an adorable little girl hopping all over the place and one of the ladies pregnant with another one. And they’re all talking about how marraige would help them out. How come they haven’t made gay marriage ads like that? Something like that sounds like it might work, 'specially since people don’t hate lesbians as much. Oh, and they can’t be beautiful, just average, because men might get jealous.
It’s in the works. I don’t know if the specific images you’re suggesting will be used but the campaign is set to go. For some reason the HRC site with better information is non-responsive else I would link directly to the source which leaves out the stupid shit from the stupid rabid right wingnuts, excuse me, I mean defenders of the faith.
Interesting you should mention it. There was, not an ad, but an article in our local paper today featuring a modestly attractive lesbian couple with their adorable baby girl. Aside from the recent ruling, they were also significant because they had both been ruled to be natural parents of the baby. One had her fertilized egg implanted in the other, who did the actual pregnancy and birth part–and apparently they were both ruled to be parents by the court. Anyway, there they were in their lovely suburban home, playing with their baby. One was a stay-at-home mom and the other was a working mom.
In the article there was, of course, the obligatory spew from some conservative type about how people like this were “blowing apart” the foundations of the family, etc. It looked pretty ridiculous in context.
That would have been me.
Crafter_Man, I don’t want to jump on you, but how, exactly are people like this blowing apart the foundations of the family?
Yeah, I’d really like to hear how two people raising a child together in a committed relationship can adversely affect your family in any way. While you’re at it, explain to the the millions of other people in “nontraditional” families–divorced, widowed, adopted, extended, etc.-- exactly how they are harming you and why they shouldn’t have a right to exist either.
Really, I think any person who speaks out against gay marriage as a threat to traditional marriage but doesn’t speak out against every reality marriage show on Fox is a complete lunatic. Talk about making a mockery of the institution of marriage…
trying to gently tug thread back on track
It’s not exactly warm n’ fuzzy, but there’s a major storage center in Chelsea, NYC that has ads in the subway. They show people standing on the street smiling with the smugness of people whose apartments are clean and lives therefore ordered. One of them has a fortyish guy in scrub greens with a stethoscope and lists the things he’s storing in his handy-dandy cube. One of them is “boyfriend’s artwork”. It doesn’t jump out at you until you read it a couple of times, which is nice. It just presents gay domesticity as ordinary and NONpolitical, just trying to say that whoever you are, you KNOW you need more space to store stuff, you slob, and if that includes gay slobs (shlomosexuals, the NY Observer calls them) they’ll be happy to get their money too.
Because it is my opinion that a marriage is defined as the union between a man and a woman.
Sorry if my opinion upsets you.
Doesn’t upset me, so much as confuses me. I assume you’re married, correct? And I also assume you’re married to a woman.
If not, no biggie, then I assume you aspire to be married to a woman.
How does two homosexuals being married alter your definition of marriage? I mean, you’re not going to marry either of them, right?
If I, a straight man, choose to be in a long-term relationship with a woman, but not get married, how does what I do have any bearing on what you do? Ditto for homosexuals. Do you honestly believe that their marriage cheapens your union?
Your opinion doesn’t upset me. Why should it?
The urge to force other people to run their lives according to your opinion upsets me.
You are all going to hate my opinion, but I am going to post it anyway.
Men and women are fundamentally different. Not just physically, but psychologically and relationally. They bring totally different aspects to the parenting of a child, and I believe that both of them are very important. The healthiest people, and I’m talking emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually, are people who were brought up in homes that had both a mother and a father active in their lives. Definitely there are exceptions, but generally it is true that your chances of being a well-adjusted person go dramatically up if you have both a mother and a father involved in your upbringing.
Men without fathers, or lousy fathers, have trouble becoming good fathers and good husbands. Women without fathers, or lousy fathers, often seek love desperately from any man they come across, regardless of how he treats her. Not having a mother is equally damaging to a person’s development.
Thus, I believe that allowing homosexual couples to raise children is shortchanging the children’s futures. You are giving them less of a chance of success in this world and creating less stability in the families of tomorrow because when these kids grow up they won’t have a good model of a mother-father relationship.
I know most of you will disagree with me, but I just wanted to let you know how the rest of the world thinks, when they aren’t resorting to tired rhetoric.
How am I forcing people to run their lives according to my opinions? I am not a proponent of passing a law forbidding the union/marriage/cohabitation/whatever of homosexuals. In fact, I don’t think the government should have any say in the institution of marriage; it is none of the government’s business. My argument is strictly rooted moralism, not legalism.
dil: I agree 100%. Of course, now you’ll have to put up with the mindless “You’re ignorant!” accusations.
No problem, then. I was talking about people who are campaigning to get their version of moralism signed into laws with very real effects on the lives of people and their children. The original quote I mentioned was from a person in one of those lobbying groups with “Family” in their name–a word that is starting to give me the creeps, at least when it’s in the title of an organization.
Cite? Because this has been researched and found to be a fallacy.
Again, cite? This is like blaming homosexuality on the parents.
Wow, you’re just full of interesting opinions. It’s a shame the research I’ve seen doesn’t support them at all.
Esprix
The rest of the world hey, that’s a big call!
Esprix has questioned your research sources on most of your post, saving me the trouble, but how do you explain that one ‘Bubble-girl’?
Moving this to Great Debates.
And I, too, wouldn’t mind seeing some cites.
Here’s something that really needs no cite…
If a heterosexual, man and woman couple can produce and raise children who become (or as some people seem to believe, are born) gay, who and what is to say a homosexual couple who decides to raise children will have them turn out homosexuals or heterosexuals?
I haven’t made up my mind on this one, but in the interest of fairness, your cites?