It might, depending on the quality of the study. But debating with "faggots" hardly constitutes evidence of anything but attitudes. I'm sure it's true that you find homosexuality disgusting and I'm sure you see nothing wrong with being anti-gay because you're revolted by it. Therefore, there's nothing unreasonable, to you, about your views. But a lot of people find sex between black men and white women disgusting and revolting. And not so long ago, it was illegal. In any case, homosexuality is much more than anal sex. No hurry. If there is evidence to show that two-parent families do a better job than single-parent families, why would that support an argument against gay marriage, since there would be two people in the union? As for common sense, that suggests many things to many people. Common sense also suggests that the most important determinant of a happy adult is a child raised with love. Straight couples have no monopoly on that.
"Common sense" (from the point of your belief's ) would suggest exactly what you are saying. I have to agree that it would be awkward ( just like lets say inter-racial marriages ) but to go as far as to say they cant provide a "healthy family enviroment" needs further back up....Considering, like i said that most of the kids they ( gay couples ) adopt and now call their sons/daughters MAY receive much love they never had by the parents that neglected them...Surely you can see a positive in that.... I used to think the same way you did about this issue, but after further thought. As long as they are providing love and a home and care about their kids ( which is much needed in todays society ) I say good luck in their journey....peace
Okay, if all you want is word games. What difference does it make if I say I've spent hours debating with homosexuals? (as opposed to "faggots"). You're incorrect if you think this shows "nothing but attitudes". Is that all debates are to you? I doubt you believe this. The point is that these people have provided many arguments trying to convince and what I am saying is that I have encountered none that succeed, on a rational level. It's not so much that they outright fail, it's just that I don't provide me with any rationally compelling reasons to believe that the gay position on homosexuality itself, or, in this case, gay marriage, is any better, logically, than my own. Given the arbitrariness, I side with my feelings. It's not simply two parent families I referred to - I think I cleary stated two parent male/female families. As for common sense also suggesting that the "most important determinant of a happy adult is a child raised with love", well no argument there. That isn't really germane to the topic though. My point is do we want to have the kinds of kids that are likely to be raised by gay couples in our society? Do we consider it desirable? My position is hell no. What would these kids be like? Well, apart from the fact that they'd certainly lack maternal love -- certainly not an unimportant point; the effects of which are uncertain, but seem likely to be negative -- they are, obviously, almost certain to be taught being gay is A-Ok, and that it's a viable life style choice, maybe taught to experiment with sexuality, probably from a very early age. Those are the givens. Now, even though it's unclear precisely how homosexuality occurs, there is strong evidence that, although it may in some ways be genetic, that it also develops. So, do we want to have kids raised in which any potential for such development is almost certain to be realized? In other words, while we may condone and tolerate homosexuality, do we really want to be producing more gays? I sure don't. Tell you what else, there's a big chunk of the world's population that agrees with me. Social impact. Hard to just shove under the carpet with some "civil rights" spiel.