The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage

Damn Yankee said:
First of all, you were the one setting the standard here, that attacks on the messenger were legitimate. Second, my "attacks" on the APA are focusing purely on facts. The facts show that their decision to de-list homosexuality as a malady was political forced on them by militant gays. Now it looks like they are being pressured, again by militant gays to de-list pedophilia as a malady.

Not only have I dismissed your references as hogwash I've now provided further evidence that homosexuality is related to pedophilia.

Yet you want these deviants to get married, which is the next step for legitimacy to adopt kids.

Why do you want kids to be exposed to potential pedophiles?
Click to expand...

Boy, are you trying to break records for number of strawman arguments in a single post??

And its funny that you try to ridicule someone for something, then do it yourself, then claim I set the standard. lmao

You made an attempt to discredit one of the references. Had you actually looked at the references, you would have seen far more than the APA saying gay parenting is fine.

Unless you can show (without using Cameron) that all homosexuals are pedophiles (or even the majority of them), you have no case at all. In fact, since the question is marriage, you have no case anyway. Gays are already allowed to adopt kids in many states.
 
Wow talk about straw men. You bested yourself there: 'prove most gays are pedos'. And dismissing a source before it is referenced. :lol:

No, you set the standard: attack the messenger. And again, my dismissal of the APA is based on the fact that it has had a gay agenda for decades now.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Wow talk about straw men. You bested yourself there: 'prove most gays are pedos'. And dismissing a source before it is referenced. :lol:

No, you set the standard: attack the messenger. And again, my dismissal of the APA is based on the fact that it has had a gay agenda for decades now.
Click to expand...

I dismissed Paul Cameron. Based on valid critiques of his work. The people he quoted complained that he misinterpreted their data. The APA and whatever the american sociologists organization is called both condemned his work, as have numerous other well respected organizations. The man is a hack and a lunatic.

And you keep wanting to make this about children, when it is about marriage and the benefits granted by the gov't. Many states allow gays to adopt now. So you should be out campaigning to have those adoption laws changed. If you truly believe that gays are predisposed to being pedophiles, you are sitting back and allowing (in your mind) potential pedophiles to adopt. It is nonsense.
 
Since you may have missed it in the CNN article I provided a link to, here is a quote:

"But don't believe me, a doting, biased mother. The Child Welfare League of America, in the business of protecting children since 1920, has been unequivocal: "Any attempt to preclude or prevent gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals or couples from parenting, based solely on their sexual orientation, is not in the best interest of children."

"The National Adoption Center, American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association agree. Thirty years of research says the same, including a new 17-year study published this month in Pediatrics, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, concluding that children raised by lesbian parents do better academically, are more confident than their peers and have fewer behavioral problems.


So that is The Child Welfare League of America, The National Adoption Center, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Medical Association, all agreeing that gay parents are fine (lesbian parents are even better than gay men or straight couples).


Are the Child Welfare League of America, The National Adoption Center, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association all part of the gay agenda that commandeered the APA??
 
Damn Yankee said:
No, you set a standard by summarily dismissing my sources, so I summarily dismissed yours.

Nice straw-man though. :)
Click to expand...

I did read your sources and provided links to professionals debunking Cameron's work. I did not "summarily dismiss" anything.

But I can see that you prefer not to read anything that goes against your preconcieved notions. I guess that makes it easier to hold onto your prejudices.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Apparently so, since gays are 30-some-odd more times likely to be pedophiles.
Click to expand...

30 times more likely. That sounds ominous, but without a baseline it is largely meaningless. "30 times more likely" could still be 0.05% of the homosexual population.
 
So you're OK with 30 times more likely that an adopted child gets molested, so long as gays get a marriage license.
 
Damn Yankee said:
So you're OK with 30 times more likely that an adopted child gets molested, so long as gays get a marriage license.
Click to expand...

Wow, you really have gone off the deep end, haven't you? If you would like to point out where I said that...?

Since gay adoption is already legal in many states, why not allow gay marriage as well? lol

It is coming, SM, despite your ravings and repeating the writings of lunatics. BTW, do you believe, like your mentor Cameron, that gay sex is so much better than straight sex that if men try it they won't go back to straight sex?
 
You basically said you don't mind that 30 times more kids are abused by gays, because it was probably a small number.
 
Damn Yankee said:
You basically said you don't mind that 30 times more kids are abused by gays, because it was probably a small number.
Click to expand...

The fact that you want me to have said that is coloring your reading skills. I pointed out a flaw in your logic, I did not say I didn't mind any number of children being abused.

But this is still your diversion concerning gay marriage. This "it will make it easier to adopt" nonsense is not a reason to ban gay marriage.
 
The OP was about gay marriage. This "slippery slope" argument about pedophiles is a side track you want to take because you have failed to show any real cause for continuing the ban on gay marriage.
 
The fact that gays are more likely to be pedophiles is one reason why gay unions shouldn't be legitimized with a marriage license. That's been my stance all along.
 
Damn Yankee said:
The fact that gays are more likely to be pedophiles is one reason why gay unions shouldn't be legitimized with a marriage license. That's been my stance all along.
Click to expand...

It has been your stance for most of this thread. And it is still bullshit.

The research showing the link between pedophilia and homosexuality is tenuous at best, and not a valid reason for banning gay marriage.

How about this, let gays marry and up the requirements for adoptions?
 
Damn Yankee said:
First you said it was a side track and now you say it was my stance all along. Why did you lie before?
Click to expand...

Lie? You have tried to divert the topic since shortly after your standard "its not normal, moral, healthy or whatever" stance. No lie. You have tried to divert the topic for most of the thread.

Gay marriage would not effect you at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top