Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 247
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    73
    Post Thanks / Like

    Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    I didn’t want to derail the “Obama appointee says "...all men are created equal", but what about Obama appointees?” thread since it was opened to discuss judicial error, political intentions, and left/right leaning appointees. But some of the arguments that were being discussed about children and same sex marriage had me thinking:

    I have been trying to understand some of the arguments that have been used in an attempt to ban same-sex marriage. More specifically, the “it’s bad for children”, “procreation”, “bad for heterosexual marriage” arguments. While I disagree with the moral and religious arguments, those I at least understand.

    Here is why I’m confused.

    Gay couples have been raising children for a long time. My husband and I, for example, have only been legally married for 3 and half years. Yet we have two daughters that we have raised from birth, one is about to be 16, the other will be 18 in September. (In case anyone was wondering, both children were conceived through surrogacy) We had children before we were legally married. Even before we believed we had any chance to EVER marry. Allowing or banning same-sex marriage will not prevent gay and lesbian couples from having and raising children.

    My Uncle has been married to the same woman for almost 40 years. They have no children. They will never have children. Not because of any fertility issues, simply because they never wanted them. My oldest brother has been with his wife for almost a decade. Same thing. No children, and no want for children. My father on the other hand has MANY children through more marriages than I can count on one hand. The reason I bring all this up is that their actions would not have changed with the existence of same-sex marriage. Also because procreation is not a requirement for marriage. How then can the procreation argument have any weight in the decision to ban same-sex marriage? Allowing or banning same-sex marriage will not prevent procreation in any way.

    Even the argument (which I have heard repeatedly) that the possibility for procreation is essential to marriage doesn’t really hold up. Infertile couples are legally able to get married without debate. And I would like to reiterate that my husband and I have procreated. Yes, we had to use a surrogate, but so have many many many other straight couples.

    With regards to the harm it could cause heterosexual marriage, I see three problems.

    As a gay man, I would never marry a woman. (And yes, I know that there are countless examples of gay men marrying a woman, but in my experience that is typically for either financial/legal benefits, or fear of coming out of the closet due to societal and familial pressures therefore they marry a woman to do what they feel is expected of them. I’m not referring to those cases because they will/have happen(ed) regardless of the legality of same-sex marriage.) A straight man (I presume) would never marry a man. The same would hold true for lesbians or straight women. That being said, allowing same-sex marriage would not force straight people to marry gay people. Banning gay marriage would not force gay people to marry straight ones.

    Second, the divorce rate for heterosexual marriage has been rapidly growing for a long time. Even before the it was conceivable that homosexuals would be allowed to marry. Allowing or banning same-sex marriage will not add or subtract to the divorce rate of heterosexuals.

    The last problem I see under the “bad for heterosexual marriage” argument is when people claim that it would change the “meaning” of marriage. My understanding of the meaning for the word marriage is a promise to love my partner (regardless of gender) through thick and thin. Good times and bad. Rich or poor. No matter what life throws at you both, you work as a team to create a happy, healthy, loving environment that you share for the rest of your lives. Yet to my knowledge, no straight couple has felt less love for their spouse due to my being married to another man. Heterosexual people would still love their significant other regardless of the actions of two homosexual people. Can a straight person honestly say they no longer have a desire to marry the person they love because two men are legally allowed to do so as well?

    I put this thread in the Formal Discussion section because I wasn’t looking to debate the issues I presented. Not exactly anyways. No amount of debating would change how I feel. I just like to try and step into the shoes of other when I can. Try and genuinely understand where the other side is coming from, intellectually at least. But in these arguments, I just don’t get it.

    Any thoughts or alternate explanation for these arguments that I’m missing?

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,473
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Hi Gemini. I mostly agree, but I think your argument lacks focus.

    You need to explain why you think Gay Marriage is good for children or at least as good as heterosexual marriage. And while personal experience is a form of evidence, and highly convincing if you are the person in question or know them well, its a poor form of evidence for a public debate as it is not very convincing to a wider audience.

    I think what you are primarily missing is the common belief that homosexuality can "spread" aka that if we condone gay marriages more and more people will form gay relationships instead of heterosexual ones and that over time society will loose its ability to reproduce effectively which is a sure fire way to kill off a culture/society. I don't share that belief but it underlies arguments on the other side of the isle even if its rarely articulated.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  3. #3
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I think what you are primarily missing is the common belief that homosexuality can "spread" aka that if we condone gay marriages more and more people will form gay relationships instead of heterosexual ones and that over time society will loose its ability to reproduce effectively which is a sure fire way to kill off a culture/society. I don't share that belief but it underlies arguments on the other side of the isle even if its rarely articulated.
    Playing the devil's advocate here only, in a sense, homosexuality can spread if you allow it to be OK to do so. That is in Uganda, where people can be killed for being homosexual that discourages homosexuality. Whereas in the modern world, where it is fine for the most part, it has indeed spread.

    So the question shouldn't be about whether it can spread but whether it is OK for it to spread.

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,473
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Yep, killing gay people will definitely cut down down the number of gay marriages.

    But In this case I more specifically mean they thing that if normally straight people see that being Gay is OK, they might switch teams for fun or fashion or because in childhood your preference is set by having lots of gay things going on around you. This as opposed to normally gay people pretending not to be so they aren't attacked.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Yep, killing gay people will definitely cut down down the number of gay marriages.

    But In this case I more specifically mean they thing that if normally straight people see that being Gay is OK, they might switch teams for fun or fashion or because in childhood your preference is set by having lots of gay things going on around you. This as opposed to normally gay people pretending not to be so they aren't attacked.
    But switching teams makes no sense - certainly not for fun or fashion! Sexual attraction or rather un-attraction is innate: nobody wants to sleep with a horribly deformed person, there's nothing that would make you want to switch to that team, ever! Right? So it's the same with same-sex attractions - I don't see how it can be a whim. Unless you've had those feelings or experiences yourself, which at best makes you bi-sexual rather than homosexual I don't see how you can say this. So unless you're arguing that everyone is bi-sexual, equally attracted to men and women, then I don't think you have a point here.

  6. #6
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    73
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    You need to explain why you think Gay Marriage is good for children or at least as good as heterosexual marriage. And while personal experience is a form of evidence, and highly convincing if you are the person in question or know them well, its a poor form of evidence for a public debate as it is not very convincing to a wider audience.
    I did use all anecdotal evidence for my side of the issue. I will have to do more research. I know that studies exist, but couldn't name them off the top of my head.

    That being said, my ultimate point is that gay couples are going to have children anyways. Regardless of what studies say, or whether or not same-sex marriage is ever legal. Let's say for the sake of argument that the research showed definitively that children of homosexual parents are not better off or just as good. Banning gay marriage still is not going to stop gay couples from having children. That is why I fail to see how the argument that we have to ban same-sex marriage because it is "bad for children" is valid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I think what you are primarily missing is the common belief that homosexuality can "spread" aka that if we condone gay marriages more and more people will form gay relationships instead of heterosexual ones and that over time society will loose its ability to reproduce effectively which is a sure fire way to kill off a culture/society. I don't share that belief but it underlies arguments on the other side of the isle even if its rarely articulated.
    I hadn't thought of it that way. I guess because I'm gay, I've always been gay, never had a choice, I take it for granted that everyone else knows that too. I will have to look for studies (if any exist) that show if/when the gay population is increasing, and why. Thanks for the input.

  7. #7
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post

    I hadn't thought of it that way. I guess because I'm gay, I've always been gay, never had a choice, I take it for granted that everyone else knows that too. I will have to look for studies (if any exist) that show if/when the gay population is increasing, and why. Thanks for the input.
    Just to clarify my point with Sigfried, did you ever feel any kind of sexual attraction to women?

  8. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    73
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Just to clarify my point with Sigfried, did you ever feel any kind of sexual attraction to women?
    No.

  9. #9
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    No.
    Actually, my argument is a bit more than that: do you feel disgust? For example, in the same way you might feel disgusted at having sex with a horribly deformed person.

  10. #10
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    73
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Actually, my argument is a bit more than that: do you feel disgust? For example, in the same way you might feel disgusted at having sex with a horribly deformed person.
    I personally find the idea of sex with a woman repugnant (no offense ladies, just not my cup of tea ). I know that we cannot choose who we are attracted to. And the point I was trying to make in my earlier post is that it was never a choice for me, and even most heterosexuals in these kind of debates admit that their orientation wasn't a choice for them.

    But Sig is right. That doesn't stop opponents of same-sex marriage from using the argument that homosexuality will "spread". I know I can't debate "being gay is a choice" with someone who adamantly believes it, because they will likely never change their mind. I was just trying to, at least on some level, understand their argument. From my perspective, to say it's a choice seems completely illogical. I am trying to piece together the logic of the other side. And more specifically, with regards to how it address the need to ban same-sex marriage.
    Last edited by Gemini; March 5th, 2014 at 01:59 PM. Reason: I'm a horrible speller!

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I personally find the idea of sex with a woman repugnant (no offense ladies, just not my cup of tea ). I know that we cannot choose who we are attracted to. And the point I was trying to make in my earlier post is that it was never a choice for me, and even most heterosexuals in these kind of debates admit that their orientation wasn't a choice for them.
    Right, I agree it's not a choice. My counter to those people that believe it is a choice is that they too must have chosen their sexual preferences at one point in their lives; i.e. they must have been attracted to the same sex too. Which makes them likely bi-sexual anyway and not heterosexual.

    But Sig is right. That doesn't stop opponents of same-sex marriage from using the argument that homosexuality will "spread". I know I can't debate "being gay is a choice" with someone who adamantly believes it, because they will likely never change their mind. I was just trying to, at least on some level, understand their argument. From my perspective, to say it's a choice seems completely illogical. I am trying to piece together the logic of the other side. And more specifically, with regards to how it address the need to ban same-sex marriage.
    I'm just playing devil's advocate there - it's definitely true that it will spread if you don't 'stop it'. But rather than spreading throughout the entire population, it spreads by homosexuals coming out more. Those are really two entirely different arguments. I think that's one of the premises smuggled by the anti-gay crowd - they're insinuating that because it's a choice then it will turn people gay.

    Anyway, thanks for your info -- I've been trying to understand the other side for a while too, mainly from a political perspective; and the only thing that it really boils down to is theocracy: because it's a sin in the bible then it must be immoral and therefore legislated against.

  12. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    73
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I think what you are primarily missing is the common belief that homosexuality can "spread" aka that if we condone gay marriages more and more people will form gay relationships instead of heterosexual ones and that over time society will loose its ability to reproduce effectively which is a sure fire way to kill off a culture/society. I don't share that belief but it underlies arguments on the other side of the isle even if its rarely articulated.
    I know I already resonded to this, but a thought just occured to me. I can be a little slow sometimes.

    Would arguing that homosexuality will "spread" if gay marriage is condoned without any proof or historical evidence that it would happen be a form of slippery slope fallacy?

    I'm new to applying arguments to logical fallacies. At least in formal debates anyway. I greatly enjoy the debates on here, but feel a little out of my league. That's why I've been a member for a couple or years, read the forums almost every day, but rarely post anything. So that being said, I'm trying to learn and was wondering if I am right about the above fallacy.

    I also thought I would try and reword my thoughs in the Premise 1, Premise 2, etc, Conclusion format that I've seen used on here. I hope I get it right.

    P1: Homosexuals can and do have children, despite the fact that they are not legally married.
    P1a: Their current upbringing would not change if their parents could legally marry.
    P1b: Their current upbringing would not change if their parents could not legally marry.
    P2: Heterosexuls have always had children, whether same-sex marraige was legal or not.
    C1: Banning same-sex marriage would not affect children in anyway.

    I hope I got the format right. If my logic is flawed there, please explain how. But remember, I'm new at this. Go easy on me.

  13. #13
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern California, USA
    Posts
    2,018
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I didn’t want to derail the “Obama appointee says "...all men are created equal", but what about Obama appointees?” thread since it was opened to discuss judicial error, political intentions, and left/right leaning appointees. But some of the arguments that were being discussed about children and same sex marriage had me thinking:

    I have been trying to understand some of the arguments that have been used in an attempt to ban same-sex marriage. More specifically, the “it’s bad for children”, “procreation”, “bad for heterosexual marriage” arguments. While I disagree with the moral and religious arguments, those I at least understand.

    Here is why I’m confused.
    I think the reason you're confused is that you're trying to conflate two entirely different things: gay-marriage and gay adoption. The two were not conjoined in the other thread, so I'm wondering why you're trying to conjoin them here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    Gay couples have been raising children for a long time. My husband and I, for example, have only been legally married for 3 and half years. Yet we have two daughters that we have raised from birth, one is about to be 16, the other will be 18 in September. (In case anyone was wondering, both children were conceived through surrogacy) We had children before we were legally married. Even before we believed we had any chance to EVER marry. Allowing or banning same-sex marriage will not prevent gay and lesbian couples from having and raising children.
    If you're argument is that there is some connection between allowing gays to marry and allowing gays to adopt, then it would follow from your own argument that banning gay marriage would have some connection with banning gay adoption.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    My Uncle has been married to the same woman for almost 40 years. They have no children. They will never have children. Not because of any fertility issues, simply because they never wanted them. My oldest brother has been with his wife for almost a decade. Same thing. No children, and no want for children. My father on the other hand has MANY children through more marriages than I can count on one hand. The reason I bring all this up is that their actions would not have changed with the existence of same-sex marriage.
    What I don't understand is how your family's history, what little of it you've listed above, tells anyone anything about the same-sex marriage debate. I'm sure that debate wouldn't have been affected one iota, either way, if your father's father had never been born.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    Also because procreation is not a requirement for marriage.
    This is poorly put. Procreation is society's primary interest in marriage. It is the reason society has carved out the "institution". The argument, then, is, why should society have an equal interest in homosexual couples? Are they going to provide society with it's next generation of citizens? Clearly not, so why should society open the institution of marriage to include them?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    And I would like to reiterate that my husband and I have procreated. Yes, we had to use a surrogate, but so have many many many other straight couples.
    This is an abuse of language.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    With regards to the harm it could cause heterosexual marriage, I see three problems.

    As a gay man, I would never marry a woman. (And yes, I know that there are countless examples of gay men marrying a woman, but in my experience that is typically for either financial/legal benefits, or fear of coming out of the closet due to societal and familial pressures therefore they marry a woman to do what they feel is expected of them.
    And again you're trying to make an argument based only on your own experiences, beliefs, and biases. You can't formulate a valid argument in this way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    That being said, allowing same-sex marriage would not force straight people to marry gay people. Banning gay marriage would not force gay people to marry straight ones.
    I don't understand. How is any of this a defeater for the argument that including same-sex couples within the societal institution of marriage weakens the primary purpose for that institution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    Second, the divorce rate for heterosexual marriage has been rapidly growing for a long time. Even before the it was conceivable that homosexuals would be allowed to marry. Allowing or banning same-sex marriage will not add or subtract to the divorce rate of heterosexuals.
    Well let's just look at some overlapping history. According to the website LGBT Mental Heath Syllabus (chosen so there would be no allegations of anti-gay prejudice):

    "The American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality from its official Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in 1973. This decision occurred in the context of momentous cultural changes brought on by the social protest movements of the 1950s to the 1970s"

    The authors go on to cite various studies, virtually all of them by now entirely discredited, that contributed to this political movement to redo the scientific research to date that had led to homosexuality being listed in the DSM I as a "sociopathic personality disorder". So what we have is a growing political movement, driven by a cadre of gay activists beginning in the 1950s and continuing through the 70s and to the present. And then we have this chart showing the divorce rate during that same period:



    There are two major perturbations of the otherwise constant trend line. One of them coincides with WWII. I assume there will be no controversy in assuming the cause and effect relationship between WWII and an increased divorce rate?

    The other major perturbation, even slightly greater than that for WWII, more or less coincides with our timeline for the major advances won by gay political activism, given a lag period of a few years for the social impact of the newly won advance to take effect.

    What this chart tells me, given the history of gay activism and it's resultant progressive social acceptance, is that you have to prove the advancement of homosexuality's social acceptance has not adversely impacted the heterosexual divorce rate, rather than simply say it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    I put this thread in the Formal Discussion section because I wasn’t looking to debate the issues I presented. Not exactly anyways. No amount of debating would change how I feel.
    And no one debating you will care about that one way or the other.

  14. #14
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,704
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by cstamford View Post
    This is poorly put. Procreation is society's primary interest in marriage. It is the reason society has carved out the "institution". The argument, then, is, why should society have an equal interest in homosexual couples? Are they going to provide society with it's next generation of citizens? Clearly not, so why should society open the institution of marriage to include them?

    Because the notion that procreation is essential for a legitimate marriage is not true, at least as far as our current legal understanding of marriage goes. Childless marriages, adoptive parents, and step-parents are all as legitimate in the eyes of the law as marriages that produce children.

    If we treat heterosexual parents with adopted children the same as families with conceived children, why shouldn't we treat homosexual parents with adopted children the same as families with conceived children?

    If we allow a man to become the stepfather of a child by marrying a single mother, why can't we allow a woman to become the stepmother of a child by marrying a single mother?

    If we allow heterosexuals who will never procreate (like post-menopausal people) to marry, why can't we allow gays who will never procreate to marry?
    Last edited by mican333; March 6th, 2014 at 02:02 PM.

  15. #15
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern California, USA
    Posts
    2,018
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Because the notion that procreation is essential for a legitimate marriage is not true
    This is the rhetorical tactic commonly used. I say procreation is the predominant purpose for the institution of marriage; people on your side change it to "procreation is not essential for a marriage. Well, when did I ever say it was? I claim "institution of marriage", you come back at me with "a marriage". Straw man. Invalid. Will ignore until you fix it.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    The primary purpose of marriage is to facilitate property, title, and inheritance transfers. Marriage is an old political arrangement.

    Sex is for procreation and marriage is so families can share property and power. That is why they were arranged.

    Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

  17. Thanks JimJones8934 thanked for this post
    Likes CowboyX liked this post
  18. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mdougie View Post
    The primary purpose of marriage is to facilitate property, title, and inheritance transfers. Marriage is an old political arrangement.

    Sex is for procreation and marriage is so families can share property and power. That is why they were arranged.

    Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
    Very good point indeed and don't forget visitation rights that many of the anti-gay crowd also tend to ignore. And ultimately too, that it is also between two people who love each other enough to spend the rest of their lives together. Plus a large number of arguments tend towards appealing to tradition or religion, as if they are inflexible and unchangeable. I'm with Gemini, there's no real arguments out there to be had: it's why they've lost the cultural and now legal battle.

  19. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Very good point indeed and don't forget visitation rights that many of the anti-gay crowd also tend to ignore. And ultimately too, that it is also between two people who love each other enough to spend the rest of their lives together. Plus a large number of arguments tend towards appealing to tradition or religion, as if they are inflexible and unchangeable. I'm with Gemini, there's no real arguments out there to be had: it's why they've lost the cultural and now legal battle.
    Yes bigoty is a hard mindset to change. The right wing don't value justice or tolerance or fairness or equality.

    The value power, and punishment and suffering.

  20. #19
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    9,174
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by MD
    Yes bigoty is a hard mindset to change. The right wing don't value justice or tolerance or fairness or equality.
    That is simply incorrect.
    The Right Values Justice, so that violations of inherent rights are punished and restored, compensated.
    The Right values tolerance, even of the "intolerant".
    The Right Values Fairness, so that all are treated equally by the law.
    The Right Values Equality, so that the rights (which all have) are protected.

    As you have offered no support, but only an accusation.. my rebuttal is sufficient.
    To serve man.

  21. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Same-Sex marriage is bad for the Children!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    That is simply incorrect.
    The Right Values Justice, so that violations of inherent rights are punished and restored, compensated.
    The Right values tolerance, even of the "intolerant".
    The Right Values Fairness, so that all are treated equally by the law.
    The Right Values Equality, so that the rights (which all have) are protected.

    As you have offered no support, but only an accusation.. my rebuttal is sufficient.
    Not true.

    The right wing opposed ending the ban on interracial marriage. They oppose ending the ban on homosexual marriage. They opposed ending school segregation. These show they don't care about fairness or justice, and only power. The right is not tolerant as evidenced by schools in Louisiana that punish children who are religions other than Christian. The right is obsessed with solving problems with violence. They are obsessed that poor people should suffer. They take pleasure in seeing others suffer because they think they made poor choices.

    ---------- Post added at 02:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:29 PM ----------

    Just for fun The right wing authoritarian. A quick google revealed I wasn't wrong and it is a bizarre personality trait made up with obsessions with authority, bigotry, power, violence, and submission.

    ...Authoritarian submission: submissiveness and acceptance of authorities which are perceived to be legitimate and established in society, such as government or the police.
    Authoritarian aggression: aggression against outgroups and “deviants”–people who the established authority mark as targets. Examples of this includes travellers, immigrants, Muslims and other kinds of scapegoats.
    Conventialism: high adherence to traditions and established social norms. This can manifest in a respect for “traditional family values”, for example

    .....When one measures submission to authority using different scales, it is still found to correlate with right wing ideology; it is likely, therefore, that authoritarianism and being right wing go hand in hand.....


    .....high RWA people are also more likely to be prejudiced against ethnic minorities and gay people, and more likely to be bullies or friends with bullies in childhood.

    http://stavvers.wordpress.com/2011/09/22/rwa/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-w...thoritarianism

 

 
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 11 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 116
    Last Post: January 26th, 2013, 05:38 PM
  2. Gay Marriage vs Incestuous Marriage argument
    By Apokalupsis in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: October 17th, 2011, 06:43 AM
  3. Marriage better for children
    By chadn737 in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: July 5th, 2009, 05:19 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 1st, 2007, 08:27 PM
  5. Do you have, or want children?
    By Jamie in forum ODN Polls
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: October 24th, 2005, 06:36 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •