It doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs ... it has to do with the perspectives and ideals promoted in society, and the resulting consequences of those perspectives.
Interesting. The above statement is very much at odds with this statement (also by you):
The LGBT community does not want to enter into "Marriage" as it currently "IS" ... but rather, want to redifine it as they see fit.
Thus ... it is the center argument for my call to create a "union" of some sort that extends privileges, [the so called equal rights], without calling it marriage, because what they want is NOT marriage, but a legal status to access the privliges that are associated with marriage.
That is the bare bones truth of it all.
So either it is about LGBT wanting to redefine marriage as they see fit or it doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs at all. Which is it?
Do you want to take a crack at resolving this apparent dichotomy?
The only reason you think there is an inconsistency, is because you want to.
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
LGBT perspectives are very leftists. Leftist thought is bad for Marriage, as referenced time and again, showing a drastic decrease in Marriage in Nations and States that are more liberal.
BTW ... your divorce stuff has already been addressed. Liberal States in terms of Divorces per Marriage are no better than Conservative States. The hitch is in how you express the data ... divorce per 1000 population, or divorce per 1000 marriages. The divorce rates are about the same when correctly expressed. Liberals, in their lying deceiving way, like to tout their massaged numbers that make their case, by quoting divorces per 1000 people..... which will naturally be lower in State with fewer marriages. Using Such, the divorce rate would be ZERO in a State that has ZERO marriages ....
see: "Log Cabin Republicans" -- who are NOT "Leftists" ...
see: "Libertarians" -- who are NOT "Leftists" ...
But ... I'm still shocked (not to say, also amused) by your very strange Implication, then, that "Right"-Wing Persons should be allowed to "Marry," but (supposedly) "Left"-Wing Persons can and should be DENIED a Right to Marry (because "they" don't have Correct Ideas and "they" don't DO "Marriage" the "Right" Way ...) ...
It doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs ... it has to do with the perspectives and ideals promoted in society, and the resulting consequences of those perspectives.
Interesting. The above statement is very much at odds with this statement (also by you):
The LGBT community does not want to enter into "Marriage" as it currently "IS" ... but rather, want to redifine it as they see fit.
Thus ... it is the center argument for my call to create a "union" of some sort that extends privileges, [the so called equal rights], without calling it marriage, because what they want is NOT marriage, but a legal status to access the privliges that are associated with marriage.
That is the bare bones truth of it all.
So either it is about LGBT wanting to redefine marriage as they see fit or it doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs at all. Which is it?
Do you want to take a crack at resolving this apparent dichotomy?
The only reason you think there is an inconsistency, is because you want to.
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
LGBT perspectives are very leftists. Leftist thought is bad for Marriage, as referenced time and again, showing a drastic decrease in Marriage in Nations and States that are more liberal.
BTW ... your divorce stuff has already been addressed. Liberal States in terms of Divorces per Marriage are no better than Conservative States. The hitch is in how you express the data ... divorce per 1000 population, or divorce per 1000 marriages. The divorce rates are about the same when correctly expressed. Liberals, in their lying deceiving way, like to tout their massaged numbers that make their case, by quoting divorces per 1000 people..... which will naturally be lower in State with fewer marriages. Using Such, the divorce rate would be ZERO in a State that has ZERO marriages ....
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
Yet there are homosexuals who want to marry rather than participate in a civil union precisely because they want "inter-dendence (sic), commitment, and monogamy" to be "two are joined and become one".
This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
So either it is about LGBT wanting to redefine marriage as they see fit or it doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs at all. Which is it?
Do you want to take a crack at resolving this apparent dichotomy?
The only reason you think there is an inconsistency, is because you want to.
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
The problem is that you have provided no evidence for this claim. You have simply stated that it is so. I understand that you feel this way, but your feeling that SSM will cause this means nothing without objective evidence to back it up and you don't have that.
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
Again, same as above. you have no evidence to show to support this view and it is in fact, contradicted by several of the articles I linked to above. When you come through with some suppporting evidence I will be glad to review it.
LGBT perspectives are very leftists.
Dick Cheney, Liberatrians, and Log Cabin Republicans among others are "Leftist"?
Leftist thought is bad for Marriage, as referenced time and again, showing a drastic decrease in Marriage in Nations and States that are more liberal.
This is in fact, completely wrong at least as far as the US goes.
According to the CDC, below are the marriage rates and precent change for the five states with the highest percent change from 2008 to 2009 and the same for the states with lowest percent change. I have also included each states red/blue status from the 2008 election.
State 2009 Marriages 2008 Marriages %Change 2008 Vote
District of Columbia 1892 2367 -25% Obama
South Carolina 29164 33278 -14% McCain
Oregon 23530 26139 -11% Obama
Oklahoma 23539 25959 -11% McCain
Alabama 37284 40638 -9% McCain
New Mexico 10208 8033 +21% Obama
Iowa 21172 19566 +8% Obama
Delaware 5138 4826 +6% Obama
Colorado 37439 35964 +4% Obama
Arkansas 31622 30476 +4% McCain
Just to recap:
Of the five states with the biggest DECREASE in marriages between 2008 and 2009, 3 were Red (Conservative) states and 2 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Of the five states with the biggest INCREASE in marriages betwen 2008 and 2009, 1 was Red (Conservative) states and 4 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Overall of the 12 states that showed a positive increase in number of marriages from 2008 to 2009, 7 were blue, 5 were red and 1 split the vote (Nebraska).
Care to tackle divorce rates? (I'll give you a hint, you won't like it)
BTW ... your divorce stuff has already been addressed. Liberal States in terms of Divorces per Marriage are no better than Conservative States. The hitch is in how you express the data ... divorce per 1000 population, or divorce per 1000 marriages. The divorce rates are about the same when correctly expressed. Liberals, in their lying deceiving way, like to tout their massaged numbers that make their case, by quoting divorces per 1000 people..... which will naturally be lower in State with fewer marriages. Using Such, the divorce rate would be ZERO in a State that has ZERO marriages ....
The Decline (or perhps long Delay) in Couples getting "Married" is apparently a Real Social Trend, which appears to be GENERAL, not limited to mostly any certain particular Demographic Group ...
So either it is about LGBT wanting to redefine marriage as they see fit or it doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs at all. Which is it?
Do you want to take a crack at resolving this apparent dichotomy?
The only reason you think there is an inconsistency, is because you want to.
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
The problem is that you have provided no evidence for this claim. You have simply stated that it is so. I understand that you feel this way, but your feeling that SSM will cause this means nothing without objective evidence to back it up and you don't have that.
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
Again, same as above. you have no evidence to show to support this view and it is in fact, contradicted by several of the articles I linked to above. When you come through with some suppporting evidence I will be glad to review it.
LGBT perspectives are very leftists.
Dick Cheney, Liberatrians, and Log Cabin Republicans among others are "Leftist"?
Leftist thought is bad for Marriage, as referenced time and again, showing a drastic decrease in Marriage in Nations and States that are more liberal.
This is in fact, completely wrong at least as far as the US goes.
According to the CDC, below are the marriage rates and precent change for the five states with the highest percent change from 2008 to 2009 and the same for the states with lowest percent change. I have also included each states red/blue status from the 2008 election.
State 2009 Marriages 2008 Marriages %Change 2008 Vote
District of Columbia 1892 2367 -25% Obama
South Carolina 29164 33278 -14% McCain
Oregon 23530 26139 -11% Obama
Oklahoma 23539 25959 -11% McCain
Alabama 37284 40638 -9% McCain
New Mexico 10208 8033 +21% Obama
Iowa 21172 19566 +8% Obama
Delaware 5138 4826 +6% Obama
Colorado 37439 35964 +4% Obama
Arkansas 31622 30476 +4% McCain
Just to recap:
Of the five states with the biggest DECREASE in marriages between 2008 and 2009, 3 were Red (Conservative) states and 2 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Of the five states with the biggest INCREASE in marriages betwen 2008 and 2009, 1 was Red (Conservative) states and 4 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Overall of the 12 states that showed a positive increase in number of marriages from 2008 to 2009, 7 were blue, 5 were red and 1 split the vote (Nebraska).
Care to tackle divorce rates? (I'll give you a hint, you won't like it)
BTW ... your divorce stuff has already been addressed. Liberal States in terms of Divorces per Marriage are no better than Conservative States. The hitch is in how you express the data ... divorce per 1000 population, or divorce per 1000 marriages. The divorce rates are about the same when correctly expressed. Liberals, in their lying deceiving way, like to tout their massaged numbers that make their case, by quoting divorces per 1000 people..... which will naturally be lower in State with fewer marriages. Using Such, the divorce rate would be ZERO in a State that has ZERO marriages ....
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
Yet there are homosexuals who want to marry rather than participate in a civil union precisely because they want "inter-dendence (sic), commitment, and monogamy" to be "two are joined and become one".
This is what is so laughable about the "conservative" arguments against SSM. Marriage carries privileges and obligations.
Same sex marriage is no exception. People who desire it embrace both. Same sex couples who desire "independence", open relationships, and polygamy" do not. And those people have want they want already.
Conservatives who would quash the aspirations of gays who by definition embrace "inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy," defend their positions by claiming that same sex marriage actually undermines "inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy."
The Decline (or perhps long Delay) in Couples getting "Married" is apparently a Real Social Trend, which appears to be GENERAL, not limited to mostly any certain particular Demographic Group ...
So either it is about LGBT wanting to redefine marriage as they see fit or it doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs at all. Which is it?
Do you want to take a crack at resolving this apparent dichotomy?
The only reason you think there is an inconsistency, is because you want to.
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
The problem is that you have provided no evidence for this claim. You have simply stated that it is so. I understand that you feel this way, but your feeling that SSM will cause this means nothing without objective evidence to back it up and you don't have that.
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
Again, same as above. you have no evidence to show to support this view and it is in fact, contradicted by several of the articles I linked to above. When you come through with some suppporting evidence I will be glad to review it.
LGBT perspectives are very leftists.
Dick Cheney, Liberatrians, and Log Cabin Republicans among others are "Leftist"?
Leftist thought is bad for Marriage, as referenced time and again, showing a drastic decrease in Marriage in Nations and States that are more liberal.
This is in fact, completely wrong at least as far as the US goes.
According to the CDC, below are the marriage rates and precent change for the five states with the highest percent change from 2008 to 2009 and the same for the states with lowest percent change. I have also included each states red/blue status from the 2008 election.
State 2009 Marriages 2008 Marriages %Change 2008 Vote
District of Columbia 1892 2367 -25% Obama
South Carolina 29164 33278 -14% McCain
Oregon 23530 26139 -11% Obama
Oklahoma 23539 25959 -11% McCain
Alabama 37284 40638 -9% McCain
New Mexico 10208 8033 +21% Obama
Iowa 21172 19566 +8% Obama
Delaware 5138 4826 +6% Obama
Colorado 37439 35964 +4% Obama
Arkansas 31622 30476 +4% McCain
Just to recap:
Of the five states with the biggest DECREASE in marriages between 2008 and 2009, 3 were Red (Conservative) states and 2 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Of the five states with the biggest INCREASE in marriages betwen 2008 and 2009, 1 was Red (Conservative) states and 4 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Overall of the 12 states that showed a positive increase in number of marriages from 2008 to 2009, 7 were blue, 5 were red and 1 split the vote (Nebraska).
Care to tackle divorce rates? (I'll give you a hint, you won't like it)
BTW ... your divorce stuff has already been addressed. Liberal States in terms of Divorces per Marriage are no better than Conservative States. The hitch is in how you express the data ... divorce per 1000 population, or divorce per 1000 marriages. The divorce rates are about the same when correctly expressed. Liberals, in their lying deceiving way, like to tout their massaged numbers that make their case, by quoting divorces per 1000 people..... which will naturally be lower in State with fewer marriages. Using Such, the divorce rate would be ZERO in a State that has ZERO marriages ....
The Decline (or perhps long Delay) in Couples getting "Married" is apparently a Real Social Trend, which appears to be GENERAL, not limited to mostly any certain particular Demographic Group ...
So either it is about LGBT wanting to redefine marriage as they see fit or it doesn't have anything to do with LGBTs at all. Which is it?
Do you want to take a crack at resolving this apparent dichotomy?
The only reason you think there is an inconsistency, is because you want to.
The two are separate arguments tangently related to the issue, yet related to each other. Of course the LGBT community wants to redefine Marriage such that it includes them so they can enjoy a legal status that gives them the privileges currently reserved for Marriage as historically defined. There perspective does not consider the wider implications of their goal. One of those wider implications is a decrease in Marriage, and a perspective that is not conisistent with the ideals of marriage that made it so successful, primarily, inter-dendence, commitment, and monogamy. .... it's all rapped up in the ideal that "two are joined and become one".
The problem is that you have provided no evidence for this claim. You have simply stated that it is so. I understand that you feel this way, but your feeling that SSM will cause this means nothing without objective evidence to back it up and you don't have that.
On the other side, you will find many people willing to give LGBT the "privileges they seek", but they are not willing to allow the mindset and perspectives of the Leftist centered LGBT to become recognized as "marriage", as it is not consistent with inter-dependence, commitment and monogamy, but rather, "independence", open relationships, and polygamy.
Again, same as above. you have no evidence to show to support this view and it is in fact, contradicted by several of the articles I linked to above. When you come through with some suppporting evidence I will be glad to review it.
LGBT perspectives are very leftists.
Dick Cheney, Liberatrians, and Log Cabin Republicans among others are "Leftist"?
Leftist thought is bad for Marriage, as referenced time and again, showing a drastic decrease in Marriage in Nations and States that are more liberal.
This is in fact, completely wrong at least as far as the US goes.
According to the CDC, below are the marriage rates and precent change for the five states with the highest percent change from 2008 to 2009 and the same for the states with lowest percent change. I have also included each states red/blue status from the 2008 election.
State 2009 Marriages 2008 Marriages %Change 2008 Vote
District of Columbia 1892 2367 -25% Obama
South Carolina 29164 33278 -14% McCain
Oregon 23530 26139 -11% Obama
Oklahoma 23539 25959 -11% McCain
Alabama 37284 40638 -9% McCain
New Mexico 10208 8033 +21% Obama
Iowa 21172 19566 +8% Obama
Delaware 5138 4826 +6% Obama
Colorado 37439 35964 +4% Obama
Arkansas 31622 30476 +4% McCain
Just to recap:
Of the five states with the biggest DECREASE in marriages between 2008 and 2009, 3 were Red (Conservative) states and 2 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Of the five states with the biggest INCREASE in marriages betwen 2008 and 2009, 1 was Red (Conservative) states and 4 were Blue (Leftist/Liberal) states.
Overall of the 12 states that showed a positive increase in number of marriages from 2008 to 2009, 7 were blue, 5 were red and 1 split the vote (Nebraska).
Care to tackle divorce rates? (I'll give you a hint, you won't like it)
BTW ... your divorce stuff has already been addressed. Liberal States in terms of Divorces per Marriage are no better than Conservative States. The hitch is in how you express the data ... divorce per 1000 population, or divorce per 1000 marriages. The divorce rates are about the same when correctly expressed. Liberals, in their lying deceiving way, like to tout their massaged numbers that make their case, by quoting divorces per 1000 people..... which will naturally be lower in State with fewer marriages. Using Such, the divorce rate would be ZERO in a State that has ZERO marriages ....
For My Mother: In Praise of a Life Lived
Chasing an Elusive God
Why Christianity Is Dying But Spirituality Is Thriving?
On the Frontlines An interview with Yael Eckstein, Senior Vice President of the ...
Ray Liotta, Seth Green Join an All-Star Cast in Indie Film ‘The Identical’ “We want to bring films with a redeeming value to the world. One of ...
A Life of Hope The fact that you’re standing here today with breath in your lungs ...
Habits for a Heart Healthy Lifestyle Heart disease is a top killer worldwide -- but our lifestyle choices ...
Emotional Equations Using brilliantly simple math that illuminates universal emotional ...
Are You a Compulsive or Binge Eater? Do you struggle with your weight? Find out more about compulsive and ...
Faith, Freedom and Rocker John Schlitt “We are making choices on greed and stupidity. The truth is that our ...
Robert Griffin III: Not the Average Rookie Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III continues to wow ...
Green Powders to Add to Your Diet Now Green powders are a great way to boost your health, keep your energy ...
Natural Deodorants That Actually Work What's that smell? Not us! We’ve been on a mission to find the best ...
Birth of a Habit How long does it take to form a new habit? How long should it take ...
Madly In Love With ME “I will never settle for less than my heart and soul desire.”
Is It Love If You're All Cranky When You Give It? Love is the answer to everything in life.
Living A Meaningful Life You are what you love and you love whatever you give your attention ...
"The Bible" a Labor of Love for Famed Producer, Wife The five-week, 10-hour TV special was nurtured by "Touched by an ...
Who Should Be Allowed to Pray for President Obama? It seems preposterous, but there’s a major debate over who is worthy ...
