Cheney on gay marriage: “Freedom means freedom for everyone”
posted at 4:07 pm on June 1, 2009 by Allahpundit
Yet another issue on which he and The One disagree. No surprise here, especially given Gallup’s poll on how knowing someone gay affects one’s view of gay rights: Cheney said much the same thing back in 2000 at his VP debate with Joe Lieberman, although that answer was hedged with ambivalence about whether states should grant civil unions or go the whole nine yards towards full marriage rights. He doesn’t explicitly endorse marriage this time, but there’s no hedge this time either. Just good ol’ fashioned federalism, which puts him at odds with fellow conservative gay marriage supporter Ted Olson but squarely in line with the HA readership.
Actually, there is one thing he and Obama agree on. Click the image to watch.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Of course not, but by not allowing gay people to marry you aren’t giving them the option to “wait”. Or do you have a problem with monogamous homosexuals too?
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Stupid example. False choice.
BuckeyeSam on June 1, 2009 at 6:16 PM
It’s so nice to see you and Conservative Voice deconstruct an argument based on logic and reason! There are stable homosexual couples and there are unstable and terrible heterosexual parents. Which is a better household for a child to be raised in? Don’t stoop to calling an honest question a “stupid example” just because the answer to the question may be uncomfortable for you.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:27 PM
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 6:22 PM
I don’t care if you have sex with 100+ men. I could care less. Just leave the kids out of it.
Allowing gays to marry each other does not mean that they will magically want to wait…they can choose that now!
You want to live the gay lifestyle, but only with one guy…you can decide now to wait for that guy…nothing is stopping you.
And for the record, nothing is stopping you from getting married to a woman either, it may not be your preferred sex…but marriage isn’t about sex….and if it the trade off of having a family isn’t worth it…then don’t get married. For some guys…that don’t want to settle down…they don’t get married either.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:28 PM
If sexuality is “learned” or it’s a “decision” one makes as some have asserted. Then logic tells me that you are homosexual or bi-sexual. Not that there’s anything wrong with that!!
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:31 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:27 PM
The number of stable homes with a mother and a father…they can handle the adoption rate just fine and dandy we don’t need stable homes with a dad and a dad.
The homes where the dad or mother aren’t up to par, the kid is removed into foster care.
The premise is flawed.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Monogamous homosexual is generally an oxymoron unless you’re talking serial monogamy.
Your argument also relies on the premise homosexuals actually value marriage outside of a political foot in the door to assaulting religious freedom and straight-only dating services.
Furthermore the idea that the only thing that prevents people from copulation is whether or not they have a big ceremony and a certificate from the JP is equally ludicrous. I find it specious to argue that a piece of paper is something they value so highly that they would put off fornication for it.
If they are truly intent on waiting for a ceremony or some other special celebration or occasion they will do it whether it has the official recognition of the government or not.
You have to value monogamy more than the piece of paper recognizing it, in other words.
BKennedy on June 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Whether its genetic or not doesn’t change the fact that a gay person can marry the opposite sex, and have a meaningful relationship with that person.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:34 PM
I hesitate to ask this, but how do you figure?
MadisonConservative on June 1, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Please help me understand….
I don’t see why the federal Gov needs to recognize my marriage? Before I got married I was Very Happy and taxes were low. After marriage I’m very happy still but my taxes are higher, a lot higher. As far as I’m concerned, I would like to publicly renounce my federally recognized marriage. Its undoubtedly the worst financial decision I have ever made.<(due to the tax issue)
.
If you want to pay more in taxes then get married!
.
Am I wrong?
Amadeus on June 1, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:32 PM
The homes where the dad or mother aren’t up to par, the kid is removed into foster care.
What world are you living in? Are your eyes open? Have you seen how many kids are growing up in horrible living situations these days? Most of them are not being removed from their homes. Answer my initial question please! If you can’t or won’t answer my original question because you don’t like the answer or it’s uncomfortable for you than there’s no point in continuing this dialog.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Then logic should also tell you I’m correct and sexuality is a choice.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Amadeus,
Thank you. The government shouldn’t be involved in marriage.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Skywise,
So you are admitting that you are gay or have gay tendencies that you struggle with every day. Sucks to live your life. Logic tells me that’s not the case but if it is than I stand corrected. My life experience suggests that it is not a choice. As far as sexuality is concerned you are who you are.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:44 PM
“It doesn’t matter when I made that decision…I made the decision to remain a virgin until I was married…and now that I am married I made the decision to remain faithful and true to my wife.
Are you making the claim that if you are guy you can’t control your natural impulse? – Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:19 PM”
Great. Do you think that gays have had the support system that you had when you grew up and the option to marry?
SC.Charlie on June 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM
I’d be OK with it as long as it was arrived at through the legislative process rather than the judicial.
Kafir on June 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Not trying to get in anyone’s business but my wife is taking a refresher in Psychology and there was a surprising statistic in one of her school books that the average lifelong homosexual will have nearly 10 times the number of sexual partners as a heterosexual . I don’t know if this is true but I’m sure I’ve heard that before.
Amadeus on June 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:38 PM
doesn’t change the fact that of those kids who are living in horrible conditions, the state removes them from their homes. And give the parents a limited amount of time to fix themselves, or the kids are never returned.
The premise if flawed…there are plenty of well adjusted families that are willing to adopt that we don’t need to look at the pool of sexual deviants to adopt kids.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Correction: Its not a school book per say but on a list of recommended readings for an essay that she recently submitted as homework.
Amadeus on June 1, 2009 at 6:49 PM
Conservative Voice,
Still waiting for your direct answers to my direct questions? You probably wish I was holding my breath but alas, I am not. Thanks for the enlightening discussion!
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:52 PM
I’m admitting nothing. I’m merely pointing out a basic fact. Sexuality doesn’t define a person anymore than George Bush’ wouldn’t eat broccoli.
Sex has always been an action. Not a necessity to one’s own life like eating or breathing. That’s why bi-sexuality DOES exist… that’s why prostitutes get paid to do it with anyone.
Greek’s understood this and having so much information on the homosexual mindset, I’d thought you’d know that too.
Guess not.
And btw, Life Experience is NOT logic.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 6:53 PM
SC.Charlie on June 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Gays have the same support system. In the era of MTV, riding the wave of anything sexual goes revolution…that it was easy to remain a virgin? Or remain faithful after marriage?
Fact is, even under the worse conditions, people make choices that defy expectations.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Sure, I’d love to help. Click here.
manwithblackhat on June 1, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Well, monogamous heterosexuality is generally an oxymoron unless you’re talking serial monogamy.
thuja on June 1, 2009 at 6:58 PM
I’d guess the numbers differ when broken down by gender–gay males will tend to have more partners than gay females.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 6:59 PM
Skywise,
I don’t care if you’re gay or straight. If you would, please answer the following question. Did you make the decision to be gay, straight or bi-sexual?
I and many other people are saying it’s not a decision. It’s something inherent. Are you disputing this?
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:59 PM
Yes I’m disputing it. No I’m not saying what persuasion I am because it’s not germane to the discussion because you prefer personal attacks to actual logical debate.
I’ve given you the proof. Greek History. Roman History. Agape love. Can you counter that logically?
Sexuality. Is. A. Choice. Just like what vegetables you like.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Estate taxes are the big deal. There is an unlimited spousal deduction. If you aren’t married your partner has to pay tax on everything you own. The biggest concern is the assessed value of half the house.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:03 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 6:52 PM
I refuse to answer the question that is based on a flawed premise, because that would be engaging in a straw mans argument.
Fact: Sex requires decisions…who, when, where, how.
Fact: The desire for sex is high, but not as high as the need to go to the bathroom, yet you still decide the when where and how when going to the bathroom.
Fact: Gays have married before, and lived their life as a married person and remained faithful…its possible.
Fact: A gay person can have sex with the opposite sex, and even enjoy it.
Fact: Marriage isn’t about love or sex…its more
Fact: Kids need a father and a mother, its in societies best interest to raise healthy strong families, as that is how civilization survives.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:03 PM
The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (University of Chicago Press).
It is reported that men with no same-gender sexual partners since the age of 18 had a mean of 15.7 lifetime sexual partners. Men with any same-gender sexual partners had a mean of 44.3 lifetime sexual partners. Women with no same-gender sexual partners since the age of 18 had a mean of 4.9 lifetime sexual partners. Women with any same-gender sexual partners had a mean of 19.7 lifetime sexual partners.
Mason on June 1, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Oh, nothing more than statistical analysis of the number of partners homosexuals professed to have.
Considering what a small portion of the population they are, this would tend to indicate monogamy is not their strong suit.
But I know any criticism of actual statistically verified habits of homosexuals is rank bigotry. After all, you can’t tell the truth about gay people or you’re a homophobe.
Don’t get all effete on me now. If your friend was a crack fiend would you not inform him that his actions are dangerous and counterproductive, or would you endlessly defend him and call anyone who cares to point out his self-destructive ways is a narcophobe?
BKennedy on June 1, 2009 at 7:06 PM
Wow… I was going to speculate that maybe there was an evolutionary reason that men had higher same sex partners (the whole woman controls the genetic race thing) But both sexes triple their partners when same sex?
It’d be interesting to contrast that to the number of times per partner…
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Could also mean sex is more “fun” for them than a “serious expression of love”.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Skywise,
Your assertion that homosexuality is a choice is just opinion. Not fact. Google homosexuality. There is no consensus on the matter. What I’ve stated about you IS true and IS not a personal attack. You are either gay or have homosexual tendencies. You’ve admitted as much by stating it’s a “decision”. Deal with that logic.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:13 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:13 PM
The temptation may not be a choice…but it requires a decision to act on that impulse…unless of course you want to make the claim that gays can’t control their impulses.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:17 PM
Attraction is involuntary while acting on the attraction is a choice. Most people don’t experience a sexual attraction to the same sex.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:18 PM
It’d be even more interesting to make the numbers fair. Homosexuals can’t marry, heterosexuals can. What do you bet the average number of partners figure changes for heterosexuals when you factor out people who have never been married?
It’s unfortunate that many people don’t want to give homosexuals the chance to create legally committed relationships. Even worse is that all the while they are constantly being hounded as to being unable to commit. You have to let them play the game before counting score.
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:19 PM
I support the Federal Defense of Marriage Act and a Constitutional Amendment declaring “marriage to be a bond only between one [adult] man man and one [adult] woman“, (who are not related any closer than second cousins for genetic defect reasons).
Letting the “states decide” this issue only further Balkinizes the country.
Which is to the joy of those who wish to undermine our nation.
Civil unions keep everyone equal, legally, but marriage has an age-old meaning and provides a bedrock or stability and strength for Civilization and it shold not be messed with.
Those who sentimentally support destroying this core principle of our social structure fail to carry through the thought experiment about how it would immediately SEXUALIZE THE LIVES OF CHILDREN THROUGH THE FORCED EDUCATION ABOUT “SAME SEX” MARRIAGE AS “NORMAL”.
Kids should be allowed to be kids and not experimental sexuality guinea pigs for radical social engineers.
profitsbeard on June 1, 2009 at 7:23 PM
On C’mon… Heterosexual relationships averaged FIVE. That includes married and non-married couplings for heterosexuals. So, obviously the heterosexual married couples didn’t stay monogamous either.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:23 PM
Personal attacks again. I see. Homosexuality is a choice. I bet you believe in all the googling you’ve found of Global Warming too.
Not true. Google up the number of hetero men who have homosexual fantasies.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Cheney drives the lane and throws it down with authority once again.
It’s called federalism. The GOP might want to start considering it as a core philosophy.
SuperCool on June 1, 2009 at 7:26 PM
How does that mean the heterosexual married couples didn’t stay monogamous? Couldn’t 50% of the sample be never married and have had 9 partners?
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:26 PM
Attraction is also learned.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:26 PM
I did not know that, thanks.
Amadeus on June 1, 2009 at 7:27 PM
How do you explain all of the gay animals? Do they learn how to be gay from MTV too?
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:28 PM
Skywise,
Are you stating that there is a consensus on homosexuality being a choice?
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:30 PM
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Are you saying that homosexuals need a piece of paper that says they should remain monogamous?
Under what basis? When you add the kid factor it makes sense why being monogamous is important to married couples…when its just based on feelings….eh, no foundation.
When you view marriage as simply a love and sex contract, you get the 50% divorce rate, despite the piece of paper or which religion ordained the marriage. How many divorces take place because the couple realized they weren’t in love anymore.
Why do you need the government to sanction your love life in order to determine how faithful you will be?
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:30 PM
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:28 PM
There are animals that engage in gay acts…but to make the claim they are therefore gay is projecting a human trait to an animal that bases their decisions on instinct.
Are you saying that you can’t control yourself, that you are no better than a dog?
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:31 PM
Possible. But I doubt it.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:32 PM
It seems like there is there is a pretty solid consensus on what guys are attracted to. If you look at Carrie Prejean and her fellow contestants there are a lot of similarities. Beginning in teen years guys don’t need much studying to be turned on by the same basic attributes that guys decades older are also attracted to.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:34 PM
The piece of paper is part of it, but yes legally binding yourself to another person is a motivator to stay committed. Childless heterosexual couples stay monogamous, kids aren’t the reason why.
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:35 PM
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:34 PM
do all the girls look alike? then explain all the marriages
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Well the wife generally agrees but with one caveat and that is that society would not be harmed if the marriage is were simply recognized by local authority. Which you sort of alluded to.
And because she is really HOT, i’ll just agree….
Amadeus on June 1, 2009 at 7:38 PM
Yet most guys still want to get to bed with girls–and not for baby making.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:38 PM
The very hot ones have similar qualities, even from different eras. Not everyone marries Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie–except for, possibly, Brad and Angelina. For most people, nevertheless, there is something that stimulates sexual attraction before marriage is proposed.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:43 PM
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:35 PM
donkey before the cart…the piece of paper is a piece of paper. It only has value if the people holding the paper give it value.
Childless couples stay monogamous stay monogamous…true, but the kids are a huge factor in the general case…and in my case ( where all my kids are adopted ). Why is that? Because if I am dividing my attention and time to another woman, my marriage will not hold…and I will lose my kids. ( Yes I may get the right to have a weekend or two…even half the time, but its not 100% ).
Or I may get a girl pregnant outside of my marriage…hence now have to figure out that dynamic.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:43 PM
Note to the religious right:
You will never be taken seriously by anyone on the opposite side of the debate if you can’t answer serious questions about what you believe and why you believe it. Evasive answers, changing the subject or outright refusal to answer the tough questions is a sure fire way to lose a debate and forever undermine your credibility. There is no virtue in allowing freedom and liberty for only those who agree with you.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:46 PM
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 7:43 PM
You missed my point…while there is the Hot factor….that isn’t the deciding factor in most people’s minds when they get married. Most people don’t look like Brad Pitt and Angela Jolie.
And those who do get married because she’s hot…soon find that she isn’t so hot, like every person, she still has to flush the toilet, wake up with bad breath and messy hair…she may get fat or have annoying habits…..a relationship skin deep doesn’t last.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:47 PM
And yet you are arguing to never let them hold the piece of paper. They just want the chance to be able to give that “piece of paper” value.
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:47 PM
I’m saying 40+ years ago it was a “fact” by all the science of the day that homosexuality was a mental illness.
I’m saying the Greek’s 2000+ years ago recognized several distinct types of sexual attraction and categorized the homosexual ones as better than the heterosexual ones because you HAD to have the heterosexual ones whereas the homosexual ones were more expressive.
Sure, you’re ingrained to a certain attraction but it’s UNLIKELY you’re going to meet that person… so you learn to love who you’re with.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:48 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Note to the religious Left
You will not be taken seriously by anyone on the opposite side of the debate if you keep throwing up straw men arguments and have a hissy when people ignore your flawed premises.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:50 PM
Some irony in that statement
:d
CWforFreedom on June 1, 2009 at 7:51 PM
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 7:47 PM
Because of kids, I have an issue…otherwise go ahead and have whatever relationship you want.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:51 PM
Skywise,
And it wasn’t all that long ago people thought the world was flat. Now answer the damn question!
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:52 PM
So you want to save traditional marriage to save America from destruction? Campaign to make divorce illegal then or at least harder to obtain. I find it funny that these defenders of marriage never advocate making divorce harder… why is that?
The argument that letting gays marry somehow undermines the institution of marriage is such a load of shite.
Heterosexual marriages aren’t impacted at all by this. Sex with kids remains illegal. Marriage between family members remains prohibited for rational cause (the risk to offspring of such unions).
What is this debate really about?
lexhamfox on June 1, 2009 at 7:53 PM
And that’s 100% purely cultural. Compare what was attractive in the 1800′s to today. Compare another countries’ porn to ours… Sure there are similarities (we’re all of the same species after all) but there’s far more differences.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Conservative Voice
You’re still here? I’m still waiting for you to answer my direct questions!
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:55 PM
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 7:55 PM
still waiting for you to ask non-strawmen questions
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:57 PM
I did. But since you don’t seem to understand the answer let me put it in a simple sound-bite sentence for you: Acceptable sexuality is culturally defined.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 7:57 PM
My guess is most of the politicos (pundits and politicians alike) in D.C. are for gay marriage, they just can’t all say it because the polls aren’t there yet. Let’s face many of the people we elect think they need “reform” our society. Gay marriage is a necessary reform in their eyes but not quite yet in the public’s eyes.
terryannonline on June 1, 2009 at 7:57 PM
lexhamfox on June 1, 2009 at 7:53 PM
really? Search my name throughout this thread.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 7:57 PM
yes it does impact hetero marriage by making marriage meaningless…see the netherlands for an example.
and we’d also like to keep what little freedom of speech and religion is left…which the gay movement is determined to take away.
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 8:00 PM
Any way we can blame this on Bush?
Naw, let’s blame it on Halliburton instead.
Del Dolemonte on June 1, 2009 at 8:00 PM
FIFY. For details, google :Catholic Adoption Services in MA” and “eHarmony lawsuit.”
Though to be fair just switching your address is doing them a kindness. Were I to completely rewrite it I would include references to vandalizing Mormon churches, calling all opposition bigots and homophobes, and indoctrinating elementary school students with explicit sex ed.
BKennedy on June 1, 2009 at 8:00 PM
this is rich, given that the gay movement wants to elminate the freedom to disagree with them…they’re a bunch of nazis, trying to impose a ‘gay sharia’ law in this country.
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 8:02 PM
The ”
Religious Right”…are you stereotyping? How about the the non religious right?..or left for that matter? How about the strident Obama supporters who are against gay marriage?..Hell!,how about Obama himself? He’s against it.
No evasive answers now.
There is no virtue in allowing freedom and liberty for only those who agree with you.
How ironic coming from a nonreligious leftie.
Disclaimer:
(subtle sarcastic and intentional hypocrisy in the single above claim is fully conscious and meant as cheap bait for those not perceptive to realize it and sprain their finger in an attempt to type an angry response)
Itchee Dryback on June 1, 2009 at 8:02 PM
Don’t taunt happy fun ball.
Skywise on June 1, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Skywise,
Here was my question:
Are you stating that there is a consensus on homosexuality being a choice?
Here was your first non-answer answer:
I’m saying 40+ years ago it was a “fact” by all the science of the day that homosexuality was a mental illness.
I’m saying the Greek’s 2000+ years ago recognized several distinct types of sexual attraction and categorized the homosexual ones as better than the heterosexual ones because you HAD to have the heterosexual ones whereas the homosexual ones were more expressive.
Sure, you’re ingrained to a certain attraction but it’s UNLIKELY you’re going to meet that person… so you learn to love who you’re with.
Now, your second non-answer answer:
Acceptable sexuality is culturally defined
Conservative Voice and Skywise please stop. You guys are killing me. I know you guys think you are very intelligent and smooth, but please stop it. Here’s my earlier post that is directed towards people like you:
Note to the religious right:
You will never be taken seriously by anyone on the opposite side of the debate if you can’t answer serious questions about what you believe and why you believe it. Evasive answers, changing the subject or outright refusal to answer the tough questions is a sure fire way to lose a debate and forever undermine your credibility. There is no virtue in allowing freedom and liberty for only those who agree with you.
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 8:10 PM
How does anyone else’s marriage make yours meaningless? Marriages are still meaningful in the Netherlands. They even have a lower divorce rate than we do.
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Itchee Dryback on June 1, 2009 at 8:02 PM
Did I mention anything about homosexual marriage on any of my other posts this evening? I don’t think I did. Words are important. You should pay attention to them before you inject yourself into a debate.
Good Evening Everyone!
I need to go tuck my kids into bed. Followed up shortly by some sex with my wife!
the_stoics on June 1, 2009 at 8:16 PM
I love —not in a gay way—- that old SNL bit.
Thanks for reminding me.
Itchee Dryback on June 1, 2009 at 8:19 PM
Why was Dick Cheney acceptable to social cons in 2000, but they would have revolted if McCain had done the smart thing and picked Tom Ridge for VP?
Speedwagon82 on June 1, 2009 at 8:19 PM
I haven’t sampled porn from various countries, though if someone bothered to edit it all down to ten minutes or less I might take a look.
Yes, the attributes of beauty vary by culture but the most sought after women always seem to be young and fit. Curves usually help, with ample breasts seldom being a negative.
It is a little difficult to go back in time before the 20th century due to the technology of recording devices. However, going around the world to different cultures it usually isn’t a surprise which women within a culture are the most adored.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 8:20 PM
really?
link
and of course we all know what out-of-wedlock births lead to…crime, drug use, gangs, etc..
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Did I say you did?
Uh huh…riiight.
(See above disclaimer.)
Itchee Dryback on June 1, 2009 at 8:25 PM
That often is an issue. Some marriages make it and others don’t. The ones primarily based on sexual attraction will tend to fail for the reason you state above.
Lots of guys will want to bed a hot girl, but maybe not want to bring her home to mom. Most people want a stable relationship with someone they have more in common with than just sex. However, for most people, sexual attraction is an element of a marriage relationship and sex is a medium by which love is communicated. It isn’t the only one, or necessarily the most important one, but it is a quality that tends to differentiate a married relationship from a other relations.
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 8:29 PM
Fewer marriages does not mean they are meaningless. I’d counter that perhaps they are actually more meaningful as only those genuinely wanting to get married are following through. Regardless, attributing this completely to gay marriage is dishonest. It was simply conjecture by the author without any research behind it. It even mentioned a variety of factors, not insignificantly including the increased presence of women in the workplace. That happened here too and had the same effect.
America’s out of wedlock rate are similar to the Netherlands’, are our marriages already meaningless? Our rate has been increasing at a similar rate as in the Netherlands, are you blaming that on future gay marriage legislation?
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 8:35 PM
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 8:21 PM
OK… the author you quote seems to suggest that out of wedlock births are the result of same-sex marriage laws. Yet he points out himself that Sweden was experiencing a high rate of births out of marriage but some sex marriages weren’t approved in Sweden until this year.
I would therefore question the link between same sex marriages (which don’t produce children at all) and the number of out of wedlock births in the Netherlands.
lexhamfox on June 1, 2009 at 8:39 PM
oh so Kurtz is a liar, cause YOU say so…too funny.
and your comment does huh? you really are cluless, and he’s not the only one saying this…but you haven’t researched this very well, OBVIOUSLY…..sigh
link
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM
dedalus on June 1, 2009 at 8:29 PM
This is why sex is so not what marriage is about…the amount of time spent in sex compared to changing the dirty diapers, washing the dishes, doing the laundry, mowing the lawn, bringing in income so the family can eat and wear clothes, having a conversation…is minimal. Love making is more than sex.
Can a gay man not have these things with a woman? Yes. Can he have an orgasm with that same woman? Yes.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 8:43 PM
I’d blame it on a few decades of the mental illness that is liberalism/PoMo relativism, and leftie hate….leading up to what we have to undo now.
Itchee Dryback on June 1, 2009 at 8:44 PM
from the same article
The bottom line is the neither Badgett nor anyone else has been able to get around the fact that marriage in both Scandinavia and the Netherlands is in deep decline. In Scandinavia, that decline began before same-sex registered partnerships were established, but has continued apace ever since. In the Netherlands, marital decline accelerated dramatically, in tandem with the growing campaign for gay marriage.
gay ‘marriage’ makes real marriage meaningless…its a disaster for society…why don’t one of you tell me of the societal benefits of gay marriage?
there aren’t any. this is all about the gays…getting their way and silencing their critics….bunch of brown-shirts.
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 8:52 PM
I didn’t say he lied, but you linked to it as if it was actual evidence that allowing homosexual marriage somehow renders all marriages meaningless. You’re trying to prove something so the evidence is yours to bring to the table. Your best shot was an article that pointed out a variety of researched factors and then at the end simply guessed it was something out of left field. An interesting discussion perhaps, but nothing of substance.
As I stated, America has similar figures (and has had a similar increase) without the gay marriage legislation. Interesting isn’t it?
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 8:53 PM
The Father of Modern Psychiatry, Sigmund Freud, did not consider homosexuality a mental illness.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/freud1.html
SC.Charlie on June 1, 2009 at 8:55 PM
Please, that’s like asking what the societal benefits of desegregation. At its base it’s quite simply fair. But here’s a specific: more stable relationships.
jonknee on June 1, 2009 at 9:00 PM
post your figures, and your sources.
we’ve seen the dissolution of marriage in the black community, and what it does….now tell me the benefits of gay marriage, and how it will strenghten traditional marriage…this should be good…
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 9:00 PM
laughable. again post your sources. the gay ‘marriage’ is no more stable than any other gay relationship.
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 9:01 PM
“This is why sex is so not what marriage is about…the amount of time spent in sex compared to changing the dirty diapers, washing the dishes, doing the laundry, mowing the lawn, bringing in income so the family can eat and wear clothes, having a conversation…is minimal. Love making is more than sex.
Can a gay man not have these things with a woman? Yes. Can he have an orgasm with that same woman? Yes. – Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 8:43 PM”
Therefore, a gay man and lesbian should marry and have children. And, or, a gay man or a lesbian should deceive a heterosexual member of the opposite sex into getting married and having children?
SC.Charlie on June 1, 2009 at 9:02 PM
oh yes and you ‘disproved’ it so well…yes you truly are a legend in your own mind….get a clue, just because you say so doesn’t cut it…
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 9:02 PM
yeah some pigs are more equal than others…and who decides whats ‘fair’?? you??
why isn’t polygamy and polyandry fair?? how about pedophilia? is that ‘fair’ too? and any argument for gay marriage can be used for those other ‘lifestyle choices’ too…
right4life on June 1, 2009 at 9:04 PM
SC.Charlie on June 1, 2009 at 9:02 PM
Therefore don’t define marriage as a sex contract or a love contract.
You could marry the opposite sex, with her knowing full well you find men more attractive. Or you might decide the family thing isn’t your liking at all…and play the field the rest of your days. Or you may decide that you would be better off with no sex…I don’t really care. In the end, its your decision to make.
Conservative Voice on June 1, 2009 at 9:10 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »