Irish Marriage Equality Referendum Draws Near

[Ben Kenobi]

Such as gay parents (also, if there are so many, why don't they adopt?)

They do and are adopting children.

so dead parents, and parents who abuse their kids are responsible, but since you don't like gay couples, **** those kids and let them live in the orphanages.

I am not responsible for the abuse of the children in the orphanage. The abusers are responsible for the abuse of the children. I am responsible for any children I choose to bring into my household. Or, if I were one of the officials, I am responsible for placing children into a house where abuse occurs, because those parents would not have access to that child if I had not given them access.

The same is not true of the orphanage.

No I don't.

Then if you're unwilling to accept cited evidence I see no reason to pursue this discussion further. The evidence is plain as day. Domestic partner abuse is more common among gay and lesbian partnerships.

You demanded evidence. I gave you evidence and you will not accept evidence contrary to your prevailing opinion. Some people are open to reality others are not.

[Ben Kenobi]

What does that have to do with it. I can disagree with the church and let them know where I disagree. I've had discussions with priests. I have no power to change them.

I don't donate to organizations that I have moral disagreements with. Why do you donate to an organization that you have moral disagreements with?

Are you really trying to say that GAYS shouldn't be allowed to get married because they're more likely to need government aid?

I'm arguing that gay marriage is a consequence of societal changes since the 60s, and trends of increasing illegitimacy. I'm also arguing that those changes have weakened society and encouraged more people to seek government aid, whereas before they were more stable and more likely to provide for themselves.

Gay marriage, and the consequent teaching children these values at kindergarten will simply reinforce these trends. This will make it much harder for America to defend herself in the future, especially if the folks who are doing well choose to sit out a battle between secular progressives and Islam.

Obama's very clear as to his goal. He's not on your side - he's seeking to replace you so that he never needs your support ever again.

[C0ckney]

I'm arguing that gay marriage is a consequence of societal changes since the 60s,

and you're correct. society has become more open and less prejudiced. this is a positive thing; except of course for bigots, who find their bigoted views becoming less and less socially acceptable.

[C0ckney]

ireland has gone in just 22 years from decriminalising homosexuality to granting marriage equality. the pressure for equal rights is growing in around the world, even strongly catholic countries in europe and south america now have gay marriage. the rest of the civilised world won't be far behind.

homosexuality has become yet another thing, like contraception and divorce, that catholics routinely ignore the church on. the church has staked a lot on resisting marriage equality and the faithful have rejected its message.

[N35t0r]

They do and are adopting children.

Yet you said they cannot. What is it, are they, or are they not adopting? Also, unless things changed from 5' ago, it is still not enough.

I am not responsible for the abuse of the children in the orphanage. The abusers are responsible for the abuse of the children. I am responsible for any children I choose to bring into my household. Or, if I were one of the officials, I am responsible for placing children into a house where abuse occurs, because those parents would not have access to that child if I had not given them access.

The same is not true of the orphanage.

You are not responsible, yet you want to keep a way to make this better forbidden. Admit you don't really care about the children.

Then if you're unwilling to accept cited evidence I see no reason to pursue this discussion further. The evidence is plain as day. Domestic partner abuse is more common among gay and lesbian partnerships.

No it isn't. Even the ONE study you posted doesn't support your opinion.

You demanded evidence. I gave you evidence and you will not accept evidence contrary to your prevailing opinion. Some people are open to reality others are not.

I demanded evidence about one thing, and you provided evidence for a different thing. I don't care about whatever you bring up that isn't related to the point. My opinion has nothing to do with it.

[rah]

I don't donate to organizations that I have moral disagreements with. Why do you donate to an organization that you have moral disagreements with?

Well I don't have to agree 100%, I just have to agree enough. Even the priests I talk to don't agree 100% but that doesn't stop them from being priests.
Did you agree on how they handled the pedophiles. Of course you didn't but you're still a member.

Tying GAY marriage to the 60's is pretty funny.

Of course then you believe that handicapped people should seek not government aid. (they're more likely to need it just like gays)
Maybe we should ban them from getting married. I'm all for it.
Blacks have not come out of poverty as a group, and they've number on government aid is higher than it was in the 60's. (yes, the 60's comment equally not relevant)
So next you'll be saying that blacks shouldn't be allowed to get married.

It is a slippery slope.

[Ben Kenobi]

I demanded evidence

Which you rejected. I have nothing further to discuss with someone willing to simply dismiss evidence that he dislikes. What's the point?

[grumbler]

So you're conceding the point altogether. Thanks, Loinburger. I'm glad that you can finally see the truth.

Wait. Loinburger says you will "be able to fabricate any statistics that you like" and you thank him for finally seeing the truth?

Own goal, old boy.

[loinburger]

I've stated, "there's nothing to indicate that Catholic priests abuse any more than men of the general population."

Rather than challenge this assertion, you've conceded my point.

Your unproven assertion is irrelevant to my suggestion that women should be priests to limit abuse. I didn't concede the point, I challenged your assertion's relevance.

It's perfectly clear to me that you prefer prejudice to facts. The facts are clear on this issue. Catholic priests as a collective are no more nor less likely to abuse children than the general population.

You are continuing to ignore my suggestion that women should be priests, and instead are challenging something else entirely. If you care about children as much as you claim then you should agree that men should not be priests in order to reduce abuse by priests - however, your only concern is in limiting the rights of homosexuals.

What right? There is no right to adopt children. Children are not property, loinburger. I oppose gay adoption for the simple reasons that children do have a right to a father and a mother, not social experimentation like cattle.

Yes, we know that you're a bigot, you don't need to keep repeating yourself.

Curious. So telling no to a gay couple to prevent them from accessing children in adoption is equivalent to outlawing homosexuality. Are you suggesting that homosexuals are attempting to recruit children?

Would you support a law that outlawed homosexuality?

[loinburger]

Did you agree on how they handled the pedophiles. Of course you didn't but you're still a member.

He think that the pedophilia scandal wasn't that big of a deal. Because he cares about children, you see.

[rah]

Naw, I'll give him that one iota of credit for agreeing that the Church did a bad job handling it and could have corrected it faster.

[Ben Kenobi]

homosexuality has become yet another thing, like contraception and divorce, that catholics routinely ignore the church on. the church has staked a lot on resisting marriage equality and the faithful have rejected its message.

Would you consider Judas among the faithful?

[Ben Kenobi]

Wait. Loinburger says you will "be able to fabricate any statistics that you like" and you thank him for finally seeing the truth?

I asked if Loinburger was willing to challenge my assertion that Catholic priests are no more nor no less likely to abuse children then the general population of men.

He has subsequently made an argument that assumes this is true in arguing only women should be priests.

I suggest you take his cue. If you want the evidence, I'm happy to provide it.

[loinburger]

Child abuse is more frequent in African-American households. You want to prevent homosexuals from adopting to prevent child abuse - shouldn't you also be arguing that African-Americans should be prevented from adopting?

[loinburger]

He has subsequently made an argument that assumes this is true in arguing only women should be priests.

You have subsequently ignored this argument. Why?