It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Same-Sex Marriage Judge Finds That a Child Has Neither a Need Nor a Right to a Mother

page: 9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:36 AM

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
I answered the question.

You did, but you hinted that it was wrong. Would you have any objections if your children came to you one day and told you that they love their first cousin and intend to marry and start a family?

I've never seen a law preventing that, so long as they were both of legal age. Social stigma? I wonder how those are perpetrated...

Perhaps that which is unnatural warrants attention and leads people to believe some things are just wrong.

So suddenly you're worried about the social stigma facing gay people? Are you trying to imply that your argument is based in empathy? So people should stop being themselves and exercising their freedoms (or attempting) because other people are offended and impose some sort of social "no no"?

I'm actually more tired of hearing the Gay Community go on and on and on about Gay Marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. If you cannot accept this, then move to a country where it is considered socially acceptable.

My children turned out fine. Wonderful actually.

I'm glad you were able to raise your children well. Congratulations.

I assume they won't be happy because they will be inbred. What you described is is a belief based in discrimination. I have no such belief.

So you don't consider it wrong then? You would have no problem with somebody that marries their first cousin and has children?

Who set the goals? What are these goals?

Raising a family? Contributing to society? Procreation?

Well, what do you believe Marriage signifies, or ought to signify? Two people who love each other so much that they need a legal recognition of this seemingly unconditional love?

All my parts work, I've raised a family and contribute to society in a positive way. I don't see why you are implying that heterosexual marriages are somehow superior to same sex marriages.

Good for you. Heterosexual Marriages are superior to homosexual Unions because they provide the basic elements needed to create, maintain and develop a family. This might sound cold, but it is the truth.

[edit on 12/8/2010 by Dark Ghost]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:46 AM

Originally posted by RRokkyy
what is so hard to understand? Not married people can raise kids because society supports them. In primitive times a SINGLE PARENT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RAISE CHILDREN.

You are pretty hard to understand. What are you talking about? Society is raising my kids? When does that kick in because I could certainly use the help.

You do know that women used to die giving birth more often than they do now, right? Do you think all those kids died off for want of a mother until...when? The industrial revelution? Please teach me some history.

animals produce offspring through sex, and even Fcking Dumb animals enter into a contract to RAISE THEIR OFFSPRING.

Niether one of my cats had a participating father and they each came from different mothers. Perhaps you know a good lawyer? Obviously these two Toms violated a contract. I did not know animals had contracts just because some species raise their young and some do not because you used one example that does. Where is daddy bird? Or is it only momma birds that enter into this contract? Is this a gender specific contract? Are you envious of the way animal reproduce? Ever tried to get child support from a breeding dog?

Birds build nests together and then feed their offspring until they can survive on their own.

Single dads cannot do that? Two gay dads could not do that? I am not sure what point you are making.

It is a contract that is not made of paper. Call it love or instinct but it is real enough for animals to successfully raise their young.

Please explain how Sea Turtles continue past the first ever generation of them without parental guidance? Mom and dad have sex, lay them eggs, and book. Animals is a poor example of a marriage contract benefitting the development of offspring.

ONLY FCKING SICK humans abandon the job half way through.

Really? Had you been paying attention to my posts, you would notice I have said more than once that the mother of my children was taken from us. I was unaware that she was a "FCKING SICK" person for dying. Thanks for that. Now I know that as a single father I am comparable to Sodom and Gamorah, and my wife was a bad person for not living long enough. Neither one of us was even gay and we are still horrible parents. See, everyone can damage kids.

Did you ever see a mother bird,or dog or animal abandon its young to die because of irreconcilable differences?

I have seen both abandon their young, yes. As for the reason being irreconcilable differences, I was never able to determine that. All I know is that someone else had to raise those puppies and someone had to sweep up those dead baby birds. So much for that contract.

It only happens when the mothers or fathers life is in immediate peril.

You know just about nothing about animals, do you? How about you stop trying to use animals and stick to something you have at least some knowledge of. The subject here is humans. Why can you not talk about the subject at hand? Your ignorance of the animal kingdom is highly distracting from the actual topic.

People here think they think, but really as Mark Twain said,90 percent would rather die than think.

People here say stupid things like telling people they are bad for dying or sinners for trying to raise their own children despite the loss of the mother.

I am too smart for this place. I am not getting enough stars for the effort.

I think I just peed a little.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:53 AM

Originally posted by Darkrunner
I did.

The premise is a child does not need to be raised by both a mother and father to be well adjusted.

I would submit that being raised by a homosexual couple does not make your childhood years any easier. I know, as I went to high school with a kid who had Jim and Gary as his parents.

The topic is that kids will grow up wrong without a mommy and thus have a RIGHT to a mommy. There are reasons for no mommy other than having two gay dads.

Now we all know how widespread childhood bullying is. I didn't give him # because I got it for growing up fairly poor and did not have the latest fashionable clothes or shoes.

How is he doing now?

How are those bullies doing now? Most of the high school bullies I know would give their left nut to be as successful as the gay kids I grew up with. Kids will pick on each other for anything. Ever go to school wearing off brand clothes?

What are you suggesting? We coddle out kids and not allow them to have gay parents because they might be picked on? I thought you conservatives were sick of the nanny state and kids being babied too long? Let them take their gay dad having lumps like everyone else. It will not take long before someone wears shorts in the shower and they have a new target.

Then again, maybe you are all suggesting that life should be more like high school and you wish there were fewer reasons for bullies to pick on you in school and in life? Not sure I get it.

But I know I wouldn't want the # he went through. School years are hard enough without that to live down every day of the school year.

I would not want the stuff I went through either. I would not want the stuff most high school kids feel during those years. They can realyl suck for a lot of people. They can be overwhelmingly good too.

Where is the group of adult homosexuals out there speaking out to kids warning them of how horrible life is when you get made fun of in high school for being different? Surely you are basing your opinion on some kind of reality. Where are the kids of gay couples to tell me how messed up they are now? Or are you just saying what you think reality is because it helps to fit your views better?

Kind of how you, like many others in this thread, read the part about having a right to a mom and jumped right in before remembering that there are plenty of straight single dads out there.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:54 AM

Originally posted by Nofoolishness
show me where marriage is a right. quit being a fool.

Can someone show me where having a mother is a right?

Or did we jump to a different thread?

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:59 AM

Originally posted by Darkrunner
I tell you what, I would rather stay in an orphanage than put up with that kind of abuse because your moms or dads couldn't have kids, they picked you.

Because growing up in an orphanage is a good way to grow up? Kids have a right to a mommy or an orphanage? I will tell my kid when they get up that they have to live in an orphanage because I have not found a replacement mommy yet.

Maybe you have some studies that show growing up in orphanages is good for kids? At least better than having two gay parents or one single dad?

I have to ask because I am having a hard time remembering any successful person
-dedicate a meior to their orphanage
-thank their orphanage in an award speech
-write a book about how growing up an orphan lead to their success
-promote the orphan lifestyle as a better choice that gay parents, single dads, or really anything.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:06 AM

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Until Gay couples can start reproducing independently (without the reliance of a third party of the opposite sex), there right to marry will keep being questioned. Marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman for a reason.

What is that reason?

Millions of sterile men and woman would like to know.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:11 AM

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
What if I love my first cousin and she loves me? Why don't we have the right to marry? Why must my right to marry the person I love be prevented by discrimination?

In the US, you are allowed to marry your first cousin. The problem is that you said marriage is a contract between a man and a woman to produce a child and by increasing the odds that the child will be born defective does not really seem like the best way to honor that contract does it? So unfortunately, it is perfectly legal for you to marry your cousin but it then does away with your argument about marriage being in place in order to perpetuate the species.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:12 AM

Originally posted by Nofoolishness
So you adhere to the 'living document' mentality. Thanks that is all i needed to know. Then lets just up and change it whenever society wants to or you have enough 'popular support'. This idealogy of yours is dangerous.

So black people should have their citizenship stripped?

The idea that the document should not change is a pretty dangerous sounding idea.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by c g henderson]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:41 AM

Originally posted by c g henderson

Originally posted by ironfalcon

Surely this is the Sodom and Gomorrah of new.

If you were a judge, would you rule that every child has both a need and a right for a mother?

So, according to you, I as a single father who lost his wife to illness many years ago is not only unfit to raise my children but I am equal to a city of sin that should be destroyed by God?

Furthermore, if their Uncle helps out from time to time that is even worse because although straight, he is also not a mother?

What is your solution? Should my children be taken from me or should I be forced to take a wife?

As a person who was raised in similar circumstances, by my father, I would say that it doesn't matter who raises a child, as long as that child is loved.

My father raised me and my sister alone, whilst holding down a full time managerial job. He had help from Aunts and Uncles, of course, but he proved it is possible to raise kids successfully in an unconventional household. He did it in the 80's too, when there was far more social outcry about such things.

I will say that it would have been nice to have known my mother, but I am living proof that no child "needs" a mother and any attempt to say otherwise is nothing more than an insult to my father and the hard work he did bringing us up.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:01 AM
reply to post by c g henderson

I'm not sure what he is doing now. It's been some time since high school. He may well have turned out to be a successful lawyer or doctor for all I know. Or he could have turned out to be a serial killer. He doesn't show up on a facebook search.

Yes, children get picked on during school. But the other children don't need that kind of ammunition....

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Darkrunner
reply to post by c g henderson

I'm not sure what he is doing now. It's been some time since high school. He may well have turned out to be a successful lawyer or doctor for all I know.

So what is the issue? What are you basing your idea that having two dads was for him on? Why would you say something you really admittedly do not know anything about?

Or he could have turned out to be a serial killer. He doesn't show up on a facebook search.

How many serial killers have been raised by gay parents so far? If that is your level then you must really abhor the idea of straight people having children. They spawn serial killers on a pretty regular basis. Straight ones too.

Yes, children get picked on during school. But the other children don't need that kind of ammunition....

Of course they do not need it because they will find something to pick on no matter what.

So you are worried about something that may or may not happen and may or may not end up well anyway?

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:16 AM

Originally posted by Darkrunner
reply to post by c g henderson

Yes, children get picked on during school. But the other children don't need that kind of ammunition....

You're right, they don't need that ammunition, there's already plenty for them to go on. Kids will always find something to pick on each other for, one small detail like this won't make a jot of difference. The way you put it is kinda like blaming the victim for the crime. It's the bullies that are in the wrong, not the parent's of the children.

I was bullied in high school and now I thank them for it. It made me a stronger person and prepared me to face the real world. It also made me a smart arse and improved my sense of humour. Hell, if I could go back in time I'd kick my own ass, I was such a geek!

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 11:51 AM
So we're not mammals any more???????

That is what I get from this thread and reading it. How we survive as a species is beyond my thoughts.

posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:00 AM
reply to post by c g henderson

You do know that women used to die giving birth more often than they do now, right? Do you think all those kids died off for want of a mother until...when? The industrial revelution? Please teach me some history.

most of the time men remarried and the new wife helped raise the child with the father.

posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:48 AM

Originally posted by Romans 10:9
Anyone who thinks a 4 or 5 year old kid seeing his two 'daddies' or 'mommies' kiss each other and snuggle with each other on the couch, isn't gonna be confused and tripped-out, is a moron.

Religion aside, there is a biological drive in the VAST majority of people that would have them pick mates of the opposite sex. This drive is already in place even in children.

Children raised by gay parents have been thrust into a F'ed up situation out of their control, and if you asked them, probably their desires.

"It would be better a giant millstone was bound around their necks and they be tossed into the sea than to cause one of these little ones to stumble."- Jesus of Nazareth
Right here folks we have the heart of the problem. People like this will always want to deny rights to others because he/she is basing their opinions off of the Bible and the words of our Lord, instead of seeing the situation as a LEGAL one.

Jesus does not make my laws.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:27 PM
You know I just love how people can take things and twist them to fit their own agenda. I would encourage each of you to download the ORIGINAL decision and read it before you make your own decision regarding the judges ruling.

The quote that the OP used was was, in my opinion, taken out of context.
Judge Walker was quoting Professor Michael Lamb, Head of the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology at Cambridge University. (Its on page 95 of the decision, I looked it up)

The fact of the matter is that the opposition presented a weak case (read the decision..he lists their reasons..they were biased and based on supposition).

You can download the entire decision here

Its also not like he hasn't ruled AGAINST gay issues before. Google him and you can see that he has always stuck to the letter of the law.

And all that aside, my partner and I are legally married in CA (we tied the knot before prop 8). What the hell difference does it make to ANYONE. We have been together almost TWENTY YEARS. I don't see how my marriage is effecting anyone else marriage. If we are, I would love to hear from you so you can let me know exactly HOW my being married to my partner is hurting your marriage.

And one other thing. Gay men and women can ALREADY adopt in CA and have been able to for YEARS. Marriage has nothing to do with it. There ARE going to be kids that are going to have gay parents regardless of Prop 8.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:14 PM
I don't give a hoot who thinks I'm a bigot, but this same sex marriage just isn't right as far as I'm concerned! It's made even worse by the fact that queers and dykes can even adopt children. No doubt if this post isn't deleted, I'll get a lot of hate responses, but I'm only stating my opinion. I don't hate queers and dykes, but I did prefer the days when they all stayed in their closets, and the word "Gay" meant to be "light hearted and happy". In Toronto they have an annual parade, during which they openly flaunt themselves in ways that would result in heterosexual couples being thrown in jail. It seems that sexual morals in today's world are fast disappearing down the toilets of public washrooms.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 10:18 PM

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
You're bringing up America is now the new Sodom and Gomorrah while criticizing the legalization of same sex marriage. That is ridiculous! Last time I check this country wasn't ruled by any religious or non religious authority. Every American has a right to their own. If you deny that right then you are against the Constitution of the United States.

The bolded text...

makes you a hypocrite.

Because your opinion here is a contradiction of what you are defending. The same judge says that a child does NOT have a right to a father or a mother.

Of course, it is just his opinion.

Yes - you DO- have a RIGHT to have a father and a mother. In fact, it is inevitable, because this is HOW YOU ARE CONCEIVED!


Now, just to make sure everyone stays calm
Within the article you will find that the judge based "his opinions" upon studies which also claimed that few studies had taken place regarding gay fathers and lesbian mothers.

Besides - get out of the people's hair ya danged District judge. We don't want you or your opinions. You serve D.C., not us. I mean... I'm not a Californian, so, let the people speak!

And see, the people DID SPEAK! And now a D.C. judge is gonna come in and rant about his opinions as if they are loftier than the State's? Really?

Y'all in California got it better than us here in NY though. See, the District runs us so quietly and easily because it owns the State and because people in New York are generally so easily fooled as to believe that their family and their best friends will look out for their needs in Congress. Mwahah! Atleast in California y'all got people in Congress who will speak somewhat for the State - enough to cause a District judge to perform shoddy research and give ignorant opinions in an attempt to attain some semblence of recognition and control by earning the respect of gays and lesbians who might (and not all of them) be so easily fooled as to like the federal government because it says, "It's unconstitutional to say that gays don't have a right to have kids - but it IS constitutional to say that a kid doesn't have a right to have a parent!"

Woohoo... Glorious stupidity. IT's making me feel a little crazy.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:11 PM
Infants/children are capable of forming the necessary attachments with people other than their biological parents. They have certain needs which need to be meet and if in a loving & nurturing environment, their development will flourish regardless of the gender of those `mothering`/caring for them.

The issues arise, it would seem, when the child with two daddy's/ mommy's interact with other children/adults.
You cannot control what other people think and children with this family arrangement will encounter hate-filled comments and possible bullying.

Children who use sexual slang and derogatory remarks, are only mimicking the actions of adults, parents ... society at large anyway.

So the argument that the children of same sex parents will receive taunting/bullying is really an issue for society to resolve .

Many many once acceptable attitudes are no longer tolerated , sexism, racism and their abolition was not wholly embraced by large swaths of society long after they received protected under rule of law.


A `living document` has the dynamism to mirror the current needs of a states population. No peoples - stand still .....humanity rumbles forward.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by UmbraSumus]

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:36 PM
the gay marriage topic is a tired argument between people who live in reality, and people who live in a delusional land of fantasy and make believe.

Acts 17:26 Paul applied this principal when speaking to the Greeks on Mars Hill in Athens when he said: "And hath made of ONE BLOOD all nations of MEN for to dwell on all the fact of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation

that sounds like man was created equally and then there's that popular phrase citizens of fantasy land like to ignore so they can feel like they are above everybody else:

"Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged!" and my personal favorite: "Let He Who is Without Sin Cast the First Stone".

see if they followed those rules that this supposed air poppa placed, they would then have to look themselves in the mirror. god forbid (no pun intended) that they realize they have sins they have commited as well. however gay marriage is a worse sin then any the ones looking in the mirror have committed right? it is after all the most evil sin one can commit right? nothing like raping and molesting alter boys (isn't that 2 sins in 1?). lets provide sanctuary for those who preach the gospel since they will be forgiven by sky dad anyway.

in this day and age i find it absolutely ridiculous that this is even an issue. god doesn't make the law of the land, politicians and judges do. if they say same sex marriage is ok, then i guess it's ok.

keep it to yourselves weak minded sheep of the christian "faithful", let your "god" worry about it. after all it's his supposed law and he's the only one who has the right to judge man of his sins right? unless it was a different church i learned these hard lessons from growing up.

but hey what do i know? i'm just some left wing nut job because i don't judge a man or woman based on where they want to relieve their sexual tensions.

top topics

<< 6  7  8   >>

log in