|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I think this is the last gay thread that we've had that's still open, so I'm just gonna put this here. Might be worthy of new topic, I dunno. But it seems controversial enough to sprak a discussion:
quote: http://www.news.com.au/...tammy/story-e6frfkyi-1226169281540 Some are calling this child abuse, some are insinuating its a step in the right direction. I'm not sure how I feel about it yet, but it doesn't seem right.... 11 years old is pretty young.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I am curious as to what the importance of pointing out that the parents are gay is..... If it was a single mother, would THAT be pointed out? Well, it does make the story as a whole more queer (zing!), that is: strange. And strange sells.
if you think this child is doing this because they think he doesn't have the necessary "positive male role model" in his life. Oh, I would've went the other way with it: that the mother's have influenced him into this. One of the argument of the anti-gay folks is that the gays are going to be recruiting. This does look like that.
Aside from that, this is fucking wrong on so many levels. 11 year old kids have zero clue what they want. The kid would probably get injections to have you change him into Optimus Prime or a T-Rex if you told him you could. Interesting, that if you told him you could part... do you think the mother's could have had a major influence on this? From the article:
quote: At 3 years old, you're pretty much just copying stuff from your parents, don't you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Apparently the parents agree with you, which is why they are: "giving their child hormone blockers that delay the onset of puberty, so that he can have more time to decide if he wants to change his gender." What people are calling child abuse is: giving their child hormone blockers that delay the onset of puberty.
One of the argument of the anti-gay folks is that the gays are going to be recruiting. This does look like that.
Only if he wants to be a lesbian ... Wait... if its a boy that's attracted to girls, but also wants to be a girl, does that make him gay? Or if he wants to be a girl and then is attracted to boys, would that make him gay? Maybe its not so clear cut
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Oh, I would've went the other way with it: that the mother's have influenced him into this.
Pretty big insinuation, don't you think? Yeah, that's why I didn't go there.
This does look like that. I disagree. I also don't dignify the actions or thoughts of the anti-gays by delving into their realm. Letting the child become a female does not equate recruitment since not all women are gay. Oh, I dunno, a couple of lesbians raising a boy to want to be a girl would look bad to me. Bad enough to warrant somebody delving into their realm.
do you think the mother's could have had a major influence on this? Nope. I think the parents are (IMO) "letting him express himself". Why not?
At 3 years old, you're pretty much just copying stuff from your parents, don't you think? When my son was 2, his uncle dressed him up as a ballerina and had him prance around saying what a pretty princess he was. He doesn't wish to be a female, nor does he identify as one. *shrugs* Tiger Woods was raised to be a golfer and he loves it.
Perhaps the young man in question genuinely identifies as being a female and just so happens to have gay parents and the fact that they are lesbians makes this story newsworthy. Perhaps, but like I said, at 3 years old he's signing that he wants to be a girl and at that age you're just copying everything so I'm not so sure this came from him and not the parents.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Although I am unable to form a decision regarding delaying puberty I do suppose that, assuming the child genuinely, himself, want to change his gender, it would be easier to go through the change before/during puberty than going through male puberty and then having to change all of that back into girl-stuffs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Why does it look bad to you? Because of the permanency. Its different than, say, my parents raising me to be Catholic because I could easily just leave it.
What does their sexual orientation have to do with it? Not a whole lot.
Also, by "delve into their realm", I meant that I do not dignify the thoughts or actions of anti-gay bigots by pretending to know their thought process. Oh, I thought you were talking about delving into the gay people's realm.
Why not? Because I don't know this family and I try not to be presumptuous. Hmm, you said you didn't think it could be the parents influencing him... but that requires presumptions just as well.
I highly doubt this would be as big of an issue if it were a single mother who had an older daughter and this little boy wanted to be a girl too. I think I'd have a problem with this for any 11 year old, regardless of the parents' sexual orientation. But adding in that its two lesbians with a boy who wants to be a girl makes it more fishy to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
What undermines standing for me is my belief that ultimately the parties were just ordinary citizens and the general electorate suffers no injury when the rights of another person are vindicated. What were those citizens saying were the reasons that they wanted to challenge the removal of Prop 8?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Keep the two questions separate. Who has standing (a question of federal law)? The State of California. Who has the authority to represent the state (a question of state law)? The appellants. If federal law said that the appellants did not have the authority to represent the state, despite what the state law said, then wouldn't the federal law supersede?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes:
I think it was an older lady... in her 80's or something. What were those citizens saying were the reasons that they wanted to challenge the removal of Prop 8? She apparently got a message from the government saying that her marriage wasn't legally recognized, so she wasn't able to claim the marriage-benefits that she did, and now owed the government something like $383,000. She didn't think it was fair to pay that, and went to court. ...I think. No, I think that's what led to the removal of Prop 8 (ABE: apparently that was DOMA). But then some other citizens wanted to challenge that removal. Now the courts are saying they don't have any standing to challenge it. I was just wondering what their reasoning for challenging the removal was. Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
After the courts ruled Prop 8 unconstitutional, didn't some people come in to challenge that ruling? What were their reasons for challenging it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Ah, okay, that makes sense. Thanks. And thanks for the other explanation too.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Gay marriage is of course just the latest attempt to bring down civilization by such as the ACLU and the rest of the revisionist "legal" system. Then you should be welcoming it with open arms. Its all part of God's plan with the rapture. Jesus is going to be pissed when he finds out that you've been delaying his second coming by slowing the attempts to bring down civilization by opposing gay marriage. Seriously, you end times folks are weird. If the end is near and the second coming is on its way, then why are you trying so hard to stop it? Who's side are you really on?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Scripture says we aren't to welcome the Day of the Lord as it will be a horrible time for all, we are to fight evil no matter what, and there is no way to stop the fulfillment of prophecy anyway, although we can hope to put the evils off as long as possible. What a bunch of contradictory nonsense! You can't stop it, but you should put it off. Its going to rid the world of evil, and you should fight evil, but you shouldn't welcome the ridding of it. Pure bullshit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I prefer the stuff that Christ taught... you know, the scripture that says to love your neighbor and be a good person and help each other out. But we all know that book-worshiping heathens such as yourself prefer the doom and gloom of the Old Testament. How else can you justify hating gay people? You certainly can do it with Christ's teachings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Let she who is without sin throw the first stone.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024