Gay Marriage Will Cause 900,000 Abortions

a reply to: Nickn3

What about an F2M transsexual who gets pregnant? I'm pretty sure that happened.

This is slightly off topic but I'd just like to throw it in there:

The definition of the word "marriage" (boiled down) means, partnership between man and woman. So "gay marriage" makes no sense at all. "A same sex partnership between man and woman"..... There needs to be a new word for them.

It's like trying to say, "visibly invisible" it just doesn’t work.

Oh also, gay means happy, the word is "homosexual" -- So it should be called "homosexual legal-partnership that happens to take place in a religious building where marriages take place" --- rolls off the tongue.

a reply to: socketdude

Words and their meanings change and evolve....get with the times.
It is law in the UK now marriage is between two people who love each other.
Why care? Does it effect you.

a reply to: socketdude

That's the old definition of the word marriage. Words often evolve in their meanings - that's been happening ever since we've had words. Keep up.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

They would HAVE to be sacrificed to MOLOCH for protection of COURSE.

Hey they funny thing is, I don't really give two hoots about a word.

But I always make a point of calling homosexuals, "homosexuals".

They almost seem to get offended by it. This is what the standard conversation goes like:

"Yeah, so even though I'm gay, I don't speak with a "camp" voice, I hate they way they do that!"
"Oh, you're homosexual, I'd have never of guessed."
"Yes, I'm gay."
"You're like the 5th homosexual I've talked to this week, that's a lot even for me!"
"Why are you saying homosexual instead of gay? Isn't gay easier to say?"
"Nope!"

a reply to: socketdude

Do you only refer to yourself as a "heterosexual"? Good for you.

I went to scotusblog to read the actual brief. Good Gracious!!!! It is based entirely on the "fact" that in states where same sex marriage has been legalized, the marriage rate between heterosexual people has gone down by 5%. From that they extrapolate over a 30 year period that if legal in all 50 States, the 5% drop would mean 600,000 kids born out of wedlock and 900,000 abortions. ?!?!?

The major problem with this is the leap in causality. They assume that the drop is somehow CAUSED by the legalization of same sex marriage. What they fail to acknowledge is that the marriage rates were dropping prior to legalization of same sex marriage. (I'm on my phone so don't have research link right now. Apologies. Anyone want to look it up?) ETA: don't know if this link will work but it is from an article that addresses this directly: m.huffpost.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Link

The thing that is scary, Scalia and Roberts were both concerned about how same sex marriage would erode the Institution of Marriage, which is the entire underpinning of the "Institutional Argument" of this brief. In other words Scalia and Roberts seem to be buying into the fallacy / crazy of the brief's arguments. Eeeeeeeeeeek! Very scary.

AB

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: MisterSpock
So more gay men = more pregnant women.......

That just doesn't sound right to me.

Im thinking he is some southern or central state backward arse far religious right nut job that just wanted to link the words gay and abortion in the same sentence. Im surprised he didn't use the words 9/11 Obama and Jesus while at it.

"Obama caused 9/11 so gays could marry and cause abortion, vote Ted Cruz as that's what Jesus would want"

I was going to read the whole thread before responding but ..... There are idiots everywhere and I am getting damn tired of the South being presented a s 'backwards'. As a lesbian in the SOUTH I am offended. Grow up. I was born and raised in the South and have been a lesbian my whole life. I have never in my life seen as much bigotry as I see from people like you constantly trying to tear us down.

a reply to: windword

How the hell can an increase in gay marriages also lead to an increase in abortions? That makes no sense whatsoever! Is it me or is the anti-gay marriage movement getting a bit desperate?

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Two words. It doesn't.

And yes, it does seem desperate, as well as impossibly convoluted. It has to be because there is no scientific or logical reason to keep people from marrying.

The entire argument is built on a nonexistent foundation. (Explained in my post above.)

a reply to: AboveBoard

Yeah, in what universe does gay marriage have anything to do with heterosexual marriage rates going down? That's like saying I got a paper cut in my office while it was raining last week, therefore the rain must have caused it.

Okay, let's start with marriage rates in the U.S. They have been steadily declining since the 70's. They have tended to decline much faster within the less educated and more economically challenged. And, it is more and more common for people to get married at an older age, so the largest decline is really only in the 25-34 age group. According to the following article, the possibility of a person getting married in their lifetime is still nearly 90%.

www.prb.org...

Regarding marriage rates by state, marriage rates have been going down in every state since 2000 (before any state legalized gay marriage). States like Arizona who has seen one of the sharpest declines, hadn't legalized gay marriage during the decline. If you look at Massachusetts (the first state to legalized gay marriage in 2004), you can see that the marriage rate was declining way before gay marriage was legal there. So we definitely cannot blame the decline in marriage rates on gay marriage.

www.cdc.gov...

Now, on to abortion rates. Like marriage rates among the young, abortion rates have also been steadily declining in the U.S. - in pretty much every state. The only states that did not see a decline from 2008-2011 were: Alaska, Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Wyoming. Of those states, only New Hampshire had legalized gay marriage during that time frame. So, for the most part, abortion rates were steadiest in the states that did NOT have gay marriage.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Yes, the northeast has the highest abortion rates, and that is where many of the first states legalized gay marriage. But it's important to note that the more liberal states (who are most likely to legalize gay marriage) are the most likely to have abortion clinics available. Many women have to travel out of state to find an available abortion clinic, so they are often times not even a resident of the state where they had the abortion. If you look at Massachusetts, which legalized gay marriage in 2004, you will see a decline in the abortion rate from 2004 of 18 per 1000 women, down to 15.4 by 2011. So I guess that means gay marriage means LESS abortions!

www.abort73.com...

originally posted by: socketdude
Hey they funny thing is, I don't really give two hoots about a word.

But I always make a point of calling homosexuals, "homosexuals".

They almost seem to get offended by it. This is what the standard conversation goes like:

"Yeah, so even though I'm gay, I don't speak with a "camp" voice, I hate they way they do that!"
"Oh, you're homosexual, I'd have never of guessed."
"Yes, I'm gay."
"You're like the 5th homosexual I've talked to this week, that's a lot even for me!"
"Why are you saying homosexual instead of gay? Isn't gay easier to say?"
"Nope!"

Could it be the attitude?

Your side, not theirs.