examination of the real life of the parents and their children — that is, not based on answers to questionnaires as with Regnerus, but subject to cross-examination in court. The latter study examined 78 custody appeals decisions involving 79 homosexual parents and 142 children. The 142 children were exposed to a thousand child-years of homosexual parenting and found:

    parents recorded as lying or engaging in criminality or homosexuality were more apt to be recorded as harming children;
    homosexual parents as compared to heterosexual parents were more frequently recorded as lying and/or engaging in criminality;
    in 54 (70%) cases the homosexual parent and/or his associates was recorded as having exposed the children to harm(s) (e.g., neglect, seduction, emotional distress, hypersexualization), as opposed to the heterosexual parent in 4 (5%) cases; and
    homosexuals were responsible for 111 (97%) of the 115 harms to children in the appeals court record. In 78 heterosexual vs. heterosexual comparison cases, the 141 children were exposed to 12 harms, harms that occurred in 11 (14%) cases.

    Link : http://www.familyresearchinst.org/20...best-evidence/

    Now statements of kid who lived with homo parents . They all spoke against gay marriage because of their devastating experience.
    Link : http://cnsnews.com/news/article/laur...-federal-court
    Link 2 : https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/no...-should-know-i

    Now know to your infertility statement
    Most of the infertile may not now that they cannot have children before they get married and even if they know 60% of them get fertile after 6th months without any medical assistance not to mention that they only 3 to 5 % of total heterosexual partners as compared to 100% in gay partners . (Please don't come with lesbian taking sperm from a donour its of a male not her lesbian partner .)

    Evidence: "After six months of trying, 60% of couples will conceive without medical assistance.
    (Infertility As A Covered Benefit, William M. Mercer, 1997)

    And even if they can't they can provide an adopted children with a male father and a mother which have to look to as a role model which gay parents could not provide as stated by homo child's themselves .
    ANYONE that remebers me knows i skim through long arguments like this one... So i got that it sperm from a gay male that gets a lesbian female pregnant... What sperm is sperm... And a child is not going to be gay unless they already were before put into the custody of a homosexual couple. So your wrong and the goverment is wrong...

    (Original post by cammy10)
    Whatever you say gay marriage is never going to be natural and its going to be odd till morality and logical (not emotional) people remains
    Case dismissed
    Have a nice time

    Natural i never thought it was unnatural. Marriage is marriage doesn't matter who it is with.

    Sure the holy bible may say marriage is between a man and a woman but it can be changed up to fit the way homosexuals work...

    (Original post by paul514)
    Free will and environmental influences

    Free will??? Really free will??? I never thought of that one... Everyone did you hear that people are gay because of FREE WILL...


    So tell me how did your free willing turn you heterosexual!!! I really like your comment so i will let you slide...

    Posted from TSR Mobile


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.