Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Srexley who wrote (543477)	2/20/2004 11:59:58 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Clearly when countries (Sweden) started to allow gay marriage, they had NO idea what would happen. Did they intend for children born out of wedlock to nearly double to about 60%? Did they plan for that? Have they studied the rapid change or are they just saying "too late to look back and say what if?" Odd that a Socialist country like Sweden really didn't engineer this, they just let it happen. Has the crime rate changed? The rate of suicide (already pretty high)? What about child abuse etc? Like I said, I'm willing for Sweden or any other place to carry this experiment out. The results there will not necessarily apply as they, like other Northern Euro countries are fairly homogeneous and don't get massive immigration pressure or have serious ethnic division. We're a sovereign country. We don't have to get rid of capital punishment nor do we have to copy public policy in any other country. The really interesting place of change to me is Iran, not Sweden. Sweden's changes and even ours are small compared to what could happen in Iran.

To: Srexley who wrote (543477)	2/21/2004 12:10:49 AM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

First, I was not the one who initially claimed such a link. Both JP and the author did. Then, JP tried to squirm out of it by claiming he never stated that there was a cause/effect link. But, somehow, homosexual marriage is still to blame, even though there is not a causality... Go figure. Must be rightist logic. JP likes to use convoluted logic and long replies to try to beat someone into silence. His sort of intellectual dishonesty is of the highest grade. Back to the discussion, in a general sense. In science and math, two variables can affect each other only if there is some relationship between them. A influences B in some way. If A influences B which influences C, there is still a relationship between A and C. Let's say A causes B. Then, if left along, B will eventually change back to A. However, if the presence of C is added, B will resist changing back to A. To say that there is no relationship between A and C is nonsense. But this is what JP tries to argue. First, he asserts, through use of the attached article, a cause/effect relationship between the increase in nonmarital births and homosexual marriage (which the article clearly states). Then, when called for some sort of proof or data to support that link, he denies ever asserting it, and calls me a liar. Hmmm, I think he should consider guesting for Rush when Rush is 'indisposed' (i.e. slumming with Martha). Btw: if you followed the argument, I asserted that there was no causality between nonmarital births and homosexuality, and challenged JP to assert such proof. He backed away, but also threw out the smoke screen that I couldn't prove that a link didn't exist. That is such horse pucky as to be laughable. Most people know that it is much easier to prove a link, than to disprove the possibility of a link. JP knows that, and throws it out as more bluster. JP likes to twist and avoid the point with semantics. He is the consummate Clinton evader.