In Defense of the Marriage

[Jerrek]

Maybe so, but if the founding fathers had been able to forsee people like you twisting that to suit their own ends I think they probably would have reconsidered entirely.

Nope. That is why they left Europe in the first place.

[Bex]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Yep, and all of this is irrelevant because I got my point accross to Miss B. You're just trying to argue about a trivial thing like definition. I'm quite sure you've got the brains to know what I meant.

am i miss b? ohh that makes me sound so mysterious :pp

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Yep, and all of this is irrelevant because I got my point accross to Miss B.

Well done, one person agrees with you so other people's opinions no longer count.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

You're just trying to argue about a trivial thing like definition.

Having a memory problem? You were the one who first resorted to bringing out the dictionary.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I'm quite sure you've got the brains to know what I meant.

More importantly, do you have the brains to know what you are going on about?

[Bex]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Well done, one person agrees with you so other people's opinions no longer count.

Having a memory problem? You were the one who first resorted to bringing out the dictionary.

i certainly do NOT agree with him

[Jerrek]

Waddy boy, she didn't agree, she understood what I meant.

Originally Posted by bexy

i certainly do NOT agree with him

Whoops, didn`t mean to tar you with the same brush.

[Bex]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Whoops, didn`t mean to tar you with the same brush.

its ok i forgive you just this once..

now

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by bexy

its ok i forgive you just this once..

now

Isnt it unseasonally warm today...

[Bex]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

Isnt it unseasonally warm today...

we sooooo need an "ontopic" emotcon

[kronas]

i think marriage should be allowed between a gay couple, disallowing it would be a breach of a human right, that is to get married, i dont see a real problem in not allowing it to happen, except the religious section of society sticking there noses in to other peoples business.

marriage is about creating a new bond, solidifying the relationship you have with your partner.

if kids are to come in to the equasion adoption would be the route or the use of donors.............

if a reply to the child needs to given at a later date, as to why he/she has two same sex parents, then it would feasable to 'cover' this up until the child has reached a sufficient age to understand the situation.

Originally Posted by kronas

if a reply to the child needs to given at a later date, as to why he/she has two same sex parents, then it would feasable to 'cover' this up until the child has reached a sufficient age to understand the situation.

At what age would you consider a child old enough to understand the situation?

The reason I ask is that we assume that children can understand the situation in a heterosexual relationship with no problems, and that isn`t something innate. If a child can understand one type of relationship I don`t see that they couldn`t understand the other type. Another bonus is that if these things are explained to them when they are young enough then hopefully then they won`t be misled by that propaganda put out by large sections of society.

[Russ]

i think marriage should be allowed between a gay couple, disallowing it would be a breach of a human right, that is to get married, i dont see a real problem in not allowing it to happen, except the religious section of society sticking there noses in to other peoples business

Er no, I've been against that long before I became a Christian. If gays wish to have relationships then all well and good. But for me (and many others) marriage has been about children.

if kids are to come in to the equasion adoption would be the route or the use of donors.............

Yep fine, as long as both sides are opposite sexes.

if a reply to the child needs to given at a later date, as to why he/she has two same sex parents, then it would feasable to 'cover' this up until the child has reached a sufficient age to understand the situation.

Cool! So, lying to the child!

Tell me, why would you need to 'cover' anything up?

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Another bonus is that if these things are explained to them when they are young enough then hopefully then they won`t be misled by that propaganda put out by large sections of society.

WTF? The propaganda?! Would that be the same propaganda that the majority of the human race has subscribed to for at least 2000 years? I call that established practice with long precedent.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

At what age would you consider a child old enough to understand the situation?

aged 12-13

i would say 16 as a safeguard

Originally Posted by dr wadd

The reason I ask is that we assume that children can understand the situation in a heterosexual relationship with no problems, and that isn`t something innate. If a child can understand one type of relationship I don`t see that they couldn`t understand the other type.

yes but you dont expect a 5 year old to understand what a homosexual relationship is about, you have to think about the timeing, it would be individually balanced depending on the mentality of the person at the age they were told, not everyone can fully understand the opposite to something, especially if those around them meaning other children have a mother and father and you have to acknowledge there question and they feel 'abnormal'............

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Another bonus is that if these things are explained to them when they are young enough then hopefully then they won`t be misled by that propaganda put out by large sections of society.

if you do mistime the education then you will ultimately confuse the child, the 'propoganda' as you put it would no come in to it, because the child would/should have sufficient protection from the parents to ensure other pupils dont question the child about not having a mother or father, but having said that things tend to 'get out'............

[Russ]

So do you agree that an upbringing by a homosexual couple is, shall we say, 'unconventional' enough to warrant the need to 'cover' it up to a child?

I say conventional upbringings sound much better!