Pope: Catholics should ask gay people for forgiveness

[Jon Miller]

So... but it's not the state's job to force people to have children.

While this is what our (and I definitely do mean my) culture says, and what we value.

It hasn't been true for most of the past and is likely (I think) to not be true in the future.

JM
(Particularly when you replace state by society.)

[Ben Kenobi]

So what... is it an irrelevant sideshow or a reinforcement... WHICH IS IT?

The law being what it is, is a reinforcement via Oberfell. It's largest effects are actually going to be on Christian bakers, businesses, etc.

[Ming]

The law being what it is, is a reinforcement via Oberfell. It's largest effects are actually going to be on Christian bakers, businesses, etc.

Not if they don't discriminate and follow the law...
And again, nice try, but attempting to change the argument... Your usual tactic when you are proven wrong.

[Ben Kenobi]

We were talking about the state, and your only justification is a few wedding stores... irrelevant.
With the exception of Wedding gowns and Bridesmaid dresses, all other elements of a wedding are still in play... place, food, music, and more.
And that only applies to male gays... Female gays might still be interested in wedding gowns. And males may get more tuxes.

Ok. That's in theory. At the end of the year, I'm doing worse than the year before.

To generate more sales across your ENTIRE CUSTOMER BASE.

I'm already doing that.

I would be focusing on business that was increasing knowing there is very little you can do about segments of your business that are decreasing because of factors out of your control.

Wow. That's terrible. The raw numbers and core business doesn't matter to you?

But get married and have children... Tough sell since they are so many factors involved, and most of which can't be addressed by salesmanship.

So you'd just throw your hands up and say, "there's nothing you can do?"

[Ben Kenobi]

Not if they don't discriminate and follow the law...
And again, nice try, but attempting to change the argument... Your usual tactic when you are proven wrong.

If the business costs are that draconian, Oberfell will have a vastly negative effect on business operations.

[Ben Kenobi]

Most rights and obligations afforded by marriage have **** all to do with children. Why is this even a debate?

The primary state accorded benefit of marriage is children.

[Ming]

Ok. That's in theory. At the end of the year, I'm doing worse than the year before.

People get married for MANY reasons... a tax break is probably not the number one item on their list.

I'm already doing that.

Not if you are ignoring part of your customer base.

Wow. That's terrible. The raw numbers and core business doesn't matter to you?

Only terrible to somebody with no business sense.
Always go after the growth side of the business.
Don't waste money and effort on things you can't change.

Again, I would highly target those that plan on getting married. But I wouldn't waste a dime trying to convince somebody to get married if they aren't interested.
You can't make somebody do something they don't want to do. It's a waste of effort. There are better ways to spend the resources you have.

[Giancarlo]

Please stop quoting him. I'm going to rip my pretty hair out reading more of his inane drivel. Ben has no clue about LGBT people. I doubt he has ever met one of us and talked to us about how we feel.

[Giancarlo]

Oh please... Please quote where I have ever said it's only about lUVVVE. Oh that's right, you can't. As usual, you are lying once again.
Marriage is about love, but also about partnership, trust, belonging, sacrifice, and many other things. If you want to add a spiritual element to your marriage, fine by me.
But many people don't see it your way. And many marriages with and without your "spiritual element" have succeeded, and many have failed.

You are more than welcome to believe whatever you want when it comes to your need for a spiritual element... but that's you, and NOT EVERYBODY ELSE.
They are also welcome to believe what they want about what marriage means to them.

So as usual, BK's idea of religious freedom is that only his idea of religion should be free, and nobody else is allowed religious or non religious freedom.

That piece of... Is now speaking for me?

My argument isn't all about love.

There are hundreds of thousands of kids left in the system up for adoption. All before same sex marriage was legalized. Many gay couples adopt children kicked to the streets by their parents or abandoned.

Marriage is about a partnership in love and IN LIFE. Many same sex couples do adopt and save children from being orphaned forever.

Ben you sanctimonious piece of ****.

[Giancarlo]

Ben is an irrelevant sideshow. A piece of **** that treats other human beings like garbage. shame on him!

[Giancarlo]

Marriage isn't all about kids or procreation. Many same sex couples adopt regardless. Quite a few heterosexual married couples do not have children. Kids and procreation is not a prerequisite or latter requirement of marriage.

[Proteus_MST]

While this is what our (and I definitely do mean my) culture says, and what we value.

It hasn't been true for most of the past and is likely (I think) to not be true in the future.

JM
(Particularly when you replace state by society.)

Actually, pure quantity in case of children often doesn't matter as much as quality.

To explain:
Children raised in an orphanage most likely have less chances to become successful in society, than children who are raised by loving parents
Also, children who are raised in state funded orphanages cost the state more money than children who are raised by parents (who may be subsidized through the tax cuts because of their marriage, but on the other hand buy everything for their child tehmself.

Therefore the state has an even bigger incentive to get kids out of the orphanages and into the hands of adoption wiilling parents.
(and may be rewarded not only with lesser cost to raise those childen, but also with more successful kids who, in their adfult years, will be able to pay more taxes (due to better education and jobs) and/or stay away from a criminal career or living on welfare (which, on the other hand would cost the state money)

Adoption and being loving parents however is something that can be done by homosexual couples as well as heterosexual couples ... therefore, even if we concentrate on offspring, a homosexual marriage can be useful for the state ... not by producing children, but by adopting and raising children (and make them useful members of society)

[Berzerker]

I am in favor of reducing taxes on married men and women, because frankly - we need more kiddos.

The state has a prima facie interest in children - given the educational system and the desire of the state to perpetuate itself.

And of course the state has a prima facie interest in teaching those kiddos to love the state, to pledge their allegiance to the state and its god. You want to subsidize having kiddos to benefit the state, sounds fascistic

While this is what our (and I definitely do mean my) culture says, and what we value.

It hasn't been true for most of the past and is likely (I think) to not be true in the future.

In the past the clan or tribe needed cannon fodder to survive, the Bible reflected that reality. Thats the past, not the future... Our future is one of over population and wars over increasingly limited resources

until God comes back and wipes us out again...

[Giancarlo]

Ben likes the Duggars. Big fan of them I think.

[Berzerker]

big families have their appeal, I rarely watched the Waltons but I liked the ending when they'd all tell each other good night

I just wanna leave enough room for the critters, religions promoting population growth based on ancient dogmas are not helping