Working on my traditional marriage argument.

But what does this have to do with whether two people should be allowed to marry or not? Why do you constantly refuse to explain this?

Two people getting married are not typically worried about paternity issues at the time of their marriage. What you are citing is what happens after marriage, if and ONLY if they have children. It is not relevant to whether the two people in question should or should not be allowed to marry right then and there, no children involved.

 

It will never provide a rational or honest answer.....why bother trying?

 

I just did. You merely failed to comprehend.

Different topic. Why two individuals choose to marry and why government has chosen to license and regulate the relationship.

 

Encouraging heterosexual couples to marry reduces the number of single mothers on their own with absent or even unknown fathers. Encouraging ANY other type of couple does not do so. For the 1000th time.

 

No you didn't. Like I said and you quoted, "Its the voluntary agreement to have your partner artificially inseminated and the voluntary acknowledgement of parentage on the birth certificate that creates the obligations.". NOT the marriage, NOT the birth of the child.

 

Could you keep a straight face when you wrote that?

 

Not an argument against same sex marriage. This is why you keep losing in court, and on this forum.

- - - Updated - - -

Repeatedly refuted.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll admit it is tough when responding to the stupidity and debunked bull(*)(*)(*)(*) you post.

 

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension and processing any information that does not fit with your narrow and nonsensical views

 

Your information doesnt contradict my views. You are blinded by your ideology.

 

Are you one of those people who just want to argue for the sake of arguing? My point was not about gay marriage. It was about adopted kids.

 

So you really think your adopted daughter didn't care if she was raised by you or by her natural parents? It was all the same to her? I realize, as a parent who adopted a child (and I salute you for making that difficult decision by the way) you have to pretend there is no difference to her between you being her parent or being with her real parents, but it's tough for adopted kids to deal with that sort of rejection. It's usually a life long problem.

 

Yes you've already stated that. I'm not sure what the purpose of the repeat is.

 

It can be a life long problem if the adopted child is not cared for the way he/she needs to. . .just like any other children, adopted or not!

No, my daughter never wanted to live with her birth parents. . .she ran away from her abusive father (she had cigarette burns on her hands, and HUMAN bite marks on her right upper arm), and she didn't remember ere having a mother. She was picked up and spent 2 years in an orphanage because she was too agressive to "fit" in an adopted family. . . .until the directrice of the agency that was processing our demand for adoption found her and immediately decided that she would fit right in our family, because we were all headstrong and not afraid of "problems."

We tried to keep her from forgetting her original language by having her meet with a Korean woman who lived in our neighborhood. . . she REFUSED to even look at the woman. . .she would hide behind us any time she would spot an asian person in a shop.

A few months after she came to us, we took our two children to Disney World. Epcot was crawling with asian tourists, and my daughter would hide behind our legs, and pull us away to avoid every Asian looking man. At one point, she became almost hysterical, crying and screaming in fear because she thought she had seen a man who was her father!

Early on, we made the decision that, before she became a woman, we would take her back to Korea, to Seoul, to give her a chance to experience her culture and to be in the city where she was born. I wasn't able to go, but my husband took her and she spent 10 days there while my husband was visiting customers and working. My daughter was escorted by a couple of lovely Korean secretaries and they even went back to the orphanage from where she came. The director of the orphanage and at least one other worker remembered her, and told her all they knew about her past, gave her access to all the document they still had. . . .she wasn't interested.

My daughter is a gifted artist and a very good photographer. When she came home from Korea, she showed us the pictures she had taken. . .ALL were in black and white. . .This is the way she wanted to keep it. . . apart from her REAL life.

Certainly she has the same feelings as many other adopted children. . .and the prevalent feeling when those children are WELL cared for and loved is that they are SPECIAL because they were SELECTED, not just born in a family who didn't want them, but SELECTED by a family who WANTED them, and loved them.

This last father's day, my daughter posted a picture on her Facebook page: A picture of herself with her family, my husband, myself, her brother, and her, on the day we picked her up at the airport when she was not yet 6 years old. She also made a comment: "You can't choose your family, but 30 years ago, a man flew half way across the world to bring me home. It was the luckiest day of my life. Happy father's day, dad, I love you."

You think what you wish. . .it doesn't matter.

I KNOW.

 

Great story!! You should be proud of yourselves and your daughter. I have to wonder what this Mike character is thinking about. Is the point that he is trying to make somehow related to an argument for traditional marriage? That is where this all stared.

Or maybe against adoption....which would be idiotic.

 

So, you believe that it is assumed a man and woman who get married will be having sex - but don't believe that the same assumption is made of two men (or two women) who get married?
On what basis are you making that assumption?

 

No, only when a man has sex with his wife, does

160.204. PRESUMPTION OF PATERNITY. (a) A man is
presumed to be the father of a child if:
(1) he is married to the mother of the child and the
child is born during the marriage;

ever have any applicability. YOU are the one who claims while procreation has no relevance to marriage, a relationship without sex isn't a marriage.

 

He is assumed to be the father because it is assumed that the married couple would have had sex, resulting in the woman's pregnancy... Right?

 

Repeatedly refuted. Same statute applies to same sex couples.

 

???? No, "a man" is always a man and never a woman.

 

Strawman

 

Yes, that is the relation between sex and marriage between a man and woman. A relation that doesn't exist in the case of two people of the same sex.

 

So, you believe it is reasonable to assume that heterosexual people who get married will be having sex, but not reasonable to assume that about gay couples who want to get married?

Sorry, I thougth you were the one who said

That certainly makes it seem like you're assuming that both heterosexual and homosexual couples would be engaging in sex...

I also thought you were the one who said

Which certainly makes it seem like you believe that a gay couple (which is made up of two consenting adults) could raise a child together.

So what's left? The need for a child to be created by that couple? Why? It's not as if we're underpopulated. It's not as if there aren't plenty of kids currently up for adoption...

 

Still waiting for you to identify this inexorable link between sex and marriage, without which you dont have a marriage.

 

That's odd... I believe that in post #523 I illustrated that you've already demonstrated belief in a link between sex and marriage.

 

A link between sex and marriage that exists only for a man and a woman. I was looking for this link that applies to two people of the same sex.