# How to decide which instances of opposition to gay marriage are hateful and bigoted. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 6, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653 "2012-08-06T20:14:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 37
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/721 "2012-09-09T06:28:02Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > You didn’t state it explicitly, but you did use the word “tradition,” and that, too, is not intrinsically bigoted. When the portion of the “tradition” in question that is supposedly important is carefully selected to justify persecution a group while other parts of the same tradition that are equally as old and firmly held are rejected, that _does_ make it bigoted however. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/722 "2012-09-09T10:04:24Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Thanks! I heartily disagree with the reasoning, but I did ask to see it. > > In my opinion, it comes uncomfortably close to bigotry, by claiming that a gay couple cannot raise a child as well as a straight couple. I don’t believe that. A given gay couple can no doubt raise a child as well or better than a straight couple. God knows, there are plenty of bad straight parents and wonderful gay parents. Some of whom I can personally vouch for. But I _do_ maintain that the ideal situation is for a child to be raised be a married man and woman. > [@Trinopus](#): > > But, even if I were to grant that it is entirely free of bigotry, I think the facts have, by this time, wholly belied the idea. There have been enough children raised by enough couples for statistical significance, and, as I understand it, no studies have shown any deficiencies in the sexual development of children raised by gay couples, as contrasted with children raised by straight couples. I wasn’t talking about the sexual development of kids being raised by gay couples, but by kids in general. Societal norms help. > [@Trinopus](#): > > As I understand it, a loving family is the ideal situation for child-raising, and that the sexual make-up of the marriage has been shown to be irrelevant. I agree that "loving is the most important component. But the ideal is loving parents consisting of one man and one woman. Children get different things from different sex parents. > [@Trinopus](#): > > You didn’t state it explicitly, but you did use the word “tradition,” and that, too, is not intrinsically bigoted. But this isn’t a complete defense, as, if there are no other arguments that are not bigoted, then simply defending the status quo on the basis of tradition is adhering to a bigoted situation. If that were the only reason, I’d agree. > [@Trinopus](#): > > FWIW, I’ll back off to say that I have not heard any good reasons to ban SSM, and that most of the reasons presented by opponents have been bigoted. And I thank you for a fair and logical discussion. This is where the problem usually happens. People claim to want a not-bigoted rational argument, but when one is presented, they deny it was given. That’s because what they really mean is that they want a reason they think is a good one. This, as you acknowledge, can be two different things. I appreciate you doing so. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/723 "2012-09-09T10:12:46Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Yes, bigoted. No, not bigoted. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Traditional marriage was a pretty much a master/slave arrangement where a man owned a woman in all but name, and where interracial marriages were banned. This has nothing to do with the points I made. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > But let me guess - you are using a custom definition of “traditional” where the only traditions that are so vital to protect _just happen_ to be the ones that persecute homosexuals. Guess again. I’m using a definition that comports with history, tradition, and nature. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Claiming that same sex couples raise children worse is false, and claiming they do despite the facts _is_ bigoted. Didn’t claim that. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Claiming that children need so-called “clear norms to guide sexual development” to avoid them turning out _(shudders)_ homosexual is again false, and bigoted. Didn’t claim that either. As it is now, some kids have a hard time figuring out their sexuality. With clear guardrails, that confusion will just increase. Why would you want to increase the likelihood that kids would have confusion about their sexuality and mistakingly identify themselves as gay when really their touching/playing at a young age was simply normal sexual development? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/724 "2012-09-09T10:26:45Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > But I _do_ maintain that the ideal situation is for a child to be raised be a married man and woman. Even if that was true, so what? That has nothing to do with marriage, and at any rate the number of children raised in an ideal home is zero. Everyone and everything has flaws. > [@magellan01](#): > > I wasn’t talking about the sexual development of kids being raised by gay couples, but by kids in general. Societal norms help. No they don’t; if anything they tend to have no effect beyond traumatizing the kids who don’t fit those narrow norms. > [@magellan01](#): > > This has nothing to do with the points I made. Because you created a fake tradition that left out those details. > [@magellan01](#): > > Guess again. I’m using a definition that comports with history, tradition, and nature. No, you’re using a twisted definition that ignores all three. > [@magellan01](#): > > Didn’t claim that. You did, and still are with your handwaving about “ideal” couples; which is another way of smearing same sex couples as inferior. > [@magellan01](#): > > Didn’t claim that either. As it is now, some kids have a hard time figuring out their sexuality. With clear guardrails, that confusion will just increase. Why would you want to increase the likelihood that kids would have confusion about their sexuality and mistakingly identify themselves as gay when really their touching/playing at a young age was simply normal sexual development? :rolleyes: That’s a ridiculous argument. The promotion of guilt and hatred like you are doing is what causes children with non-conformist sexuality trauma. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/725 "2012-09-09T10:35:59Z")
So tell us, dictionary-defender magellan, what _other_ words (if any) have you ever considered worthy of defense against creeping redefinition, or is “marriage” the first and only? Someone else may have to re-ask this on my behalf, as I suspect magellan is ignoring me. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/726 "2012-09-09T10:47:22Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > So tell us, dictionary-defender magellan, what _other_ words (if any) have you ever considered worthy of defense against creeping redefinition, or is “marriage” the first and only? > > Someone else may have to re-ask this on my behalf, as I suspect magellan is ignoring me. Done. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/727 "2012-09-09T11:59:14Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > the ideal situation is for a child to be raised be a married man and woman. Cite? Otherwise, I maintain that the ideal situation is for a child to be raised by parents of the same race, and I’m no more bigoted than you. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/728 "2012-09-09T12:34:03Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > So tell us, dictionary-defender magellan, what _other_ words (if any) have you ever considered worthy of defense against creeping redefinition, or is “marriage” the first and only? “Racist,” perhaps, is another of the short list of terms that must be defined as narrowly as possible lest we risk a linguistic catastrophe, whereas terms like “socialist” are apparently so elastic they can expand to accommodate any meaning. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/729 "2012-09-09T12:39:11Z")
But if we keep allowing people to re-define words, then all communication may cease! Think of it, civilizations may collapse if we know that Bill in accounting is “married,” but we cannot immediately know that his spouse is a female person! Chaos. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/730 "2012-09-09T12:51:31Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Otherwise, I maintain that the ideal situation is for a child to be raised by parents of the same race, and I’m no more bigoted than you. I hereby postulate that children should only be raised by themselves, since being raised by someone not exactly like themselves is apparently so traumatic. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/731 "2012-09-09T13:47:56Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > I hereby postulate that children should only be raised by themselves, since being raised by someone not exactly like themselves is apparently so traumatic. I may agree. Because nothing is worse for a child than to learn from an early age that there are other people in the world, people who might have different ideas and approaches to life, instead of following the same “traditions.” Studies have shown that tolerance for others is easily gained after a person reaches voting age. [/sarcasm] ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/732 "2012-09-09T13:53:25Z")
This is post 347, for those following at home. > [@magellan01](#): > > One concept that has been fundamental to our society id the notion that a man and woman come together and form a union, and that that union is the ideal place in which to raise children. The word for that has been “marriage”. It works. It’s useful. And until recently, it was crystal clear what the word meant. Now, people want to change the definition to include concepts that the original concept disallows as a possibility. Those of us who think that a concept that has been so intrinsic, so fundamental, to our society deserves to have a word to describe it, find the expansion of the meaning of the word as unhelpful, nonsensical, even dangerous. This isn’t an argument against same-sex marriage, it’s an argument about what to call it. And it’s not a rational or sensible argument, it’s just an appeal to tradition. It seems to come down to a request that gays be kept out of the marriage club - let them get married, just call it something else because mine is _traditional_ and deserves some extra recognition on that basis. For what reason is that necessary, exactly? What happens if we don’t treat heterosexual marriage as the most specialest kind of marriage? As far as I can tell, the answer is nothing - except that people who aren’t too keen on gay marriage will be unhappy. > [@](#): > > That it serves a valuable function, particularly for laying the world out for children. So “marriage = man + woman” can be understood by children, but “marriage = two people who love each other” is far too confusing and complicated? > [@](#): > > But it helps kids to look at the world and see their are guardrails of sorts. Taking that away does not serve them well. I don’t think I get this. Kids sometimes engage in same-sex playing, so if they don’t know that marriage is for heterosexuals, then… what happens? They become confused about gender role because the only way they learn about those is through the concept of traditional marriage even though many children aren’t raised in one? They grow up to become pansexual nymphomaniacs? How does restricting the meaning of marriage do anything for children and what do you think will happen if the meaning changes? > [@magellan01](#): > > Not a bigoted point in it. I don’t agree, and it’s also nonsense. > [@](#): > > take, traditional marriage is the ideal situation in which to raise a child, laying out clear norms to guide sexual development, pick whatever you’d like. None of them bigoted. We’ve already discussed these arguments more than once. I think this is the second time someone has asserted we need to start the whole thread again for their benefit. I posted about these arguments a page or two ago and I’m sure they came up early. Scientific studies have debunked the notion that children raised by a heterosexual family “do better” than kids with same-sex parents. I’ve never seen any evidence supporting the gender roles contention and it’s quite goofy anyway: children live with their parents but they see their extended family, teachers, friends, and a lot of other people and all of them can be involved in shaping gender roles. Even if you do wrongly believe that children of heterosexual couples are better off, that doesn’t require you to oppose gay marriage. You can fall for that incorrect idea and still think that even if a gay family is suboptimal, a stable and loving home is a good thing for a child under any circumstance. If your argument relies on factually incorrect statements, questionable logic and irrelevant assertions to justify the lesser treatment of a group of people, I am comfortable calling that argument bigoted. Particularly since the overall point it’s being used to support is definitely bigoted. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/733 "2012-09-09T14:04:33Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Cite? > > Otherwise, I maintain that the ideal situation is for a child to be raised by parents of the same race, and I’m no more bigoted than you. Sometime in the late 60s and early 70s my sister married a black man. It surprised me to find out which of my in laws were closet racists whom had never had cause to reveal it before. They had two kids, and my sister made the comment that what they did as adults was thier business but it was a shame to bring two kids into the world knowing the hard time they’d have as mixed race children. It occured to me at the time that she was suggestng we cowtow to racism. In order to avoid the pain the kids would suffer at the hands of ignorant racists, the solution was to not have kids, rather than challenge the racists and ignorance, deal with the pain involved, and try to put that crap behind us as people and as a society. It’s the same now. People feel they are imposed upon and harmed in some way because they are being forced to deal with thier own ignorance and bigtry about homosexuals. Remember ORielly saying something like “Well how do we explain that to our kids” How about, “Sometimes men love men romantically and that’s perfectly normal” How about teaching our kids real respect for our fellow humans and diversity, and to judge by character rather than labels and superficial qualities? here’s a great clip of Al Franken taking down a distortion by a group promoting “families” making a claim that children do better in hetero couple families. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/318DYr_K8J4/hqdefault.jpg "Franken Takes Down Anti-Gay Witness For Mischaracterizing Study") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=318DYr_K8J4) It seems clear to me that what children respond to is love and support which helps them feel secure and encourages them to develop. Healthy discipline and responsibility, reasonable boundaries. some guidence and being treated with respect as a unique individual with interests and minds of thier own. It makes sense that growing kids need good role models of both genders, but it often isn’t , and doesn’t have to be, in thier home. Single Moms and Dads raise good kids because of role models in other parts of our lives. A Grandmother, or other relative. A teacher , or neighbor, or someone in the community. The argument seems to be that we have to support the absolute ideal situation. It’s a completely bogus argument. Of course we do support the ideal… and we haven’t stopped supporting it , we don’t encourage it any less, by recognizing that reality is often not ideal and we often make something very positive out of a less than ideal situation. And Hey, maybe one ideal is to promote equality and respect for our fellow citizens in our children. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/734 "2012-09-09T14:42:56Z")
**magellan** provides a pretty great illustrative example for **lance**. Here we’ve got someone who is convinced–CONVINCED–he’s offering a non-bigoted argument against SSM. When pressed, however, he reveals that at the core of his argument is a belief that “the ideal situation is for a child to be raised be a married man and woman” which, however he spins it, means that a same-sex couple is not an ideal child-rearing situation. This is a measure by which he considers same-sex couples to be inferior to opposite-sex couples (again, he denies this, but his denial is directly contradicted by the “ideal situation” quote). Either his opposition is based on facts, or it’s not. If it is, I invite him to present those facts. If it’s not–well, let’s be incredibly generous, and pretend that he’s never been confronted on this belief before, and let’s start the one-week clock for him now. Give him a week to realize that his belief has no factual basis and to revise his worldview. If he does, I’ll be first in line to applaud him. If not–if he obstinately maintains the belief about the inferiority of same-sex marriages in spite of no evidence for this belief–then surely we can agree that his position is bigoted. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/735 "2012-09-09T15:22:12Z")
(Once again putting in my disclaimer that I strongly support SSM and have argued at great length against Magellan’s position, as I find it to be wrong, wrong wrong…) > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Either his opposition is based on facts, or it’s not. If it is, I invite him to present those facts. I think you’re oversimplifying things a bit. Is “children raised by gay couples turn out just as well as children raised by straight couples” such a clearly and firmly established fact, verified by so many different studies in so many different situations, over such time and with such historical significance, that to disagree with it can only be the result of willful ignorance? How many studies have there actually been on this topic? And it’s a VERY complicated topic, in that there are around a billion other factors to correct for, plus it’s very hard to assess the long term impact until the children have grown up to be adults. Plus you need lots and lots of data, and the number of SSM couples raising children wasn’t huge until recently, etc. All of which is to say that it would not at all surprise me if an objective expert, asked whether that statement was true, would say that the most accurate answer possible is that we don’t yet have enough data. Which leads to a second question, which is whether believing that a straight couple is the ideal situation for raising children is, in and of itself, bigoted. And I’d argue that it isn’t… or at least, that it’s possible for it not to be. After all, men and women are clearly different, and not just physically. So even if you value men and women equally, and value straight people and gay people equally, it’s not preposterous to believe that the ideal child-rearing situation is to expose the child to both male traits AND female traits from loving parents. Now, I’m not saying that’s actually TRUE, I just don’t think it’s prima facie ridiculous, and I think it’s possible to believe it without being bigoted (although I’m sure the vast majority of people who do believe that gay parents are inferior ARE bigoted). (Slightly tangentially, my disagreement with Magellan’s position is several-fold: (1) even if the absolutely perfectly ideal situation for raising children is a straight couple, so that on a scale of 0 to 100, the absolutely perfect straight couple could raise children with a quality of 100 but the best gay couple could only get up to 96, that’s utterly inconsequential when compared to the indisputable fact that almost no one gets anywhere near that mythical 100 anyhow… so many straight couples are abusive or ignorant or unable to provide health care or unable to provide education or whatever, and thus ranging from 0 to 80 on that scale, that a tiny theoretical difference in maximum attainable perfection (even if it exists, and I don’t see any evidence that it does) is no reason to deny people fundamental human rights. (2) his concern about the redefinition of marriage is silly… but he also has it exactly backwards. If he wants children to grow up valuing the word and the concept and the tradition of “marriage”, then when uncle Jeff and uncle Dave love each other and live together and provide an example to the young kids of what a stable and loving relationship should be, they SHOULD be able to be legally married. Seeing married gay couples isn’t going to turn straight kids gay. But seeing happy loving committed gay couples who can NOT get married WILL cause kids to question the meaning and necessity of marriage in the first place.) ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/736 "2012-09-09T17:49:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Didn’t claim that either. As it is now, some kids have a hard time figuring out their sexuality. With clear guardrails, that confusion will just increase. Why would you want to increase the likelihood that kids would have confusion about their sexuality and mistakingly identify themselves as gay when really their touching/playing at a young age was simply normal sexual development? Why do you think this is something that needs to be prevented? So Tommy and Timmy play doctor with each other at twelve, and Tommy spends the next four years thinking that means he’s gay. So what? And how does segregated marriage make that not happen? You keep insisting that your solution to the SSM debate is completely equitable to both gays and straights, and that nothing in your solution insists or implies on gay couples being in any way deficient compared to straight couples. If your characterization of your position is correct, how is a kid supposed to know that a heterosexual marriage is the model he’s supposed to follow, and not a homosexual civil union? Anyway, your insistence here that gay couples are less than ideal parents, and your belief (stated elsewhere) that gay relationships are less fulfilling for their participants because it’s not “what nature intended” are both inherently bigoted positions. As I’ve said before, it’s an exceedingly minor level of bigotry, and I wouldn’t characterize it as “hateful” by any stretch, but your stance on SSM clearly stems directly from a misplaced assumption that gay relationships simply aren’t as good as straight ones. ---
**Author:** ![Questioning\_Zion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/58956e/32.png) [@Questioning\_Zion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Questioning_Zion)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/737 "2012-09-09T18:15:21Z")
Well, there’s something to be said about how children learn from the traditional role models of a “mother” and a “father”. But before hetero marriage can claim any moral high ground, it needs to clean a lot of house. As far as opposing same-sex marriage, the homo community needs a significant amount of house-cleaning. One would be to distance themselves from the outlandish practices of “Pride” parades. Two semi-nude men, one walking the other on a dog leash in a pair of asslesss chaps don’t convey to me that they want to be able to list one another as next-of-kin, let alone that small children should be left in their care. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/738 "2012-09-09T18:24:53Z")
> [@Questioning\_Zion](#): > > Two semi-nude men, one walking the other on a dog leash in a pair of asslesss chaps don’t convey to me that they want to be able to list one another as next-of-kin, let alone that small children should be left in their care. Yes, because there are no straight couples who share a leather/dominance fetish. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/739 "2012-09-09T18:25:38Z")
> [@Questioning\_Zion](#): > > Well, there’s something to be said about how children learn from the traditional role models of a “mother” and a “father”. > > But before hetero marriage can claim any moral high ground, it needs to clean a lot of house. > > As far as opposing same-sex marriage, the homo community needs a significant amount of house-cleaning. > > One would be to distance themselves from the outlandish practices of “Pride” parades. > > Two semi-nude men, one walking the other on a dog leash in a pair of asslesss chaps don’t convey to me that they want to be able to list one another as next-of-kin, let alone that small children should be left in their care. I have neighbors that are hetro, the wife walks the husband on a leash every day. I live next to a church that openly states that women should be subservient and the pastor has stated that women who take out student loans are actively stealing from their future husbands. All of these are non-sequitur arguments as were your claims. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653/740 "2012-09-09T19:20:20Z")
> [@Questioning\_Zion](#): > > Well, there’s something to be said about how children learn from the traditional role models of a “mother” and a “father”. Is there? Then say it, please. > [@](#): > > One would be to distance themselves from the outlandish practices of “Pride” parades. > > Two semi-nude men, one walking the other on a dog leash in a pair of asslesss chaps don’t convey to me that they want to be able to list one another as next-of-kin, let alone that small children should be left in their care. …and why would I care what it conveys to you? Because a dude at a spring break party sloshing beer everywhere and leering at a chick in a wet t-shirt doesn’t convey to me that they want to be able to list one another as next-of-kin, let alone that small children should be left in their care. How much housecleaning vis a vis frat parties, spring break parties, etc. do straight people need to do? I say zero, because that’s really stupid.What do you say? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653.md?page=36) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-to-decide-which-instances-of-opposition-to-gay-marriage-are-hateful-and-bigoted/630653.md?page=38)