Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

MARRIAGE: Children benefit if parents can wed

Letter by Roger A. Ward, Tacoma on Jan. 10, 2012 at 10:05 am with 85 Comments »
January 10, 2012 11:03 am

During much of our country’s history, rearing children was considered one of, if not the primary reason for government efforts to promote and support marriage.

The majority has decided that raising one’s own biological offspring is not the primary purpose of marriage. Today, less than 40 percent of Americans believe that “children are very important to a successful marriage” (2007 Pew Family Research poll). The percentage of all marriages with children under 18 has declined from 50 percent in 1960 to 30 percent in 1997.

These are bigger changes in the definition of marriage than allowing same-sex couples to marry. A majority of Americans express support for gay marriages and say they are no different in purpose than other marriages. Some raise children and some do not.

We should focus our support on nurturing children in our society. Numerous long-term studies have consistently shown that children raised in same-sex families fare the same, and in several studies, better than those raised by opposite-sex parents.

Same-sex partners should receive equal social, legal and financial benefits for the raising and nurturing of the future citizens of our country.

I agree with the Connecticut Supreme Court that there is a “status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody.” It is important for the children raised in same-sex unions that we convey such status and significance and call all legal contracts uniting consenting adults “marriage.”

Leave a comment Comments → 85
  1. Very well written letter Roger. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees with you, the Connecticut Supreme Court, or common sense. As you shall soon see in the response this blog will produce.

  2. keepinitreal says:

    RW, the poll changed the definition how?

    A “majority of Americans express support for gay marriages…”
    according to ???
    And if so, then let’s put it up for a vote, rather than have the court change it.

    “Numerous long term studies… ” Really ? No citation ?

    Come on now, you know better than that.

  3. keepinitreal, I notice you didn’t write the same comment on Alice Hori’s letter of Jan 9 who provided no support for her assertions that statistics were “indisputable” on her side.

    I provided several links and others provided studies that certainly do dispute her contentions and no one was able to provide any studies that supported her contentions.

    I don’t know what studies this letter writer had in mind, but one link I provided to the previous letter says approximately the same thing:

    “studies have indicated that children with same-sex parents show no significant differences compared with children in heterosexual homes when it comes to social development and adjustment”.

    The specific study in the article concluded that children in same-sex households “scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.”

    http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html

  4. Children benefit best with TWO lovingly active involved parents. Period.

  5. keepinitreal says:

    Yea tuddo ? So how are you different from me in that regard ? Really…

  6. keepinitreal says:

    In fact, tuddo, tell me what did write on Alice’s thread that contradicts or is contrary to what I wrote here.

    :)

  7. Frida, I appreciate your opinion. Science proves otherwise, and we need to make important decisions like this one based on facts and not fantasy and myths.

  8. HistoryFan says:

    “Children benefit if parents can wed”. I agree. A mother and a father each bring to the marrage a different and unique parenting perspective based on their gender (biological make-up). This benifts the child and has for thousands of years.

  9. taxedenoughintacoma says:

    Parents consist of the male who sired the child and the female who gave birth to the child. In all human societies, the biological mother and father are both responsible for raising their young.

    Sorry, the gay plumbing is not biological, it’s unnatural in the eyes of society. Lets don’t let terms like “gay” distract us from the act and the behavior. Can anyone not agree the act is unnatural?

  10. taxedenoughintacoma says:

    Mr. Ward,
    You must be in the teachers union. Now the gays are making the argument, “it’s for the good of the kids”.

    What’s next, new tax levies to support gay parents because, “it’s for the kids”?

  11. I agree, the “its for the kids” argument is absurd but….since it is one of the principal arguments put forward by anti-equal protections under the law folks use to prevent same-sex marriage, it isn’t surprising that someone would point out that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

    You can’t put forward an argument that marriage exists solely for child-rearing purposes and not expect the response that, since gay couples legally adopt (and/or have children through surrogate donors or previous marriages), it follows that gay couples should be allowed to marry as it is best for the children.

    But then….if marriage is only for procreative and child-rearing purposes, how can you justify allowing hetero couples that don’t have children or have raised their children up and sent them on their ways to remain married? Shouldn’t my 90 year old parents be forced to divorce if marriage is solely for procreation and child-rearing?

  12. For many of us, “the family” was God’s idea and began with a male and a female who produced children. It didn’t take long for humans to mess with the original plan, thus polygamy occurred, etc. It doesn’t change the fact that the ideal plan is for a man and a woman to lovingly procreate and raise their children together.

    Who cares what the majority of people now “feel?” I’d guess that the majority of people in my kids’ generation think that pornography is harmless and yet it’s clear that it is anything but harmless.

    Apparently some gazillion vieweres thought the vulgar and exploitive humor (and I use the word loosely) on Two and a Half Men was hilariously funny, when in many ways it was just a pitiful reflection of the path “the majority of the people” appear to have stepped on.

    I understand the majority of American college students think it is OK to cheat. Does that make it ok?

    And for the record, the song and dance about how kids actually fare “better” in gay families is nothing but a bit of propaganda that soon, people like muckibr will be quoting as FACT because he read it somewhere on wikipedia.

    As I pointed out another thread, at the very least, homosexual couples fight and abuse each other and the kids as much as heterosexual couples do. Broken wounded people get married and sometimes do bad things. Their sexual orientation is not the issue.

  13. I know this comment will fire up the minority…but quite frankly, the selfish, ridiculous over permissiveness, politically correct acceptance, and the embracing…dare i say…celebrating of what has always been considered deviant behavior is just one more nail in the coffin of our culture.

    And for the sake of argument…Look up the standard definition of “deviant”. Of course since the loud minority demands a change in the simple traditional meaning of words, I expect there will be many and far reaching changes to Websters!

  14. Dcr, according to your literal definition of “deviant”, the top 1% wealthiest are deviants in our society, since they are far outside the norm and the participated in deviant behavior to get that way, since it is far outside the norm for people to have the wealth they accumulated or were passed down.

    So why do conservatives so strongly support deviants?

  15. alindasue says:

    taxenoughintacoma said, “Can anyone not agree the act is unnatural?”

    I can agree with you that the act is unnatural, however can you also agree that it should not be up to the government to tell us who we can and cannot marry?

    The only reason to have a “legal” marriage is to officially recognize and register the combining of families. Outside of that, people are married according to their religions and/or beliefs. In my religion, a family consists of a man and a woman and their progeny, but do you really want the “legal definition” of marriage to be based on my religion alone?

    There is a reason for separation of church and state in our country. It not only protects some people from the overzealous religious, but also protects the rights of each of us who are religious to worship according to our own consciences.

    sozo said, “It didn’t take long for humans to mess with the original plan, thus polygamy occurred, etc.”

    How many of the Old Testament prophets had multiple wives? Let’s see… Abraham and Jacob (aka Israel) to start. In fact, I haven’t found any references in the Bible to condemn multiple wives – just references to things like the first wife runs the household, etc.

    However, I am not arguing the issue of polygamy, but only acknowledging that it is considered a valid practice in many religions and cultures throughout the world. If a man, say from somewhere in Africa, is legally married to three women in his home country, do we force him to “divorce” two of them if he wants to immigrate to the US?

    I can understand laws to protect vulnerable populations – like “child brides”, for instance – but when we are dealing with consenting adults, the law shouldn’t be able to tell us who we can or cannot marry.

  16. so, sozo, you again give your argument that gays and straights are no different, but you are going to treat them differently and insist everyone else treat them differently because of yuouir personal instructions from your god. How convenient an approach to explain away intolerance.

  17. I agree with sozo! The TV show “Two and a Half Men” was and is stupid! Not funny at all, and very crude.

    But, soxo’s WRONG (again) about me believing that “kids actually fare “better” in gay families” because I don’t believe that at all, and I have said so on other threads, if she would have read or remembered what I wrote.

    I said that kids in same-sex parented families are probably just as well off as kids in opposite-sex parented families. And I didn’t get that from wikipedia. It’s from personal experience, knowing lots of people who actually have grown-up and are growing-up in those kinds of families.

    Same-sex parents are just as capable of raising well adjusted normal straight heterosexual kids as straight parents are capable of raising gay and lesbian kids. Because, sozo, did you ever stop to think….

    Did you ever stop to think where gay and lesbian kids come from in the first place?

    They come from straight heterosexual couples, because (and both you and aislander have pointed out over and over and over again and again and again) heterosexual couples produce most of the children born in this world today. And, most of the gay and lesbian kids and adults in the world today had straight parents. Like Mary Cheney’s dad Dick!

    Did you ever stop to think about that?

    You know what would be YOUR best solution sozo? If you could just get straight parents to quit producing gay and lesbian kids! Why don’t you work on that idea?

  18. sozo, I just want to let you know that the “soxo’s” in my 2nd para is a typo only. I hit the x when I meant to hit the z. Please don’t read anything into it, because nothing was meant by it. Sorry about that.

    But, I do have another question for anyone who goes with the Old Testament, and is relates to the issue of “deviant” behavior.

    QUESTION: In incest okay?

    It must be, because you know that Adam and Eve were the first couple according to The OT. And they had kids right? But, for the 2nd set of kids to be born, there would have had to be some incest going on between the brothers and sisters, who were the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve, right?

    So, incest is okay then, because it’s in The Bible, right?

    But, if The Bible says incest was/is RIGHT,

    because it happened with Adam and Eve’s kids, and it also happened in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, because after Lot’s wife turned into a pillar of salt Lot had sex with his daughters, and that’s another form of incest,

    … how can you say it’s WRONG?

    If The OT says incest is RIGHT, but it’s really WRONG …

    and The OT says homosexuality is WRONG, couldn’t it really be RIGHT?

    Now you see why I take my guidance on really important issues ONLY from Jesus in The New Testament. (… and not Wikipedia!)

  19. Again, keepinit-real? I suggest you try to read the entire comment. As I have pointed out in detail on other threads, you really seem to have a serious reading deficit problem.

    I said, as anyone with 6th grade reading skills can plainly determine, that The Old Testament of The Bible says incest is okay. Whereas, and this is a direct quote so read it very carefully, “Now you see why I take my guidance on really important issues ONLY from Jesus in The New Testament.”

    Perhaps you can have some read those comments to you.

    AS USUAL keepinit-real? has PROVEN HE CANNOT READ THROUGHLY ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THESE ISSUES. For his own good, he should really be prevented from participating in discussions like these which are obviously far over his head and level of perception.

  20. muckibr, you say “heterosexual couples produce most of the children born in this world today.” I’m sorry if this offends you, but that sentence makes me smile. Let’s just say that ALL children are the result of a heterosexual couplING. Oh wait, I forgot about the lab.
    Anyway, I’m sure we can agree that there won’t be any babies to worry about unless a union of male + female takes place somehow!

    tuddo, I did not say that gays and straights are no different. You have my permmission to NOT put words in my mouth. The difference between them is not ontological, however. They are different in terms of how they choose to express their sexuality.

    alindsue, polygamy occurred among God’s people, yes. The cool thing about the Bible is that it doesn’t hide the truth about the choices people made. When you read about David, for instance, you get the whole ugly picture. He made some horrible, deadly choices and his family paid the consequences for them. The Bible does not condone polygamy or suggest in any way that is desirable.

    Sin is not determined by how many people are engaged in it. That’s the pile some others here step in. Just because a whole bunch of people agree to hang a man from a tree doesn’t make it right does it?

  21. Oh look…Now “tuddo” twists and spins my observation ( which is shared I believe by the vast majority of Americans ) into an argument about money! HAA!

    You people who support this silliness never cease to amaze me with your diversionary tactics.

    Simple fact is that the majority of people in this country think homosexuality and the idea of them marrying is just weird. Most of us could care less what homosexual people do behind their closed doors, but leave it there.

    They always have to fiddle around trying to make equal that which can never be.

  22. keepinitreal says:

    I just get bored with wallpaper. Besides, regardless of how you deflect and twist to avoid the truth, that the ballots were designed by a democrat, a fact remains a fact.

    Looks like lunch is over.

  23. ….and speaking of “intolerance” and “acceptance”. How about the bizarre notion that those who cry for equal rights for gays, just do something about THEIR intolerance for the idea that the majority of people in this country will never accept that lifestyle as equal or normal.

  24. sozo, “muckibr, you say “heterosexual couples produce most of the children born in this world today.” I’m sorry if this offends you, but that sentence makes me smile. Let’s just say that ALL children are the result of a heterosexual couplING. Oh wait, I forgot about the lab.”

    Actually, not offended at and and I am very glad something I wrote makes you smile, but you are AGAIN WRONG when you say “ALL children are the result of a heterosexual couplING.” because, as you say in the next sentence, “Oh wait, I forgot about the lab.”

    You caught yourself, and so you didn’t actually forget. TERRIFIC!!! You actually got it right until…

    … you went and screwed-it-up again and wrote: “Anyway, I’m sure we can agree that there won’t be any babies to worry about unless a union of male + female takes place somehow!”

    No, we can’t agree, because as you already said, there is “the lab.”

    In-Vitro Fertilization DOES NOT require the coupling of a male and female, as you characterize it as “a union of male + female”. (Country singing star Melissa Etheridge had a baby thanks to sperm donated by folk/rock singing star David Crosby, but they never “coupled” to accomplish that.)

    All you need is sperm and egg, and that does not even require that the male and/or female donors be in the same room, same city, or even same country, so they need not “couple” or engage in any physical “union.”

    In fact, the science exists today, that does not even require the male sperm or female egg. Have you heard of cloning?

    I know one (or more) of the more immature posters on this blog is going to post the something using the word “sheeple” after I post this, but let’s all just consider the source when that silly person does that.

    Have you heard of Dolly, the cloned sheep? Cloning be done with humans now. We don’t need sex, or even two genders to procreate, thanks to science!

    Still, what are YOU going to do about all those straight couples who are producing all those gay and lesbian kids? That the real problem isn’t it?

  25. Dcr628, Who, specifically, is asking you to “accept that lifestyle as equal or normal.” Can you name names and provide quotes?

  26. commoncents says:

    I would imagine that the acts being performed in a gay household are exactly the same acts that are performed in many a straight household between married and non-married m/f’s and as a result while not the norm would certainly not be classified as deviant. Let’s be real here…it’s not the act that is considered deviant but who is doing it to whom that seems to be the problem.

  27. “muckibr”…You are playing into this EXACTLY as I suspected someone would. I never said, never once, that anyone is asking ME to accept anything.

    What I have done in my comments is simply bring to light the observation that apparently you, and those who struggle for our American culture to make equal that which will never be, are just spinning your wheels.

    Homosexuality, no matter how long and loud it is waved, is NEVER going to be accepted as equal or okay by the vast majority of Americans. The gay community just needs to ‘accept’ that fact, and control their ‘intolerance’ of the idea that their lifestyle is just plain seen as wrong by most people.

    How does it become, that a small minority of Americans can label a vast majority of Americans as “intolerant” simply because their views aren’t shared by that majority?

    And muckibr, to answer your question…(“Who, specifically, is asking you to “accept that lifestyle as equal or normal.” Can you name names and provide quotes?”)

    Get real Muckibr!! The entire thrust of this gay equality movement IS solely for the purpose of getting the American society to accept their lifestyle as equal.

  28. Pacman33 says:

    The test-tube-baby said ~

    “All you need is sperm and egg”

  29. Uh, muckibr, remember those analogies you had to learn for school?

    sperm+egg:male+female

    As for cloning, that’s a whole new subject.

    What is sad to me is that people don’t seem to remember any of the importance of a child being conceived in an act of unique intimacy.
    It’s a sad day in our world in so many ways.

    As for males and females engaging in the same acts as homosexuals, cc, you may be right, but you may not be nearly as right as you think. Granted the world has turned sex into mere recreation and a gigantic sexual experiment, but it is much more than that to many many people. Sex isn’t always about just getting your pleasure-fix for day.

  30. sozo, I don’t think I am putting words in your mouth when you say: “homosexual couples fight and abuse each other and the kids as much as heterosexual couples do. Broken wounded people get married and sometimes do bad things. Their sexual orientation is not the issue”

    That clearly says you think that the rate of abuse is exactly equal. That means you think that the rate of non-abuse is equal, too. That’s just plain arithmetic.

    The science is clear that there is no difference in how well the children fare in gay and straight marriages. So, I suggest before the anti-gay crowd clears out for good that they change their arguments for and against and not base it on “the children”.

    And, Dcr, the majority of Americans do not think being gay or even gay sex is morally wrong.

    http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctpolitics/2011/07/poll_majority_o.html

    Even among those who do, there is a growing trend who agree that their own moral and religious opinions should not supersede equality under the law.

    It appears you’ve changed your arguments, I see in your response to Muckibr from gays needing a majority to needing a “vast” majority, whatever that means in your ever-changing rules of the game.

    I do not think the majority should ever get to vote on inalienable rights, like marriage, but a clear majority in the USA supports marriage for same-sex couples, and a clear majority do not think being gay is morally wrong.

  31. tuddo, you said “you again give your argument that gays and straights are no different” which is hardly the same as me pointing out the likelihood of dysfunction being similar in both straight and gay homes. As for mathmatical particulars, I was not suggesting “identical” statistics, and I doubt that anyone but you thought I was. Let’s just keep it simple, odds are (rhetoricaly speaking) that which causes one to abuse spouses and kids is not limited to straight people.

    As for majorities, it would appear that a majority of Americans thought Charlie Sheen was funny. It would appear that a majority of Americans idolize Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie and think that Oprah Winfrey is a sage. All those numbers don’t make a whit of difference in a discussion about what is morally right or even healthy for a society.

  32. One other instance of numbers being meaningless. I see where USA Today reports that large numbers of people think spirituality and questions about God are a waste of time. When those numbers reach the tipping point, will God cease to be?

  33. sozo, wrote “I doubt that anyone but you thought I was.” Just so you know, I agreed with EVERYTHING tuddo wrote about your comments. So that makes at least two of us, so your statement was wrong. tuddo is extremely good at understanding and responding to people on these threads. tuddo has you pegged to a tee, really.

    Now, as to something else in your latest post…

    What the hell is wrong with Brad, Angelina and OPRAH!!! What’s your major malfunction!! Those are three really GOOD PEOPLE! Charlie Sheen I can do without, but layoff Brangelina and OPRAH!

    And BTW God has already ceased to be for some people, but will never cease to be for all people. If you don’t know that, well, there’s just no hope for you. It’s called FAITH!

  34. Dale – I want homosexuals AND heterosexuals to keep what they do behind closed doors to themselves.

  35. ReadNLearn says:

    The rate of child molestation in households with same sex parents is double that of heterosexual couples if the child is unrelated by blood to the parents and of the same gender.

    That’s reality.

  36. sozo, I will ask again, and please answer without bringing in your personal morals or religious views, which, like Charlie Sheen’s, I would not give a whit about:

    How is gay marriage unhealthy for a society when it harms no one else, does not harm the people involved and does not hurt society. Please answer with real facts and not your personal opinion.

    You can sway my opinion about gay marriage, as can anyone, if they would give any proof that gay marriage is unhealthy for our country.

    What we have seen over years of discussion about this is that people answer that question with their personal interpretation of the Bible, a statement about changing a “tradition” or “changing a definition” or saying that they don’t want to be around gay people or imagine what they do in bed.

    When people do try to make a case, like the previous letter that stated that children of gay parents were somehow harmed by being raised by gay people, there were no facts, and no one provided a shred of evidence even when I did provide facts and links tbhat showed that children were not harmed.

    An important decision like this needs to be based on facts, evidence and serious discussions, especially when people make the claim that gays are “guilty” of something like harming soicety.

  37. ReadNLearn, please provide a link and I will take your accusation seriously. However, here are a few findings and links that I did find that say yuou are just making stuff up:

    “The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children.”

    http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

    “Myth: Lesbians and gay men are more likely to molest children.

    Fact: There is no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. All of the legitimate scientific evidence shows that.”

    The study concluded that “a child’s risk of being molested by his or her relative’s heterosexual partner is over 100 times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual” Carole Jenny, et al., Are Children at Risk for Sexual Abuse by Homosexuals?, Pediatrics, Vol. 94, No. 1 (1994);

    “A review of the available research on pedophilia provides no basis for associating child molestation with homosexual behavior.” David Newton, Homosexual Behavior and Child Molestation: A Review of the Evidence, Adolescence, Vol. XIII, No. 49 at 40 (1978)

  38. Sorry, I forgot the link that has a detailed biblkiography that supports the Myth/Fact info: http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aids/overview-lesbian-and-gay-parenting-adoption-and-foster-care

  39. Beerboy….AMEN to that!!! ;) (“Dale – I want homosexuals AND heterosexuals to keep what they do behind closed doors to themselves.”)

  40. tuddo challenges with, “And, Dcr, the majority of Americans do not think being gay or even gay sex is morally wrong.”

    Regardless of where you find the weak snippets to support your argument, I’ll give you one challenge, and you WILL fail…

    Take 100 Americans…Have them give a truthful, honest heartfelt answer to this question. “Would you prefer your son or daughter to be gay or straight?” Now that answer cannot be laced with a sideways distraction such as “Well, I just want them happy” or some other goobered up excuse….Just a one word answer, ‘Your kid..Gay or Straight…You pick.’

    I will guarantee you will find the VAST majority of Americans will prefer straight kids. That about settles that idea that most Americans think gay is not wrong…..unless of course the country is chock full of politically correct hypocrites without the backbone to express their true thoughts for fear of offending someone! Now THAT is another story!

  41. keepinitreal says:

    Yes, we are aware legislators legislate contrary to the will of the majority.

    Next.

  42. Dale – of course parents want their kids to be straight, if for no other reason, being gay is a harder life due to the prejudice against them.

  43. The majority of parents also want their children to be male.

  44. ManuelMartini says:

    “For many of us, “the family” was God’s idea”

    This person denies scientific data about rising seas and climate challenges.

  45. “Who cares what the majority of people now “feel?” ”

    Well, hopefully the Washington state Legislature cares how the majority feels.

  46. Beerboy…..that was one of those ‘laced with a sideways distraction’ answers I was talking about….a ‘yeah but’…no yeah buts allowed :)…

    (“of course parents want their kids to be straight, if for no other reason, being gay is a harder life due to the prejudice against them”)

    Most parents would prefer their kids to be straight for no other reason than they want them to be straight. Picture this ludicrous scenario….Mom and Dad just have a new baby…..they are gathered around the nursery window at the hospital with gramma and grandpa and all the aunts uncles and bystanders, all smiling, and oohing and ahhhing….Show me ONE out of the millions of new parents worldwide who says….””Gee I sure hope he turns out to be gay!!”

    Sheesh!

  47. ManuelMartini says:

    As the parent of two males, I never gave a thought to their sexuality after their birth.

    Show me one parent that worries about sexuality of an infant when there are so many other things to worry about during the first year of a child’s life.

    What a ridiculous argument.

  48. And tuddo, lets not forget this idea…In this day and age, it isn’t all that common to find anyone WITH morals, so your statement is simply unqualified isn’t it?

    Oh people will SAY they are moral, until something gets in the way of them getting or doing what they want. Then morality takes a backseat. Find a lost wallet on the sidewalk, full of 50 dollar bills, and sure it might get turned in, but a few if not all the bills will be gone, for example.

    (“And, Dcr, the majority of Americans do not think being gay or even gay sex is morally wrong.”)

  49. ManuelMartini says:

    muckibr, the one thing that this legislative action will reveal is who voted how, so that constituents can remember when the next election comes up in November.

    This is about the word “marriage”, much like the silly “Hijacking Christmas” argument. I’m thinking that rational adults are tired of the game.

  50. ManuelM…As a parent of three kids, I never gave thought to their sexuality either..not because there are so many other things to worry about, but simply because its just assumed they will be straight.

    The fact is, my comment will be seen by some as “ridiculous” simply because it is a true statement that goes against their argument that cant be argued against because of its truth.

    (ManuelMartini writes, “As the parent of two males, I never gave a thought to their sexuality after their birth. Show me one parent that worries about sexuality of an infant when there are so many other things to worry about during the first year of a child’s life. What a ridiculous argument.”)

  51. tuddo, I am unable to satisfy you with absolute facts, and confess that it is my OPINION that validating gay marriage will have an erosive effect on what God intended. You win. It’s my opinion, an opinion based on a lifetime of reading, observing, praying and living in fellowship with both gay and straight people. But an opinion. If you get your way and gay marriage because an acceptable thing, perhaps we can slip back into the world as spirits from the afterworld and see how it’s going.

  52. Why am I not surprised that Oprah and Pitt-Jolie are your heroes, muckibr?

  53. May I ask: In the exchange of ideas between tuddo, beerBoy, ManuelMartinin and Dcr628, is there at least agreement among you all that people born either homosexual or heterosexual, and do not choose to be that way at some point later in life?

    It seems, from your comments that you all at least agree, sexual orientation is something people are born with, and not something that is a learned trait later on in life.

  54. Dcr, I preferred my children to be doctors and lawyers, but not one of them chose that lifestyle. However, they made some great choices in their lives based on who they are and who they wanted to be, not on who I wanted them to be.

    Your introduction of parental preference as a factor in whether or not to allow the removal of unconstitutional restrictions on a basic human right is nonsensical, as bBoy has well pointed out.

  55. muckibr, my view is that it makes no difference in whether a person is born gay, is nurtured gay or chooses to be gay, since I base my arguments on marriage as a basic human civil right that cannot be unreasonably restricted.

    I think the science is unclear at this point, but so far, it appears that there are genetic components, hormonal components (most importantly in the womb), nurturing components, and learning components. The ratio of each is muddled, with different studies showing different impacts.

    I do think that by the time a person develops awareness of sexuality, there is not much “choice” in the decision, since the major impacts of the factors I list have already taken place.

  56. Dcr, I do not share your cynical view about morality in the USA. (Is one of the requirements of being a conservative that you must believe no one is moral but you?)

    We are bombarded by examples every day of people who certainly fit your idea of the majority, but I think if you look at any study, you will see the facts are much different. The vast majority (as you like to say) are law-abiding, moral people.

    Take this study by Barnard College in the hotbed of immorality, NYC:
    http://www.physorg.com/news93535863.html

    82% of the time a found wallet was returned intact to its owners.

  57. “Dcr, I do not share your cynical view about morality in the USA. (Is one of the requirements of being a conservative that you must believe no one is moral but you?”

    tuddo….this is exactly why it is such a chore to have a conversation or even debate with most people in these silly threads….not much more than opinions where everyone else is wrong based on ASSUMPTIONS.

    So, how do you know I am “conservative” and what do you know about my morals? My comments are based on what I have seen, and heard, and learned through nearly 60 years of life..just simple, lifelong observations. And Good Grief, look at how simple, factual observations are muddied up by twisted, detracting spins. That is the plan, deride truth and cloud things up….its the only way for some people.

    Regardless of the spin, I will STILL maintain that probably close to 100% of parents world wide hope they dont end up with a gay child. Prove me wrong.

  58. ManuelMartini says:

    There is no spin, other than yours, Dcr. New parents don’t think about sexuality of their child.

    Do you think that Dick Cheney and wife spend their hours contemplating how they could have done something different to “make” their daughter heterosexual?

  59. ManuelMartini says:

    Dcr, I will add that I’m the grandparent of 11 children, thus the chances of one or more being homosexual is there. So what?

    I never consider the thought until someone brings up this stupid subject, which mirrors all of the demagoguery of the anti-civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

    Remember all the reasoning for opposing black/white marriages? Remember the segregated toilets because “they have diseases we don’t have”? Remember segregated eating places for the same reasons?

    I’d be embarrassed if I were you. We are about the same age.

  60. ManuelMartini says:

    “I will STILL maintain that probably close to 100% of parents world wide hope they dont end up with a gay child. Prove me wrong.”

    This, after admitting you didn’t think about it at the birth of your children.

    Prove that part of the moon isn’t green cheese, Dcr. All I can do is shake my head in wonder.

  61. Dcr, if you want to get past the “spin” then let’s work on getting down to some basics. Like; you, Manuel and me are all about the same age. (Around 60, give or take a couple years.) Okay, we have that in common. We grew-up during the same period of time.

    At least Manuel and I have grandkids. Do you Dcr? If so, then we all have something of a vested interest in this issue.

    Now, how about answering my question up-thread at 8:26 AM this morning. So far only tuddo has addressed that.

    tuddo and beerBoy, would you like to add some info regards your general age and kid/grandkid situation?

    If we can establish some traits we share, maybe we can find areas where we can agree on some things, and then other areas where we can agree to disagree without all the animosity that only clouds the issue.

  62. sozo: Why am I not surprised that Oprah and Pitt-Jolie are your heroes, muckibr?

    Is it because you are a sanctimonious prude who judges everyone by your own personal God-like standard?

    Do you not remember the scripture: Matthew 7:1-5

    1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

    3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

  63. P.S. I never said Brangelina and Oprah were my heroes. I only said they were GOOD PEOPLE.

    Since you scolded tuddo with: “You have my permmission to NOT put words in my mouth. ”

    Where the hell do you get the right to put words in my mouth?

    “5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

  64. P.S. sozo, if you take a look at the other current thread on this topic “MARRIAGE: Shouldn’t we encourage commitment?” you might see where I came to your defense at 8:44 AM. And it caused tuddo to apologize to you at 9:06 AM. When you do get back to that thread, you might have want to say “Thank you.”

  65. muckibr…

    1. yes i have grandkids

    2. To answer your question, I think the final jury is still out on whether gays are born that way. I suppose there is that possibility. If it is proven to be the case, I can handle that..However in todays world, where permissiveness, and “if it feels good do it” runs rampant, with so many young, un-developed minds being fed that this lifestyle is okay if not normal, then that could sway them in their confusion to go that way. I dont doubt there may be some ‘gays’ who run that way, because its thought to be the cool thing to do. I suppose I’ll catch flak for THAT comment too. Sure is tough in today’s culture to be ballsy enough not to be political correct, and opine your honest beliefs.

    3. Finally, I hold absolutely no animosity. I simply maintain that while others claim an excuse that homosexuality is considered morally okay by “most people”, I will maintain that morals in this society, by and large, are in the can, and anyone would be hard pressed to find any parents who hope their kids turn out gay. I’d say those seem to be truths that are just too uncomfortable for some to take.

  66. …by the way, to add, I agree on quite a bit…however when I know I am right on something, I will NEVER bend that or excuse it because its not a popular opinion. I HOPE that “trait” is shared by everyone, but in today’s overly sensitive, politically correct world, its not…or honest opinions are kept buried.

  67. Great Dcr628,. Thank you for you candid reply. Let’s hope others follow suit!

    As to your second comment at 12:16 PM, there is yet another thing at least you and I have in common. I have said almost those exact words before, “when I know I am right on something, I will NEVER” back-down, almost never anyway.

    However, I always try to leave the door open at least just a crack, in case there is somebody who can prove me wrong. It doesn’t happen that often, but it has at least twice since I have been on these TNT threads.

    Thank you for your replies. Let’s see what the other guys say now.

  68. muckibr, Dcr has raised the point that much of the comments here are diversions. I agree with that, and think age or number of children or grandchildren is a diversion. There is no more validity in a grandparent’s comments than a single youngster’s.

    But, I am a great grandparent several times over and probably older than anyone currently commenting.

    Dcr, your statement about parents not wishing to have gay children is probably true, but does not support your argument in support of morality. As bBoy and others have pointed out, most parents don’t think about it, many have reasons other than morality for wanting straight kids.

    I feel like I am a very moral person, and all of the people I know who support gay marriage are very moral people. So Dcr, it is somewhat insulting to me for you to even equate support for gay marriage with immorality.

    To me making decisions based on myth, prejudice or fear without benefit of factual evidence is immoral. I’ve been on juries in courts of law, and I call it out there, too, when people are making decisions based on their own irrationality.

    And, Dcr, it is not hard to discern that you are a die-hard conservative. Your statement about not bending when you think you are right (even when factual evidence proves you wrong), is a common trait of far right conservatives.

    If someone could present factual evidence to me that gay marriage does harm, then I would change my mind. But, it would have to be scientific and not religious evidence, myths or beliefs.

    I hope you can tell I have done a lot of research on this topic, (especially since it took a lot to persuade me to change my religious beliefs on this topic) and I have yet to see any evidence of harm in the literature that goes back about 75 years now. Therefore I remain convinced the Constitutional ideal of equality under the law must be observed.

  69. Gee, I don’t think I’m a sanctimonious prude, nor do I think most people who know me would find that an apt description. But maybe. And I’m working on my own plank, but it hasn’t completely blinded me!!

    My apologies for misquoting you on Oprah and Pitt/Jolie, but as far as your scriptural admonition, I wish you and others would recognize the difference between making a judgment about something, as in an assessment, and being judgmental in a presumptive way. There’s a difference between a judgment and “being judgmental.” All I said was that it didn’t surprise me that you were a fan…based on a lot of things you’ve said on various threads, and you’ll admit, you’ve shared a lot? It was a reasonable assessment.

  70. And, btw, I’m hurt that you left me out of the Over-60-with-Grandkids Club! Is it a boys only affair? (no homosexual pun intended, honest!)

  71. tuddo, please do not feel insulted by any of Dcr’s comments. I am sure he doesn’t mean them in that way, but he is passionate about his point of view as we all are.

    The reason I ask for others to share some info about themselves is to create a base of understand that might help us understand each other as people rather than just words on a blog. I was hoping to inject some humanity it this cyberspace.

    If we were all at the country store, sitting around the cracker-barrell in one of those Norman Rockwell moments, we would certainly be a lot less prone to dissing each other than we are here in the anonymity of this blog.

    I believe I understand your point regarding changing your religious beliefs, as I too went through a personal conversion on that and other issues. It’s not easy being raised one way most of your life, and then having to admit to yourself that maybe some of those people were not telling you the true story.

    BUT, as I say, this is still NOT a religious issue. It’s still only about changing a law to issue a piece of paper to a wider spectrum of people. When that law is changed, it will NOT have any impact on the religious community. They will still be free to do as they believe.

    Can we agree on that much?

  72. sozo, a gentleman never asks a lady her age.

    Of course you are welcome! Pull-up a chair and have a seat near the cracker-barrell with the guys.

  73. sozo, Okay on the other thing. No judgement here.

  74. Cracker-barrell rules: Just try to be nice to each other, okay? We can share ideas without getting all snarky, can’t we?

  75. ReadNLearn says:

    Remember, the same folks who support NAMBLA support gay marriage.

  76. Based on the comment from ReadN… then Republicans support same-sex marriage.

    Editorials blast NAMBLA republicans (see the kink, I mean link below.)

    http://dailygotham.com/blog/bouldin/editorials_blast_nambla_republicans

  77. Good comment at 2:50pm “tuddo”. However a slight course correction for you–I believe I alluded to this in my comment to “muckibr”–When I have my opinion, and know it to be true, or correct, I become tenacious as a pitbull (No, I dont own one!)–HOWEVER, those that know me best also know that I to, as muckibr said, do “leave the door cracked” to allow proof that I am wrong to get through. When I am proven wrong I am the first to accept it. So far on this issue I havent been proven wrong. So much for your stereotype on conservatives.

    And correct you are…I AM a die hard conservative, BUT it is simply my way to live MY life. I dont let my conservative views get in the way of letting others live life how they see it. I may speak against something, or offer the opinion that I dont agree, but it stops there. This gay marriage issue may become law nationwide at some point. I dont care. It wont affect me or mine in any way, and if it does, then congratulations to those it does affect. That certainly wont change my opinion, or lessen my saying that I do not agree with it. I have the iron pants and thick skin to take it when people disagree with me or even think I’m nuts…Unfortunately, there are too many in this far too overly sensitive culture we live in who dont practice the same.

  78. “Cracker-barrell rules: Just try to be nice to each other, okay? We can share ideas without getting all snarky, can’t we?”

    Yeah okay Mom! Sheesh What fun is THAT!! ;)

  79. So much for your play nice rules muckibr!! … I just pulled a “Fantastic Voyage” stunt….shrank myself down to microscopic size and swan through the internet, surfaced at “tuddos” house, and snuck in under his keyboard….I planted limberger cheese under his space bar, now he’ll get a blast everytime he hits it!!

    Okay okay Tuddo……Just pickin on ya… :D

  80. “So much for your play nice rules muckibr!!”

    What does that mean?

  81. Dcr, so that was you. I thought I’d left an egg in my chicken coop too long. As old as I am its hard to tell where those smells are coming from!

  82. Dale – I would bet that there are no parents that hope their children are born autistic, deaf, blind, etc. BUT, most parents of children who are born with obstacles to overcome want those children to be as happy as possible without having additional barriers to their happiness created by the law.

    tuddo – I’m 54 and have no children but my 56 year old gay brother has been in a monogamous relationship for 30 years, is married (he and his spouse flew back to Iowa for the ceremony), has two adopted children, and one grandchild.

  83. btw – neither of my brother’s children are gay.

  84. ManuelMartini says:

    NAMBLA is so much worse than a religious cult that forces young girls to “marry” elder men in their organization.

    Focus ReadNLearn-son. This is supposed to be about consenting adults, thus the fantasies of pedophilia and bestiality will have to wait for comment thread dedicated to that subject matter.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0