Gay marriage is child abuse. >/lgbt/ will still defend this

>>8851348
I'm against it.

>>8851348
If I'm free to live as I choose, than I guess that means I'm free to have children to raise with my husband then.

>Mariage
>Nature

>>8851348
>Gay marriage is child abuse.
I kinda agree but for other reasons.

Gay males tend to just go the super liberal loving dad route with adopted kids but lesbians tend to have a lot of hate towards their children if they either end up becoming hetero (in case of girls) or are male.

most lesbians that adopt also go the route of let's adopt little girls which creeps the shit out of me because you shouldn't have children based on your sexual preferences. It's not like you're supposed to be attracted to your fucking kids for gods sake.

t. spic dyke disgusted at my own kind.

>>8851348
Marriage is only a way to trap yourself financially and emotionally. That is why a lot hetero marriages fall apart.
The only good thing in marriage is the wedding desu

>>8851402
Wow I didn't know things were so bad. Almost makes it seem like they shouldn't adopt then

File: 1504962952477.jpg (233KB, 931x569px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 931x569px

>>8851348
>>8851402
Shouldn't breeders worry about divorcees than gay parents?

File: 1337004864508.jpg (53KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 720x480px

>>8851402
>most lesbians that adopt also go the route of let's adopt little girls which creeps the shit out of me because you shouldn't have children based on your sexual preferences. It's not like you're supposed to be attracted to your fucking kids for gods sake.

Oh come on now. Most parents prefer to have children of their own sex. Like how fathers hope it's a boy 'cause then they can play football and shit.

>>8851434
>>8851441

Nah anon, it's not to be able to play football or play barbie with your kids. It's far from that.
clg itself has a couple of crazy 20 year old girls who keep going the creepy route of let's marry and adopt little girls and I always keep trying to remind them having kids has nothing to do with what you're attracted to.

I have fucking kids for gods sake, it doesn't matter if they are a boy or a girl they are your kids and you watched too much yuri if you think otherwise.

>tfw I will end up outing myself as the mom anon if I keep talking about this shit outside of the general.

>>8851402
>it's creepy that lesbian couples adopt girls who are the gender they're attracted to
Yes i'm also sure that all straight couples with kids adopted or not are paedophiles because one of them will be bound to have a child that aligns with one of their sexual preferences. Are you sure you have the right number of chromosomes anon?

>>8851348
Why do we have so many gay equivalents of uncle toms on this board? Are literally any of the people here who advocate for views and laws that go againts the well being and benefifs of gays even gay themselves?

>>8851469
Self hate and desire to be accepted by those who reject them

>>8851459
Having children who happen to be the gender you're attracted has nothing to do with the "I will only adopt and love my kids if they happen to be a girl" I see being posted a lot on this board.

Seriously, grow up. How many gay guys you see talking about them hating their children because they aren't gay or are a girl?
Lesbians do this shit all the time and it sickens me.

>>8851474
And to be more direct here.

If my daughter grow up to be het, a lesbian or even end up becoming FtM I'm not going to give her shit for it.

I'm going to be her mom no matter what.

>>8851402
As a gay guy, I'd honestly prefer if my children were all straight. The LGBT life is harsh.

>>8851348
I'm not 100% against the message beause I think having a mother and a father are important to cognitive development in a child but surely 1 parent is better than 0 and 2 parents are better than 1

>MAKES THAT IMPOSSIBLE
oh yeah? it does?
2 fags adopting a parentless child doesn't make it impossible for a heterosexual couple to conceive and raise their own children....

there is a good argument somewhere in there but religious fundies are too stupid to craft it correctly

>>8851488
But would you hate or mistreat your kids based on their gender and sexuality?
Because this is the problem I have with other lesbians. It makes me fucking furious.

>>8851434
Divorcees, unwed single parents, sex out of wedlock, childless married couples, etc. -- in theory it's all equally unacceptable for those that wring their hands about gay parents.
I figure for some it's all one brutally consistent agenda, the type that might also be pro-life and support abstinence-only sex ed.
And others are just creeped out by the possibility of gay parents and don't exactly realize or care that not everyone gets married because they intend to raise children, and it's unfair to deny marriage rights based on sex and orientation rather than a couple's fitness and willingness to raise children.

>>8851459
>>8851424
>>8851441

To be fair there is that part in that play that thinks an adult woman drugging and raping a child is good http://www.ifeminists.com/introduction/editorials/2002/0212.html

>>8851500
For the gender of my kids, I'd honestly like both. Like for my first child, I wouldn't care at all if it were a boy or girl, and for my second child, I would prefer an opposite sexed kid, but even if I'd end up with all boys or all girls, I'd be extremely delighted and proud of them. Being a dad is my dream, I just want a happy family.
With sexuality, I said I'd prefer they were straight, but if one (or all, really) of my kids turned out gay or trans, well I'd love and support them, I mean it's what I went through. And of course, I'd never actually tell them I wish they were straight, this is hypothetical though, If I ever have the privilege of becoming a dad, I probably wouldn't care at all about their sexuality or identity.

>>8851348
I'm totally alright with it not being marriage. Doesn't mean a single dad/mom shouldn't be able to adopt.

It might suck, but I guarantee it's better than being an orphan, or a dumpster baby.

>>8851348
Marriage is a legal contract. The religious idea of marriage these people idealize was already legal for gays anywhere with freedom of religion.

File: 1470957127324.png (201KB, 322x395px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 322x395px

>>8851457
>clg itself
>a couple of crazy 20 year old >>>girls

>>8851348
>>8851469
>>8851653

nah i like the idea of civil unions that enshrine my relationship in law (e.g hospital visiting rights) but marriage is a religious concept and there doesn't really seem to be any extra rights coming from changing the name to upset people.
don't see the point of riling people just to say 'lolz we married now stay mad fundies! xDDD', not helpful. most religious sects don;t support us, only secular civil society protects us

File: wrong.png (737KB, 1000x968px) Image search: [Google]

737KB, 1000x968px

>>8851680
>i like the idea of civil unions
Forcing gay people to have their marriage contracts under a lame technical name like that is just typical "separate but equal" bullshit. Also they don't usually have the same rights as a real marriage contract.

>marriage is a religious concept
Wrong. It's a contract. Every religion has its ideas on the marriage contract but no religion can take credit for it.

>>8851348
agree with>>8851622
I don't need marriage to have kids as a gay guy. My dream is to have a partner and then adopt a child or surrogate if I have enough money. I don't really care if it says that the child is belong to me or my partner. I raised my child after all, I know that I am his father.

Gay love is rare but if you found yourself a partner willing to help you bring up a child, you won the lottery.

>marriage is a religious concept
Literally religious indoctrination.
Marriage was first and foremost a financial thing.

>>8851552
>With sexuality, I said I'd prefer they were straight, but if one (or all, really) of my kids turned out gay or trans, well I'd love and support them, I mean it's what I went through. And of course, I'd never actually tell them I wish they were straight, this is hypothetical though, If I ever have the privilege of becoming a dad, I probably wouldn't care at all about their sexuality or identity.
Why is that? Do you hate yourself?

>>8851680
>but marriage is a religious concept a
So I guess if we make our own gay religion we can get married?

>>8851348

This Jetblue ad can go fuck itself. And you can buy a flight with them to Hell.

>>8851691
here in the uk civil partnerships pre-gay marriage (before march 2014) conferred exactly the same rights as a heterosexual marriage. don't know what it's like elsewhere, and separate but equal is fine by me as long as they really are equal

>>8851717
yeah why not? isn't that called Unitarianism anyway?

>>8851680
If marriage is religious concept, then make it exclusively one. If a man and woman want to enjoy legal benefits, they should be forced to enter civil union as well.

>Gay marriage is child abuse
What if you don't have any children?

>>8851779
>separate but equal is fine by me as long as they really are equal
Then you are very short-sighted about how second-class citizens are kept that way.

>yeah why not? isn't that called Unitarianism anyway?
What you don't understand is that gay people can have the Anglican Christian marriage ceremony already if they want to and they have a willing priest (or someone willing to pretend to be a priest). That's called freedom of religion. There was never a debate about gay people's right to the religius ceremony of marriage, ONLY the legal contract!

>>8851798
And this is why Anglicanism is a fucking joke of a denomination. Shouldn't even be called Christianity anymore

>>8851807
...you still don't understand. It has nothing to do with the Anglican Church. Gay people can also do their marriage ceremony according to the ancient traditions of the motherfucking Congo pygmies if they want to and they don't need any tiny little forest-nigger's permission either. It's called freedom of religion.

>>8851348
really you came to /lgbt/ to say this bullshit.
Go to /pol/.
And you know this is bullshit, say that gay marriage is child abuse its the same thing is say that hetero marriage its the reason of child hunger and mortality exist.

>>8851791
it is a religious concept, adopted (rightly or wrongly) by civil society, similar to how there are public holidays for religious festivals regardless of whether you celebrate it or not. i'd not be against what you suggest, but here the religious ceremony is recognised by society.

>>8851798
>Then you are very short-sighted about how second-class citizens are kept that way.
that's why i said as long as both side really are equal. in this case, calling something marriage without it conferring any extra rights only winds people up, essentially for no reason.

>There was never a debate about gay people's right to the religius ceremony of marriage, ONLY the legal contract!
here in the UK, we had the legal contract first, with marriage following a decade later. maybe i am biased but i'm not sure that it was necessary to push the state into religious affairs by defining a religious concept for them.

>>8851348
I'd rather have them abolish state recognition of marriage than have them recognize same sex marriage

As for adoption, I'm conflicted about it. I'd rather give it a shot than leave the kids in a foster home tho

File: GayMillenial3.png (134KB, 2046x534px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 2046x534px

>>8851348
7% of millennials are gay:

https://www.prri.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/PRRI-Millennials-Web-FINAL.pdf

Millennials draw no distinctions between discrimination protections that should be afforded gay and lesbian people, on the one hand, and transgender people on the other. More than seven in ten (73%) millennials support legal protections against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing for gay and lesbian people. A nearly identical number (72%) of millennials say they favor these same protections for transgender people.

While no significant racial or gender differences exist on either question, there are large religious divides in support for expanding nondiscrimination legislation. Roughly eight in ten black Protestant (80%), white Catholic (82%), Hispanic Catholic (81%), religiously unaffiliated (83%), and white mainline Protestant millennials (78%) favor laws that would protect gay and lesbian people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing. About two-thirds (66%) of Hispanic Protestant millennials also favor such laws. White evangelical Protestants are closely divided on this issue, with a slim majority (51%) favoring laws that would protect gay and lesbian people against discrimination, and 47% opposing them. Among religious groups, the pattern of opinion about non-discrimination legislation protecting transgender individuals is nearly identical.

>>8851779
Why does being gay mean you cannot be included in the same legal system? Why do judges have to memorize two separate legal codes because some people are attracted to the same sex? There is no rational justification for this.

File: pedos.jpg (231KB, 750x1051px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 750x1051px

>>8851348
Are gays more likely to be pedophiles?


http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts%5Fmolestation.html

http://www.pandys.org/articles/abuseandhomosexuality.html

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2010/09/18/903178/-Gays-are-pedophiles-No-Here-s-the-proof

http://archive.is/ztjf2

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/uploads/attachments/Anti-gayActivismandtheMisuseofScience_1.pdf

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2009/06/05/a-major-study-of-child-abuse-and-homosexuality-revisited/

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/religious-rights-top-anti-gay-researcher-says-he-was-attracted-to-men-as-a-boy/politics/2012/05/16/39681

>>8852206
The benefits of gay marriage:


https://www.liveabout.com/the-benefits-of-gay-marriage-1411846

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/gay-marriage-boosts-happiness-health-study-article-1.3053017

http://archive.is/dmO9e

http://theconversation.com/evidence-is-clear-on-the-benefits-of-legalising-same-sex-marriage-82428

http://archive.is/kezfR

>>8852210
Genetic Evidence of Homosexuality:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/06/04/the-science-of-sexuality-how-our-genes-make-us-gay-or-straight/

http://archive.is/y64OH

https://www.advocate.com/health/2015/10/09/study-dna-identical-twins-can-reveal-whos-gay

http://archive.is/GuptB

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/17/science/gay-men-in-twin-study.html

http://archive.is/PSmzQ

https://www.christiantoday.com/article/research.points.to.genetic.element.in.homosexuality/35856.htm

Straight males carry gay genes:

http://chaladze.com/files/publications/Chaladze2016ASB.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xq28

Fecundity increases in female relatives of male homosexuals:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0051088

https://www.livescience.com/2623-gays-dont-extinct.html

http://archive.is/32sQz

Scientists find DNA differences between gay men and their straight twin brothers:

http://archive.is/g3lal

http://www.nature.com/news/epigenetic-tags-linked-to-homosexuality-in-men-1.18530

http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/studies.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/identical-twins-genes-are-not-identical/

http://archive.is/MALR3

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1993-homosexual-orientation-in-twins.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xq28

Female relatives of gay men have 1.3x as many children:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02785.x/abstract

Androgen receptor gene linked to XQ28

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAGEA11

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/study-gay-brothers-may-confirm-x-chromosome-link-homosexuality

http://archive.is/E3my1

File: GayMonogamy.png (139KB, 994x1064px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 994x1064px

>>8852215
Partners National Survey of Lesbian & Gay Couples 1988:

http://www.buddybuddy.com/survey.html

https://www.queerty.com/monogamy-making-comeback-among-younger-gay-couples-study-finds-20160922

http://archive.is/vobIA

File: GenGay.png (379KB, 666x940px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 666x940px

>>8852216
Science on gays as parents:

http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

www.asanet.org/documents/ASA/pdfs/12-144_307_Amicus_%20(C_%20Gottlieb)_ASA_Same-Sex_Marriage.pdf

Farr, R. H. (2017). Does parental sexual orientation matter? A longitudinal follow-up of adoptive families with school-age children. Developmental Psychology, 53(2), 252-264.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dev0000228

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Patterson-Farr-Forssell-AppliedDevScience-Jul-2010.pdf

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-14-635

How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=userIsAuthenticated=false

Any questions, bigots?

>>8852220

Churches in Europe blessing same sex celebrants:

http://religionnews.com/2017/08/04/britains-first-same-sex-marriage-celebrated-in-a-scottish-church/

http://archive.is/5p3DJ

http://news.abs-cbn.com/overseas/08/25/17/italian-protestant-church-says-i-do-to-gay-blessings

http://archive.is/qSJ0j

http://www.lep.co.uk/news/church-takes-its-first-gay-wedding-booking-1-8737310

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/gay-marriage/claims-parishioners-were-screamed-at-by-antisamesex-marriage-priest-who-demanded-his-flock-all-vote-no/news-story/b800c05f41b435322e87ab15faaf8adc

http://archive.is/j1PMe
Church attendance is declining:

https://www.prri.org/research/american-religious-landscape-christian-religiously-unaffiliated/

http://churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/139575-7-startling-facts-an-up-close-look-at-church-attendance-in-america.html

Religion is protected in the United State by the federal 1964 Civil Rights Act.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

I cannot refuse to make someone a cake on account of being Christian, but they can refuse to make me a cake for being gay. The rules are stacked in favor of the religious right. Enjoy it while it exists.

>>8851348
So single people shouldn't be able to adopt? Widows should give their children to foster care? Divorce fucks up a child way more that gay marriage, why is it allowed?

>>8852206
>>8852210
>>8852215
>>8852216
>>8852220
>>8852225
Put this in a pastebin

>>8852293
I'm still working on it :( It is really poorly organized.

>>8852047
If it were a religious concept, which I would contest, it shouldn't be in the law in the first place. If people demand it be called marriage then I can demand equal access to it.

But if it is a religious concept, I have to ask which religion you think it belongs to? Isn't it maybe more likely that the institution of marriage is an ancient human concept that the powerful faiths of a given time took bureaucratic control of?

>>8852206
>>8852204
>>8852210
>>8852215
>>8852220
>>8852216
>>8852293
>>8851348
You forgot this

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27056045/

https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/lesbianrx/factsheet.shtml

your orientatons are far more prone to violent crime and sex abuse. Not ideal parrent material

>>8852373
>The analyses revealed, in general, that bisexuals were the most delinquent of the sexual orientation categories for both males and females. Additional analyses revealed that heterosexual males reported significantly higher levels of both violent and nonviolent delinquency than gay males
Your point only applies to lesbians. Besides if you want to argue about violence go pester black people.

>>8852247
or, for that matter, why are poor people allowed to marry?
poverty fucks up a child.

Clearly, the only people who should be able to marry are wealthy cisgender heterosexuals.

>>8852373
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27056045/

Additional analyses revealed that heterosexual males reported significantly higher levels of both violent and nonviolent delinquency than gay males

...

Marriage is a tool the clergy and the government used for easier population control and easier way of getting taxes out of people. It may be a meaningful religious ceremony for some, but that's a different ceremony than the state certified marriage.

There is no reason for the state to meddle in people's personal affairs, especially in their relationships.

>>8851348

I won't defend it. Faggots shouldn't marry. Neither should women in menopause, or men with vasectomies, or couples who can't afford children.

>>8852402
So churches should determine child custody or the state?

>>8852394
And lesbians were statistically significantly more likely to be convicted in violent crime than control hetero men and far more likely to be convicted for crimes as a whole.
Great parrent material

>>8852421
Based on the limited available research, we expected the cascade of antisocial behavior to be arranged as follows: heterosexual males>lesbians>gay males>heterosexual females, without making any predictions with respect to bisexuals.

Heterosexual males are dangerous and must be prevented from adopting children. All children deserve two dads.

>>8852421
No shit.
Remember the single mother cliche?
Now imagine being raised by 2 single mothers.
The horror

>>8852425
So they're only about the same as gangbangers in the streets then. Cool

>>8851348
>hair splitting: the issue
Also why the fuck does an Abo group quote a clapistan judge? Cucks much?

File: da childrum.jpg (46KB, 577x396px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 577x396px

>>8852429
This.
Every straight dad is a sick pedophile who molests his daughter.
And every straight mom is a sick pedophile who has sex with neighbor boys because her husband can't get it up for her anymore.

The straight menace must be stopped.
STOP ABUSING CHILDREN ALREADY, STRAIGHTS.

>>8852516
were they gonna quote themselves?

>"nyuuuuu pooftas sheddent fackin merry! wheres me fackin pitrol"

>>8852531
It's quite odd that in all of 'Straya there is not a single conservative judge to quote. Sad!

Do I want to rub a win in the face of conservatards or do I want to see a potentially gold left-wing social media meltdown after a loss?

>3% of the population
>40% of the pedohpiles
Getting raised by LGBT parents is quite a high risk t b h.

>>8852589
7% of millennials are gay.

https://www.prri.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/PRRI-Millennials-Web-FINAL.pdf

>>8852589
Most pedophiles who molest boys are heterosexual in their adult orientation

>>8852719
Source?

>>8851348
I'm gay and 2000% approve this.

lul at the fact this doesn't even consider parents that leave, are killed, or incarcerated

File: Capture.jpg (60KB, 849x499px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 849x499px

>>8852421
It was compared to straight women, not straight men.
Straight men are still top-notch delinquents. So theoretically, gay men make far better fathers.

>>8853262
I like you.

File: 1495201436128.jpg (77KB, 400x551px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 400x551px

>>8852815

>>8853297
The sentiment is mutual.

>>8853262
Those error bars between lesbians and straight men overlap a lot. That's very significant considering that women get prosecuted less overall but here they still managed to tie straight men.

Guess that means lesbians are just as likely to be burglars and gang bangers as any straight guy in a slum.

>>8853505
you are reading into this things that are not there.

>>8851469
I'm willing to bet most of the "uncle toms" are really just /pol/acks

>>8853523
I'm a /pol/lock but I support gay rights, just not transgender rights. I'm in between the closeted anti-gay denizens and the openly activist transpeople.

>>8853512
You just don't know how to read stuff. If two things are within their error bars, they're statistically the same. You're just as likely to get a result that closes the small gap if you reameasuresd one of the two.

>>8853541
So only the difference between heterosexual males and homosexual males then is statistically significant and homosexual males are less prone to violence which you have not addressed with this distraction and imagined implications.

File: beach.reading.jpg (187KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1080x1080px

>>8853523
>just /pol/acks
>>8851469

Yes, they think they are "red-pilling" us by going undercover and pretending to be conservative and gay but they're not convincing anyone because gay people aren't idiots so it is mostly a wasted effort, like Jehovah's Witnesses going door to door.

>>8853538
And I back torpedoing gay marriage and sexual orientation protections because that pisses off smug polgb like you who thought you were normal and everyone loved you.

Looks like you're nothing more than a snail calling bugs gross in the end

>>8853523
A gay Uncle Tom is one who votes for pro- mass migration parties as well as one who's alt-right, but not a normal conservative.

>>8853557
I never said I thought everyone adores me but its absolutely my right to fight for my own self-interest.

>>8853561

So then if you fight against others rights, it's right for them to fight and bring you down. Gay marriage getting rejected and sexual orientation protections in the states getting overturned is fitting Karma for the narcissist gay. Soon you'll relearn you're no better.

File: Naxalt.jpg (43KB, 500x441px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x441px

>>8853602
I am not fighting against others' rights. I am not claiming to be better I just want equal treatment by our secular government under the law.

>>8853557
I'm trans and gay and I back the same as you and also bathroom bills, etc. Pissing off shits like him is just the icing on the cake.

>>8853607
See >>8853538
What makes you think you should get any special treatment they don't? I think SSM turned you all into insufferable narcissists who thought they could get away with anything and spent all their time hurting other less fortunate. Hopefully all this stuff makes you go back to normal.

>>8853618
Gay marriage is now a conservative position.

>>8853615
Transbians don't pass so what will you do once you're arrested?

>>8853630
Not any more. Not after people watched you terrorize bakers and florristia and mistreat kids you took as a fashion statement. Instead the Supreme Court and trump is siding with those weding caterers. And Australia is set to defeat your marriage referendum. That will encourage states to push back. Texas already did by banning ssm benefits.

>>8853633
Disabled bathroom, men's bathroom, know the laws won't be enforced anyway, private establishment the laws don't apply to, change birth certificate so using the women's is legal.

>>8853643
Breyer, Kagan, Kennedy, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg voted for gay marriage in Obergefell v Hodges. Why would any of them vote to restrict gay rights when the precedent is that religious beliefs do not trump state law?

The case about Texas is still pending and will likely get thrown out by a higher court. Further proof you are vindictively trying to target gay people and make us suffer financially. Why should gay people not get job benefits as partners?

>>8853654
Not when you stand out like a sore thumb. Well I guess you could still your disabled. If you're already a hon that will only make you a stand out somewhat more.

>>8853654
Not when you stand out like a sore thumb. Well I guess you could still your disabled. If you're already a hon that will only make you a stand out somewhat more.

>>8851348
It's not at all like adoption is easy. It's way more difficult than just fucking and having a kid - all the red tape you have to jump through and money you have to spend, plus having to prove that you have the means to raise a child.

Seems to me that going through the adoption process is much higher of an indicator that two people are ready to be parents than just... having a kid.

Any two straight fuckwits can have a baby regardless of how stupid or poor they are - and they do it all the goddamned time. Now you wanna prevent some of those unwanted kids from getting adopted because they WON'T have a parent of each gender? Give me a fucking break.

>>8853672
The court and trump are tipping their hands in favor of the baker. And Kennedy will retire in a few years latest. In the mean time, Australia will show then cons that the public doesn't want this. The nex Conservative party leader in UK has already said he wants to flip the party from support to opposition.

And many more states will join Texas once they see they have a chance, push bans and create test cases that will be ready for the post Kennedy Supreme Court. Your narcissism and lack of sympathy for other was unbearable when you thought you were one of the cool kids. This is Karmic.

>>8853708
This decision will be decided before anyone retires. All polling in the past ten years in Australia has been in favor of gay marriage.

>>8853708

You don't think straight people are capable of narcissism?

>>8853708
If it's not something the public wants, why did state after state pass marriage equality laws? Marriage equality has bipartisan support from a majority of the public, but an incredibly obnoxious opposition with a stick up their asses (ironic, huh?)

>>8853720
At least it's normal kind of narcissism better than >>8853557 thinking he's cool and showing off to everyone. Ditto with milo and his pedophilia talk. Think about it. These are the kind of guys who like bullying others.

At least the Christians are less hypocritical and more humble. >>8853717
Shy Tory bias. Your pols haven't been right in decades. And plenty of southern states have majority opposition to ssm.

File: GayMarriage2.png (281KB, 962x974px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 962x974px

>>8853735
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/same-sex-marriage-civil-unions-doma-laws-by-state.html

>>8853748

And what happened the last time the South opposed a policy of the North?

>>8853735
Only twenty states passed it. And they did so after Obama cheered it on because lots of the public loved him and followed him.

Now the new head says it's wrong and his followers will follow him and reassert the opposition they shyed from.

>>8851348

There's nothing wrong with being attracted to penises and two bros fucking each other, but a man can never fulfill the role of a mother, and a woman can never fulfil the role of a father.

Gender roles are part of nature, they exist for a reason. Only a mother and a father can raise a kid properly, and for that you need a man and a woman.

>>8853759
>>8853752
37 states out of 50 is a pretty good number, I think.

File: trumpgay.png (16KB, 560x145px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 560x145px

>>8853759
37 see
>>8853752

Trump said gay marriage was settled law. He supported civil unions in 2000 and supported amending the Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation in an interview with Advocate magazine. You really think he personally shares your religious anti-gay convictions?

>>8851348
I don't disagree with this principled position but the government clearly does not view marriage as just "people who raise children"
Maybe they should, but they don't

I'm also not convinced that gays should not raise children
It may be better on average for a child to have a mom and a dad, and I think gays who are interested in adopting kids should be aware of any weaknesses they might have so they can attempt to overcome them
But I'm no collectivist
There's shit straight parents and shit gay parents, good straight parents and shit gay parents, adoption agencies should use their judgement to decide who the kids go to, not the government

>>8853783
good straight parents and good gay parents*
not only shit gay parents, lol

>>8853782
>trusting anything Trump says, especially on policy
The best arguments against the man come from his own old tweets.

>>8853793
He is a social moderate traditionally. He has some token pro-evangelical positions but they don't seem deeply held. He is the least evangelical Christian friendly Republican we've had in a long time.

>>8853782
And he flip flopped to say he would overturn it. And he's siding against you in both of the sexual orientation cases.
Look, you say the same thing Christians do about trannies but think you're a special exception and can do no wrong. And it leads you to do narcissistic horrible things to poor bakers and others just to flaunt your power.

So really, the Christians are nicer people because they're humble and morally consistent and don't set rules and carve out personal exemptions for themselves like polgb does.

>>8853843
He never said he would overturn it. His DOJ is siding with a baker because they are fearing that the Civil Rights Act will be rendered to include sexual orientation if they don't. They are not trying to actively overturn Obergefell. There are still 5 justices in support of gay rights.

>>8853848
He said he would. And also the justice department is suing to overturn an EOC ruling about sexual orientation being protected. The five justice thing will have to wait till the second term and replacements.

>>8853843

Christians are covered under the Civil Rights Act. I cannot refuse to bake a cake for a Christian. They currently have the upper hand in this matter.

They were never offering to have THEMSELVES refused protection under the Civil Rights Act, only others.

The real issue is that the federal appeals courts have split on whether being gay is counted under the sex category of the Civil Rights Act. The 7th circuit has ruled they are (midwest) and 2 others have ruled they are not. Typically circuit discrepancies are covered by the Supreme Court but they have not addressed that case yet.

https://www.inc.com/suzanne-lucas/seventh-circuit-court-says-sexual-orientation-is-a-protected-classseventh-circui.html

Christians are exempt from discrimination under a current federal law, gays are only in a minority of states, and Christians want to refuse gays even those state protections which is what Masterpiece cakeshop is about.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/30/a-supreme-court-masterpiece/

http://archive.is/1fpAX

Here is a good article about the gay cake case:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/doj_s_cynical_embarrassing_brief_in_the_supreme_court_s_anti_gay_baker_case.html

http://archive.is/fIKJu

>>8853866
Where did he say that?

The justice department is fighting to overturn state law, which would invalidate ALL discrimination laws based on inherent characteristics, or at least call the into question:

>>8853879

Phillips alleges that Colorado is violating both his right to free speech and his right to free exercise of religion. The latter claim is frivolous: For decades, the Supreme Court has held that a neutral law of general applicability does not run afoul of the First Amendment if it imposes incidental burdens on religious freedom. The former claim should be frivolous, too: Courts have long assumed that states have an overriding interest in eradicating discrimination, and may require businesses to treat all customers equally without violating freedom of expression. But in recent years, anti-gay activist groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom have asserted that nondiscrimination laws infringe on free speech when they are used to protect same-sex couples.

ADF is representing Phillips, which is no surprise: It opposes LGBTQ nondiscrimination laws and has also argued for the criminalization of homosexuality and the mandatory sterilization of transgender people. Masterpiece Cakeshop is just another chapter in its long-standing effort to strip LGBTQ people of all legal protections.

It’s more shocking that the Justice Department is weighing in on this case. The DOJ’s involvement is utterly gratuitous, likely a political ploy designed to shore up support among President Donald Trump’s anti-LGBTQ base. Indeed, a close reading of the DOJ’s brief reveals that it makes no sense as anything other than partisan pandering. If its goal is to persuade the court, it will likely backfire: The brief’s dismissive attitude toward the dignity of same-sex couples will certainly alienate Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote will be necessary for ADF to triumph.

>>8853885

The DOJ’s basic argument is twofold. First, it says that baking a cake in exchange for money is “expressive conduct” and “association” that raises First Amendment concerns, and a state’s interest in protecting gay residents is not strong enough to justify “compelling” this “creative process” for same-sex couples. Put differently, Phillips doesn’t want to create a cake for a same-sex couple or to be associated with that couple’s wedding, and the First Amendment protects his right not to do so.

Even if we assume that baking a cake involves genuinely expressive conduct and association under the First Amendment—a highly contestable supposition—there’s a huge flaw in this logic. The Supreme Court has never held that for-profit businesses have a free speech right to discriminate against anybody. And for good reason: Carving out a First Amendment exception to nondiscrimination laws would blow a hole through the modern civil rights regime, fatally undermining legal protections for all minority groups.

Nondiscrimination laws, after all, regulate many forms of expression. Racist restaurateurs cannot put up a sign that reads “no blacks allowed.” Sexist bosses cannot make crude comments about women. Anti-Semitic professional photographers cannot refuse to shoot a bar mitzvah. The First Amendment protects freedom of association, but employers cannot refuse to associate with racial, religious, or sexual minorities. Private organizations like the Boy Scouts may have a constitutional right to discriminate against groups they dislike. For-profit businesses, though, must open their doors to everyone.

There is a principled libertarian argument to be made that nondiscrimination laws should not supersede businesses’ free speech rights. Barry Goldwater deployed this reasoning to explain his vote against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, insisting that the government should not force businesses to associate with certain people. But the courts have never adopted this argument, and the DOJ does not make it. Instead, the agency attempts to carve out a single exception to civil rights law to permit discrimination against same-sex couples.

Why? Homophobia, the brief asserts, is not as bad as racism. To bolster this claim, the brief cites a portion of Obergefell v. Hodges which states that “[m]any who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises.”

The brief conveniently excludes the remainder of this passage, probably because it contradicts the very argument the DOJ is attempting to make.

Obergefell continues:

But when that sincere, personal opposition becomes enacted law and public policy, the necessary consequence is to put the imprimatur of the State itself on an exclusion that soon demeans or stigmatizes those whose own liberty is then denied. Under the Constitution, same-sex couples seek in marriage the same legal treatment as opposite-sex couples, and it would disparage their choices and diminish their personhood to deny them this right.

Ironically, were the court to adopt the DOJ’s position, it would inflict the kind of harm that Obergefell forbade, demeaning same-sex couples by subjecting them to discriminatory rules.

Even worse, the brief does not explain why homophobia deserves special respect under the law. The Supreme Court has said that homosexuality is immutable, like race. Why, then, should animus toward same-sex couples be treated differently from animus toward interracial couples? And what about religious bigotry? Can a devout baker refuse to sell a cake to an interfaith couple, and can an atheist one say a Christian can’t buy cupcakes for a christening? Can a sexist baker refuse to serve a female customer? What if his misogyny is derived from religion? And why stop at a cake? Shouldn’t the preparation of other foods qualify as expressive conduct, too? Doesn’t every good or service involve some measure of expressive conduct or association that the First Amendment could theoretically protect?

In its brief, the DOJ implicitly raises all of these questions without answering them because it can’t answer them—not honestly, at least. The reality is that the courts cannot, with any logical coherence or consistency, deny civil rights protections to some groups but not others. Either nondiscrimination law are constitutional or they aren’t. The First Amendment does not grant greater rights to homophobic bakers than racist or sexist ones. Plenty of bigoted business owners wish they could assert a constitutional privilege not to associate with specific groups. If the courts open the door to one, they’ll open the door to all. Shopkeepers do not have a special right to turn away gays from their stores.

The brief strives to avoid this problem because it is, at bottom, a political document. Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently gave a speech to ADF thanking the organization for its “important work” defending “religious liberty.” Through Sessions, President Trump is discharging his obligation to appease the bigots in his base. The DOJ’s efforts, however, may prove counterproductive. This brief will delight the court’s reactionaries who favor religious supremacy and disdain gay rights. But it can only estrange Kennedy—who notably, has allowed an LGBTQ nondiscrimination policy to trump a First Amendment claim in the past. Kennedy is always eager to protect the “equal dignity” of same-sex couples; the DOJ now seeks to undermine it. The Trump administration might score political points with this brief, but it won’t win enough votes at the court.

>>8852387
>>8852394
Most /pol/tards don't read half of the shit they read.

Honestly, gay dads tend to be some of the best parents ever. Smarter, more understanding but without the emotional baggage that comes from being a woman and higher IQ/Salary.

>>8851348
I don't give a fuck what some stupid Australians say.

>>8852210
>>8852215
>Gay marriage boost happiness
>If you treat people like human being they get better

ALERT THE PRESS

>>8852589
>Male children are unprotected
>Female children are kept in the family and can be silenced
>Meanwhile every third world shit hole has straight men marrying 10 years old girls
>But gays are a total menace, right?

>>8856400
>Meanwhile every third world shit hole has straight men marrying 10 years old girls

Define third world country because you know there's more developing countries other than africa and middle east right?

>>8856421

Your are splitting hairs, even in countries like Brazil is normal for 20 something to sleep with 14 years old girls.

Then you have Japan, who literally made banks by selling porn with pseudo-little girls under the guide that "they are just drawing". Thailand has a literal business based on underage pussy and of course you have Middle East. The countries in which straight men are in power and what do they do? They marry fucking little girls.

>>8856436
Keep telling yourself that anon.
Then you go to one of these countries, fuck some 14 year old end in jail and they murder you.

Stop believing /pol/ memes about third world countries where "you can do anything" without repercussion.

>>8856445
>Stop believing /pol/ memes about third world countries where "you can do anything" without repercussion.
I don't browse /pol/ and if anything /pol/ would tell you all gays are pedos and all straight dudes are angels and Thailand sex tourism is fake news.