Which made me think of this photo: [link]
So figured I would do my, the straight guy who supports gay rights, version of it. .. meant to be satire, somewhat.
I know plenty of gays, several of whom have been in relationships longer than I have even been alive and are great parents and have strong families to their kids.
The American psychological association has done a study that has shown that there are no negative differences between a child raised by gay parents when compared to a kid raised by straight parents
Don’t know what else to put here…
Here are some other posts in my gallery that will tell my views or things I have written regarding homosexuality.
Gay Rights in America: [link]
Gay Rights in America II: [link]
Gay Debate with an ex-gay, born again Christian: [link]
Other pieces that may interest you [the reader]:
An atheist on theism + atheism: [link]
What it means to be an atheist: [link]
Those that influence me: [link]
Okay am done.
As always comrades,
Let knowledge be that truth, which portrays humanity, condemns malevolence; that respects the differences in others while abandoning the hatred and misconceptions of the past.
…back to the cave I go
Though even taking your view of "preventing a future family"... there are things called adoption, in vitro fertilization etc so if they wanted kids, and if you denote family as parents and their kids.. thus being pro gay is not then being anti family.
Good old communist days when propagating it was forbidden!!
I would ask, sir, what does communism have to do with the image or anything stated in the artist comment?
There is anti-feminist in a hm Taliban way which believe women should not be educated, believe they, in most cases should not work, should not exhibit any trait of belief she is equal to that of a male..I would say that is rather anti-female.
I would need clarification of what one means by anti-femnist - - if they take the view that woman are inferior, and should not be given the equal opportunities and rights as her male counterparts - -then I would question whether or not they wish for the female to have a lot in life that is not tied to a male...
Might I ask you what is "positive discrimination" with respect to an anti-stalking law?
No, it has nothing to do with anti stalking law, nevermind. But I observe that divorce laws are being misused. Is it same there?
I would also need an example of what you mean by "misused"? In what way are they being misused then I can say whether or not it is similar/same here?
Well, the government wooes women voters by declaring reservation on eve of election. But the policies are never implemented once a party comes to power. This happens with all other proposals and so fundamental facilities like education, food, water and electricity doesn't reach common people. People have lost faith in democracy.
Stalking for first time is bailable offence. Second time invites jail term. It is biased and leaves men powerless. There have been instances when women have misused this law.
Divorce law which is currently being passed states that women acquire 50% of their husband's private property along with alimony. Women along with their lawyers are deliberately stalling cases till the law is passed. Do you think it's fair?
Well women misuse of the law does not show any connection to feminism, which is why I am unsure how wanting equity in a social order aka feminism..and a woman lying about something are linked together?
In America the law is very similar, for a first offense a person may get a slap on the risk, a second offense may invite jail time etc.. but in America, men and women have lied about being stalked, so I do not see it as an issue with "feminism".
Your ending premise also makes me question the use of feminism in the context of marriage laws. In America we have these things called prenups that if they agree before hand I keep what I had before, and you keep what youhad before - - sometimes they would also come up with an alimony structure if the person is wealthy such as.. you will get 100K per year of marriage to be paid in a divorce - - I just looked up your law and your law has similar contractual prenups but they are void if the party commits an immoral act such as cheating...
So fair in what context? In America if someone is married without a prenup, then upon their divorce the accounts, property are split 50/50 among the divorcing parties - - generally more wealthy people or even not so wealthy people get prenups - - so it is not about fair or unfair, it is perhaps about India catching up with other countries that utilize prenups as a normal course of marriage which protects or can protect both parties in the event of a divorce.
- - Question, if the woman has more money and she gets a divorce and the husband wants 50% I assume of course one would find that just as "unfair" as they do with a woman wanting or being allowed according to Indian law to half of the estate.
So, the terms in these cases of this being feminism is greatly misused... If we wish to discuss feminism in a society we must pit against the notions of equality vs equity vs justice.
... and relate that to the gender roles, and how the laws are in favor ... we can look at the past 20 years or so where in India violence against women has not been addressed as well as it should be and perhaps the nation should truly address a realistic feminism stance.
I see nothing wrong if two men or two women marry one another. It doesn't affect my life or my family's life. Love is love no matter if people are the same gender or not.
While you often hear the right say this will lead to polygamy and bestiality being legalized, which makes me laugh... yeah two humans having sex is the same as human and animal sex [PLEASE FORGET KY LAW!!!!! which when they legalized sodomy aka anal sex they also legalized bestiality ..... was both a gay rights landmark and a showing ignorance ...] ...
[Though I admit I am in the minority in that I would have no issue if polygamy was legalized]
I'm not sure if I will someday, but even if I do I know gay marriage won't affect my marriage at all.
Oh gosh I know Beastality and polygamy are two totally different topics here. Nothing to do with homosexuality what so ever. You know some people even think gay people shouldn't adopt children because they are worried the child will 'become' gay themselves? That is a bogus reason to not allow gays to adopt. You can't just 'become' gay either. I don't know how but you just can't.
My parents have now been together going on 38 years and have never been married...
Yup, but under Kentucky law... they had the "buggery" aka anal sex law in the same law as the bestiality law. So when they repealed their sodomy law, it also of course legalized bestiality .. what I am more entertainingly laughs about is it has been 20 years and not one!!!!! democrat or Republican has put forth a bill to make just bestiality illegal..so in KY bestiality is technically legal since they have no law saying it is illegal...
I know, which is why I liked on this piece the APA study which showed that there is no correlation between gay parents and gay children.. look at Dan Savage.. his son is straight,,,
For me, a guy who grew up in New York, traveled to many countries from a young age to now, seeing gay parents, is normal, does not require a second glance. What is not “normal” for me is the 400K kids in the foster care system, or the additional 20K+ that will enter that system, amidst states that will not require a person to adopt them not because they do not meet any economic or safety standards, but because their idea of what is normal does not meet the inevitable future and present mind of youth of normality.
It has very little to do with “liberal thinking” There are liberals against gay marriage , and there are conservatives for gay marriage … as there are liberals who believe that a child is best raised by a man and a woman only… and there are conservatives who are more than okay with a two man or two female parental unit.
… your premise is flawed, stating procreation equals automatically the way a child should be raised does not meet the sniff test. Sterile people cannot have kids, should we now outlaw them from adopting of having contact with kids because they, going by your premise of procreation, cannot meet your requirement for parental care…. That of course may work under the premise that ability to have kids makes one suitable for parenthood….
It has nothing to do with “slamming you” I am merely addressing your questions the best way I know how.
A bit unsure where the 500,000 years of life come into place, are you speaking of merely humans which only trace our origins back 195K years, or animals in general of which, many species do of course have sex for procreation but very few actually raise the offspring together, if at all..
I have no issue with debating, but we must understand that an opinion is not a fact. I am not trying to change your mind, your opinion is your opinion and you are of course entitled to that, as I am entitled to my own opinion.
And it's true, in no way does a family two same sex parents provide worse parenting than one with hetero mix parents.
Yup, doctors agree that being raised by gays has no negative effects than being raised by straights. They did say that children who are raised by gays tend to be more tolerant to homosexuals, and are not so afraid of different religious or social lifestyles. But I do not see how that is a bad thing.
thank you for the fave of the I love to masturbate stamp as well.