Pope: Future of mankind is at stake over gay marriage

The “future of mankind”? Quite the flair for the dramatic there. Oh well, what’s Christmas without a little hyperbolic rhetoric?

alchemist19 on December 21, 2012 at 9:12 PM

We need children to carry on, so I would say that anything that doesn’t support and promote child-bearing in a traditional strong family is pretty worthless to mankind. That includes gay marriage among a number of other things.

Connie on December 21, 2012 at 9:16 PM

If we have gay marriage we won’t have children anymore? Ooooooookay. Are you suggesting that if we legalize gay marriage that otherwise content heterosexual people who would be in happy and stable in heterosexual marriages will be so intrigued by the prospect of getting gay married that they will go that route and thus not give rise to the children that would otherwise have been born?

alchemist19 on December 21, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Look at the birth rates of Western Civilization as we’ve continued to degrade marriage and its importance then get back to me.

njrob on December 21, 2012 at 10:23 PM

LOL!

Where to begin?…..

A lower birth rate isn’t a bad thing unless you’ve foolishly given yourself things like Social Security and Medicare to pay for but that’s a separate issue. Apart from that, infant mortality is way way down in the developed world, there’s less of a need for a lot of people to do work that technology lets us accomplish more efficiently than we did in the past, raising children is an increasingly expensive proposition, we’re not pouring young men into the meat grinder of mass warfare all that much anymore, we haven’t had a good ol’ fashioned plague wipe out a third of the population in ages… all told since we’re stubbornly refusing to die as fast as we used to we don’t need as many replacement people quite so quickly so the birth rate *should* be declining in the developed world.

Does the prospect of gay people getting married bother you so much you’re not going to have children you otherwise would?

alchemist19 on December 21, 2012 at 11:30 PM

When we are dealing with an invasion from the south as well as continued aggression from the middle east, birth rates are critical to destiny. Europe is well on its way to destruction thanks to its demographic changes because of low birth rates.

As for gay “marriage” it does not exist. I’ll allow Abraham Lincoln to speak for me in this instance, “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.”

njrob on December 22, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Invasion from the south…. Europe well on its way to destruction….. I know which Youtube videos you like to watch! The “invasion” to use your rather xenophobic parlance isn’t all that big a deal. People with lower living standards the world over have higher birth rates. As these invaders you’re afraid of come here and acculturate in a couple generations they climb the socioeconomic ladder, their living standard rises and eventually their birth rate drops off the same as everyone else’s. The Irish didn’t breed America out of existence, the Germans didn’t, the Italians didn’t and so as a student of history I can say with a measure of confidence that we’re going to be okay. That is of course unless your real issue is that you, how to say this?, prefer to drink your milk straight from the bottle and not letting anything get in that might darken it up a little.

The principle migration into Western Europe right now is Christians from Eastern Europe. You knew that, right?

Okay, enough of getting sidetracked.

Marriage is an arbitrarily defined term for something we’ve just made up, and I find your using Lincoln to defend your point to be particularly interesting. Lincoln himself helped redefine what was covered by the word “property” just a little bit back in his day when people were being ignorant bigots on that matter as well. Gives me hope for the future.

alchemist19 on December 22, 2012 at 2:05 AM

Yes invasion. What do you call 10 to 20 million people coming into the nation unchecked and with no desire to assimilate. Mexico printed brochures called “Guia del Migrante Mexicano” that told Mexicans how to sneak into the country and what they needed to survive. Try and keep up. This should be considered an act of war.

The difference between historical immigration and current, beyond its illegality, is that the people who came here wanted to assimilate and were encouraged to do so. Now, we’ve so warped our sense of identity that we encourage foreigners to keep their own identity and culture instead of becoming American.

You know the thoughts of 10 to 20 million people? You know they’re all here for whatever purpose you’re assigning them and not to try to make a better life for themselves and their children. I hope that’s not what you’re saying because if it is that would make you sound a lot like a stereotypical xenophobe.

As for Europe, take a glance at the bonfires that happen consistently in Paris and other major cities when immigrants turn cars into kindling. Look at the way that London allows criminals to openly discuss overthrowing the government and turning it into an islamic state. It’s reality no matter how much you desire to be an ostrich.

There’s a stronger criminal element in the underclass, including immigrant groups?! STOP THE PRESSES! Seriously, crack a history book sometime and you’ll stop being shocked and alarmed by a good many things. Dr. Sowell himself has documented the etymology of the term “paddy wagon” as arising from the fact large police vans were always full of Irish immigrants. Nothing new. As to the overthrow of the government, let them talk. It’s a free country and they have the right to be morons, and there are lunatics within every population. They don’t have the power to execute their plans, they more than likely never will and the best way to disempower them and their intellectual successors would be to bring the tiny Muslim immigrant population into the mainstream rather than marginalize them. We’ve already seen that given time Muslim immigrants will acculturate the same as everyone else; back in the middle of the last century there was a large influx of Turks into Germany because the Germans at that time had a lot of construction projects to do at the same time there was a shortage of healthy young men to do them so they imported the labor and now the most seditious thing those Turks so is vote for the Green Party.

Lastly, by your logic all terms are arbitrarily defined. So there’s no such thing as truth. But anyone with the ability to use logic knows that’s a falsehood. Marriage has always been between man and a woman. It has been about creating a family and protecting the young. That you don’t understand that shows us that you are incapable of using even the barest minimum of logic to understand the world as it is. You’ve shown your stripes.

njrob on December 22, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Marriage has been about many things. It’s been about the coalition of wealth and power, it’s been about convenience, heck my grandparents’ marriage about my orphan grandmother being pawned off by her older brother who was not able to take care of her. But let’s set history aside because we’ve already proven it’s not your strongest subject. Will there be fewer families created or young people less protected by their parents if gay people are allowed to get married?

alchemist19 on December 22, 2012 at 3:01 PM