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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (108055)	4/9/2009 11:24:52 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541326

Societies don't exist long without children, it has practical origins. Homosexuals won't reproduce whether they are married or not, and their being married has no impact on fertility rates among heterosexual marriages. And since gays don't recruit straights into their lifestyle, they can't undermine the available pool of would be parents out there. Gays are born that way and they will never have kids unless the adopt, it's a basic fact. As for calling something wrong, if a belief or practice is considered repugnant, immoral or legal by much of society, someone holding or doing it due to religious beliefs is no more acceptable than an nonreligious perpetrator. Honor killings and female circumcision come to mind as examples, along with polygamy.

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (108055)	4/9/2009 11:31:01 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541326

Societies don't exist long without children, it has practical origins. And we will stop propagating if we allow gays to marry? That makes no sense at all to me. Heterosexuals will continue to do as they always do. The percentage of gays won't increase because they marry, though they may seem to slightly because more will be comfortable coming out. Gay isn't a choice, and acknowledging them won't destroy marriage. Heteros have done a good job of that on their own.