Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

Mar 1, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Skanner

With Maryland poised to legalize gay marriage, some conservative opponents and religious leaders are counting on members of their congregations, especially in black churches, to upend the legislation at the polls this fall.

Comments
7,961 - 7,980 of 9,656 Comments Last updated Nov 19, 2013
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8506
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, Jane. Reality has been jumping up and biting you for over a decade, and you still can't figure out what it looks like. It will eat you alive if you don't figure out how to deal with it.
You are the one saying kids shouldn't have a mom...talk about no reality...
every kid should have a mom...
did you have one?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8507
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one saying kids shouldn't have a mom...talk about no reality...
every kid should have a mom...
did you have one?
Does every kid have a mom? If there is no possibility of having a mom, should they be denied two dads?

Talk about ignoring reality.... You live in a complete fantasy world set up only to support your own preferences.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8508
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Does every kid have a mom? If there is no possibility of having a mom, should they be denied two dads?
Talk about ignoring reality.... You live in a complete fantasy world set up only to support your own preferences.
right, rather than answer my question, you answer a different question...

its just like when anyone tries to compare gays and straights, you automatically make the straights druggie abusers and the gays well educated super-parents...

Okay, but ALL OTHER THINGS equal, two gay men and a straight couple, same jobs, abilities, money, everything the same, who should the child go with?

right, in this scenario, the child should have a mom...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8510
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
right, rather than answer my question, you answer a different question...
its just like when anyone tries to compare gays and straights, you automatically make the straights druggie abusers and the gays well educated super-parents...
Okay, but ALL OTHER THINGS equal, two gay men and a straight couple, same jobs, abilities, money, everything the same, who should the child go with?
right, in this scenario, the child should have a mom...
Why? Why does your opinion count any more than psychological studies?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8511
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Saudi Arabian wrote:
<quoted text>
nothing can ever compare to a loving heterosexual parents. NOTHING!!! they are superior to single parents and single parents are superior to gay "parents". gay "parents" can be compared to those from corrupt families like abusive alcoholic etc. why? homosexuals are in it for SHOW & ACCEPTANCE. the children will always be an outcast and will suffer mentally. if they adopt an orphan it will suffer twice for it already had suffered once, if they adopt an infant its mental suffering comes later, if it from a surrogate it will also suffer the same fate.
homosexuals are immoral deviant creatures and need to be burnt alive.
See, Jane: This is where prejudice leads. This is exactly why we all need to constantly re-open our minds and examine the justifications for our preferences. If we allow preferences to control our thinking, we eventually go from unsupportable assertions such as "A child is always better off with a mother and a father" to outright hatred of our fellow humans.

Your irrational desire to separate gays from the rest of society will never lead to good. And there is a very real danger that it will lead to evil, such as this poster proposes.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8512
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Why does your opinion count any more than psychological studies?
since you admit there are no studies directly on point, why do you think any of those studies speaks to the issue?

and of course, you will point this out when discussing the studies offered that disprove your assertions.

Face it, your studies of self selected samples of self reporting gay parents is junk.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8513
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Why does your opinion count any more than psychological studies?
and instead of answering the question (again) you try to respond with a question...

I know why...
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8514
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
See, Jane: This is where prejudice leads. This is exactly why we all need to constantly re-open our minds and examine the justifications for our preferences. If we allow preferences to control our thinking, we eventually go from unsupportable assertions such as "A child is always better off with a mother and a father" to outright hatred of our fellow humans.
Your irrational desire to separate gays from the rest of society will never lead to good. And there is a very real danger that it will lead to evil, such as this poster proposes.
now you are the one making the slippery slope argument..
we need to ignore that children are better served having both a mom and dad so people don't say all gay parents are bad?

not buying it!

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8515
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>It's true that due process is a right shared by all citizens, but that doesn't create any gender equality right. Our Constitution explicitly says male and female are different, not equal. The ERA failed, because the states don't want same sex marriage.
It does which is why ERA failed. ERA is unnecessary. All citizens have equal protection and due process. Only a nut would say otherwise.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8516
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
since you admit there are no studies directly on point, why do you think any of those studies speaks to the issue?
There are various on-point studies. They simply aren't large enough to draw definitive conclusions. But so far, not one has supported your assertions. Indeed, quite the opposite.
and of course, you will point this out when discussing the studies offered that disprove your assertions.
Face it, your studies of self selected samples of self reporting gay parents is junk.
No, the junk science comes from the anti-gay. This has been well-established. But even the preponderance of anecdotal evidence suggests that you are an old crank unwilling to evaluate new information objectively.

Frankly, you disappoint me. I always thought that jurists were better trained in evaluating evidence and logical argument. I am not surprised when a lawyer uses psychological and rhetorical tricks to achieve his goals. I am disapoointed when they are so enveloped in their own alternative reality that they don't even realize they're doing it.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8517
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
now you are the one making the slippery slope argument..
we need to ignore that children are better served having both a mom and dad so people don't say all gay parents are bad?
not buying it!
The problem is that you cannot prove the assertion that, even when all things are equal, a child is better off with a mother and father. Your repeated assertions will never make that true. You have to provide evidence, which you have never even attempted (because you know it doesn't exist).

Moreover, every family is an individual, not an average. And there is no question that many same-sex parents provide better environments for raising children than many opposite-sex parents provide.

And that is where the slippery slope comes in: When you first allow yourself to believe the "others" are not as good as you at--oh say parenting--it doesn't take long to start believing that they are not as good at other things. This may not happen to you specifically. But I have no doubt there are other areas of human interraction where you irrationally discount the abilities of gays or some other group.

But your willingness to set gays and lesbians apart as different and less-deserving than others gives permission to others to take that a little further. And the next thing you know, somebodyh is quoting Leviticus claiming that good Christians must demand the extermination of all gays.

If you are not fighting prejudice, you are enabling it. That where your attitude leads.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8518
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
There are various on-point studies. They simply aren't large enough to draw definitive conclusions.
Yet you ask me why my opinion outweighs the studies you tout... yet admit are not to be relied on, as you rely on them?

Yah, I see this BS all the time...
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8519
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
There are various on-point studies.
sorry for the second post, but which studies compares married gays to married heteros's?

NONE?

so what's "on point"?

You have inconclusive studies that do not even purport to claim what you would have these studies say...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8520
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you ask me why my opinion outweighs the studies you tout... yet admit are not to be relied on, as you rely on them?
Yah, I see this BS all the time...
Sorry, Jane. The preponderance of the evidence is against you. You know that. Yet you keep making the same unsupportable assertions.

Yep. Same BS all the time.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8521
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The preponderance of the evidence is against you.
2 posts ago, you admitted the studies were inconclusive...

this post, the evidence weighs against me?

just name the study that studies gay married couples and compares them to straights married couples

Wait, there isn't one?
curious....

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8522
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
sorry for the second post, but which studies compares married gays to married heteros's?
NONE?
so what's "on point"?
You have inconclusive studies that do not even purport to claim what you would have these studies say...
You mean you've been repeating and repeating and repeating your assertions while never reading anything that was posted for your benefit? You mean you never bothered to read any literature on the subject before you bored us with your unsupportable assertions? Hmmm. Not surprised I guess.

Now surprise me. Actually read these articles that you could have easily enough found on your own.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j....
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/dev/44/1/127/
http://muse.jhu.edu/login...

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15...

Level 7

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8523
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
They don't have to, they are saying why its worth it to encourage one and not the other...
why its worth society to offer the benefits...
its not that we think you will hurt us, its explaining why we have less of an interest in you...
If you are going to deny a fundamental right, you must be able to demonstrate a legitimate governmental interest sufficient to justify harming those denied. Encouraging one group does not justify harming another. Your lack of interest in legal equality is not a sufficient governmental interest.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8524
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
2 posts ago, you admitted the studies were inconclusive...
this post, the evidence weighs against me?
just name the study that studies gay married couples and compares them to straights married couples
Wait, there isn't one?
curious....
You, of course, know the difference between scientifically conslusive results and the preponderance of the evidence. And you also know that all of it is against you.

Now stop playing cheap rhetorical tricks. You are not litigating in front of a gullible jury who isn't provided the resources to verify your assertions. Your evasions, twists, and turns do not become you.

Level 7

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8525
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't write 'SOLELY', that's F.F.'s word, not mine. Even where same sex marriage is legal, male/female marriage is still recognized.
No written same sex marriage law existed before the 21st Century. Same sex marriage is fin de siecle folly.
Whether encoded in law or not, your desire to ignore the fact same sex couples have been forming relationships throughout history requires denial of reality.

"At times throughout history, same-sex relationships have enjoyed relative freedom within their respective places.

Evidence exists that same-sex marriages were tolerated in parts of Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt. Artifacts from Egypt, for example, show that same-sex relationships not only existed, but the discovery of a pharaonic tomb for such a couple shows their union was recognized by the kingdom. Meanwhile, accounts of the Israelites' departure for Canaan include their condemnation of Egyptian acceptance of same-sex practice. In actuality, same-sex marital practices and rituals are less known in Egypt compared to Mesopotamia, where documents exist for a variety of marital practices, including male lovers of kings and polyandry. None of the recorded laws of Mesopotamia, including the Code of Hammurabi, contain restrictions against same-sex unions despite the fact that marriages are otherwise well regulated. "
http://www.randomhistory.com/history-of-gay-m...

And again you provide us with an example of your insulting prejudice when you judge; "Same sex marriage is fin de siecle folly." This is your demeaning, insulting judgement, not a statement of fact.

And yet again, you continue to ignore the gender disparity recognized in the 14th amendment was corrected by the 19th amendment, again affirming that the constitution requires "all persons" must be treated equally under the law.

Level 7

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8526
Dec 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
now you are the one making the slippery slope argument..
we need to ignore that children are better served having both a mom and dad so people don't say all gay parents are bad?
not buying it!
Your argument relies on the false assumption children are always better served by having a mom and a dad. Yet even this false assumption fails to show how harming those families that don't have a mom and dad will help those who do, or prevent gay couples from raising children. It only harms same sex parent families while providing no benefit to straight parent families.

And again, your assumption is not true. The law realizes not all straight parents are or will be good parents, yet marriage remains a fundamental right even for parents who have been shown to be abusive. We also know gay couples do not have accidental, unwanted children, as too often is the case with straight parents. We don't make laws based to accommodate only what you can imagine is the ideal. Our constitution requires we make laws that treat everyone equally.

And again over 30 years of research including studies on straight parents alone, show it is the relationship between the parent and child that is important, not the gender of the parent.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

426 Users are viewing the African-American Forum right now

Search the African-American Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Another BM with a HOT WW Wife__----------- 5 min Paris R 402
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min Flacks News 1,082,529
About foreign born blacks. ---------- 6 min Aussie Bob 653
Random thoughts... (Sep '07) 6 min AgentSmith9 78,551
ir ww who lose weight and ditch their bm..an in... 9 min World Cup Winner 3
are indians black? (Nov '13) 9 min YOURindianBRO 145
I LOVE you anyway Goddess Rihanna!!! 11 min JamaicanBarbie 31
Why do blacks claim to be the true Israelites? ... (May '11) 21 min Ben YISRAEL 2,492
I Love White Police Officers!!!!!!!! 1 hr Gargantos 85
•••
•••