Subject:
|
Re: Marriage (was: Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:34:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
339 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > This all seems so blindingly obvious to me, I confess I find the whole gay
> > marriage debate rather confusing. What is there to debate?
>
> When you speak about the issue in terms of contract recognition, sure it
> seems obvious. But doesn't this seem painfully obvious as well: men and
> women are {not} the same. The are not simply humans with irrelevant,
> interchangable reproduction appendages. There {are} distinctive, innate
> qualities to each sex. Merely because they have equal rights doesn't mean
> they are {the same}. Isn't {that} obvious? And isn't it obvious that the
> {ideal} situation in which to raise a child involves 1 man and 1 women?
>
> [JOHN]
Why?
You keep saying that, but I don't to see *why* it's obvious. Can you spell out
the real advantages of 1 man/1 woman? What, exactly, does it have over other
unions that makes it the superior way of raising children?
My experience with children to date is that gender isn't that big of deal until
later. Even then, I'm not 100% convinced that it would have as big an impact.
Early development seems to relies more on a caring, nurturing environment than
the actual sex of the caregivers.
-Evil Wayne [who's done nothing but lurk here for years]
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
