4/2/2013 4:54 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:19:00 PM (view original):
But just because we allow gay marriage, doesn't mean we have to allow polygamy.
Why wouldn't we?  Based on "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy", "doesn't infringe on the rights of others" and, finally, "creates equal rights for everyone".

Do you think some people who are OK with gay marriage would object to polygamy?
We don't have to allow anything. Changing who we allow to get married today doesn't forever release us of any ability to restrict marriage. 

If polygamists want to get married, let them bring their case to the courts. That's not the issue we face today.
Are you for more individual rights or less individual rights?   If it's more, why are you mentioning marriage restrictions when you've already said polygamy breaks none of your Big Four.
I wouldn't be against legalizing polygamy provided it's restricted to consenting adults.

But it still isn't the issue we are facing. No one is arguing that we should legalize polygamy. People who are against gay marriage rely on the slippery slope arguments to make it seem like we have to allow polygamy if we allow gay marriage, which isn't true.
4/2/2013 4:54 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
If I found information that showed that African American households raised children worse than white households, would you then say African Americans shouldn't be married?
If I found information that adopted children of 50 year olds are worse off than "normal" families, should we ban "old marriage?"
4/2/2013 4:57 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 3:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 3:23:00 PM (view original):
Has the American Sociological Association ever backtracked on a finding?  Are they infallible?
I'm sure they have. What's your point? There is evidence showing that children of gay couples are just as well off as children of straight couples.
Swamp's favorite source indicates that gay couple adoption has been legal for less than 20 years. 

How much evidence can there be?
Twenty years worth.

And anyway, we're allowing gay couples to adopt already. Allowing them to marry doesn't change the fact that they are raising children.
Well, even if the earth is only 10,000 years old, that's a pretty small sample size, right?
You ignored the second part. We're already allowing gays to raise children. Allowing them to be married while they do it can only be a positive.

So a marriage certificate would magically make them better parents?

How so/

So you're saying that it doesn't make a difference if parents are married or unmarried?

I wonder if there's any data on that?

Actually, I'm lying, I know there's data on that.
I'm asking about gay parents.

How much of that whole 20 years of data(really less because most places have been 10 year or less) on gay parenting compares married gay couples to unmarried gay couples?
We already allow gay parents, so that isn't a variable to consider. The only thing we are considering is do we allow those gay parents to be married gay parents.

Everything I've ever seen strongly suggests that children of married parents do better than children of unmarried parents.
4/2/2013 5:04 PM
That's a good point. It doesnt matter. Gay couples in legal unions can raise children now. We're talking about marriage.

Take a step back and consider this statement: "Two consenting adults love each other and want to get married." What cold-hearted person would want to prevent that?
4/2/2013 5:07 PM
Yep


4/2/2013 5:08 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:53:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd like to argue with you, but if you're going to disrspectful and compare gay people marrying to someone marrying a toaster, I don't see the point.
I'll debate whatever you want to debate.    BL has laid out some guidelines as to why SS marriages should be allowed.    His guidelines work with toaster marrying.

If you have better reasons, and it's hard not to, throw them out.
4/2/2013 5:09 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:19:00 PM (view original):
But just because we allow gay marriage, doesn't mean we have to allow polygamy.
Why wouldn't we?  Based on "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy", "doesn't infringe on the rights of others" and, finally, "creates equal rights for everyone".

Do you think some people who are OK with gay marriage would object to polygamy?
We don't have to allow anything. Changing who we allow to get married today doesn't forever release us of any ability to restrict marriage. 

If polygamists want to get married, let them bring their case to the courts. That's not the issue we face today.
Are you for more individual rights or less individual rights?   If it's more, why are you mentioning marriage restrictions when you've already said polygamy breaks none of your Big Four.
I wouldn't be against legalizing polygamy provided it's restricted to consenting adults.

But it still isn't the issue we are facing. No one is arguing that we should legalize polygamy. People who are against gay marriage rely on the slippery slope arguments to make it seem like we have to allow polygamy if we allow gay marriage, which isn't true.
I'm arguing for it based on "equal rights for everyone".   And, of course, the other three reasons you've laid out.
4/2/2013 5:10 PM
OK, have at it. I don't care if you want to be a polygamist. Doesn't affect me.
4/2/2013 5:11 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
If I found information that showed that African American households raised children worse than white households, would you then say African Americans shouldn't be married?
If I found information that adopted children of 50 year olds are worse off than "normal" families, should we ban "old marriage?"
I'd have no problem with restricting either from raising children.

After all, in the old people example, you don't just walk into a baby store and say "Gimme a white one."
4/2/2013 5:11 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:53:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd like to argue with you, but if you're going to disrspectful and compare gay people marrying to someone marrying a toaster, I don't see the point.
I'll debate whatever you want to debate.    BL has laid out some guidelines as to why SS marriages should be allowed.    His guidelines work with toaster marrying.

If you have better reasons, and it's hard not to, throw them out.
Why don't you throw out a reason that we shouldn't allow gay marriage?
4/2/2013 5:11 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 4:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 3:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 3:23:00 PM (view original):
Has the American Sociological Association ever backtracked on a finding?  Are they infallible?
I'm sure they have. What's your point? There is evidence showing that children of gay couples are just as well off as children of straight couples.
Swamp's favorite source indicates that gay couple adoption has been legal for less than 20 years. 

How much evidence can there be?
Twenty years worth.

And anyway, we're allowing gay couples to adopt already. Allowing them to marry doesn't change the fact that they are raising children.
Well, even if the earth is only 10,000 years old, that's a pretty small sample size, right?
You ignored the second part. We're already allowing gays to raise children. Allowing them to be married while they do it can only be a positive.

So a marriage certificate would magically make them better parents?

How so/

So you're saying that it doesn't make a difference if parents are married or unmarried?

I wonder if there's any data on that?

Actually, I'm lying, I know there's data on that.
I'm asking about gay parents.

How much of that whole 20 years of data(really less because most places have been 10 year or less) on gay parenting compares married gay couples to unmarried gay couples?
We already allow gay parents, so that isn't a variable to consider. The only thing we are considering is do we allow those gay parents to be married gay parents.

Everything I've ever seen strongly suggests that children of married parents do better than children of unmarried parents.
Are you saying same sex couples are the same as man/woman couples?
4/2/2013 5:12 PM
I'm saying that we already allow gay parents. The question is, do we allow those gay parents to become married gay parents.

I say we should. What do you say?
4/2/2013 5:13 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 5:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:53:00 PM (view original):
Mike, I'd like to argue with you, but if you're going to disrspectful and compare gay people marrying to someone marrying a toaster, I don't see the point.
I'll debate whatever you want to debate.    BL has laid out some guidelines as to why SS marriages should be allowed.    His guidelines work with toaster marrying.

If you have better reasons, and it's hard not to, throw them out.
Why don't you throw out a reason that we shouldn't allow gay marriage?
Can I use tec's "traditional marriage" argument?

It's as good as your Big Four.
4/2/2013 5:13 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 5:12:00 PM (view original):
I'm saying that we already allow gay parents. The question is, do we allow those gay parents to become married gay parents.

I say we should. What do you say?
I asked if they somehow became better parents if married.

Do they?
4/2/2013 5:20 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 5:12:00 PM (view original):
I'm saying that we already allow gay parents. The question is, do we allow those gay parents to become married gay parents.

I say we should. What do you say?
I asked if they somehow became better parents if married.

Do they?
Maybe. Kids seems to do better when their parents are married.
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.