Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-S...

Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

There are 52086 comments on the CBS2 story from Nov 30, 2010, titled Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions. In it, CBS2 reports that:

The Illinois House has approved a measure to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS2.

“Free to buy cake”

Since: Jul 07

wherever I like.

#35461 Sep 7, 2012
Brenda Lee Johnson wrote:
As I said in a different post: Jack Schitt.
Brenda, have you been fisting again? Loose lips sink ships, gurlfriend.

“Free to buy cake”

Since: Jul 07

wherever I like.

#35462 Sep 7, 2012
Rufis wrote:
Homosexuals are a plague to this already messed up society.....I think they should all be burned at the stake, or hung by a noose for all to see......homosexuals make the good Lord Jesus Christ frown and Satans smile.
Pretty presumptuous of you, Ruffy, to speak on the Lord's behalf. How do you know he isn't shedding a tear over your disgraceful and hateful intolerance of others? Jesus did hang with thieves, leppers, and ho's, you know. I'm willing to bet one of the apostles was a tad light in his Birkenstocks.
Cool Hand Luke

Scranton, PA

#35465 Sep 9, 2012
It does not say shut up and accept deviance, it doesn't say be quite and let homosexuals destroy Christianity.
Marengo Jon wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty presumptuous of you, Ruffy, to speak on the Lord's behalf. How do you know he isn't shedding a tear over your disgraceful and hateful intolerance of others? Jesus did hang with thieves, leppers, and ho's, you know. I'm willing to bet one of the apostles was a tad light in his Birkenstocks.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#35466 Sep 9, 2012
Cool Hand Luke wrote:
It does not say shut up and accept deviance, it doesn't say be quite and let homosexuals destroy Christianity.
<quoted text>
Christianity must be pretty lame if a small minority such has homosexuals have the power to destroy it...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#35467 Sep 9, 2012
"One would therefore expect greater parental responsiveness towards one's own offspring than towards unrelated children, and this will result in more positive outcomes and fewer negative outcomes towards one's own children than towards other children in which one is expected to invest (i.e. stepchildren). "If child abuse is a behavioral response influenced by natural selection, then it is more likely to occur when there are reduced inclusive fitness payoffs owing to uncertain or low relatedness."[16] Owing to these adaptations from natural selection, child abuse is more likely to be committed by stepparents than genetic parents both are expected to invest heavily in the children, but genetic parents will have greater child-specific parental love that promotes positive caretaking and inhibits maltreatment."

Why would step parent situations be different in a gay union?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#35468 Sep 9, 2012
Cinderella effect data is based on step parent and even mom's casual boyfriend data, not same sex families or adoptive straight families. These families are very different. The data does not hold up for adoptive parents.

You are attempting to compare families that have experienced divorce and re blending to families where the relationship of the parents has remained intact for the life of the child. Intact marriages are not the same as families of divorce and remarriage.

Adoption is not the same as a step child relationship:

"Although remarriage of a father or mother can have bad consequences for children, when a couple adopts a baby unrelated to either of them its prospects are much brighter... parents treat their adopted children just as well as biological children."

"Two recent studies help to clarify the issue of how well adoptive children are treated. The first, published in 2007, found that children in adoptive households are treated better than children in homes with two genetic parents."

Whatever the reasons for the Cinderella effect, it is now quite clear that it is not triggered by a lack of genetic relationship. After all, adoptive parents take better care of children than birth parents do. It seems that caring for children, related or not, involves a deep human need that is better satisfied by adoption than step-parenting." http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#35469 Sep 9, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
Cinderella effect data is based on step parent and even mom's casual boyfriend data, not same sex families or adoptive straight families. These families are very different. The data does not hold up for adoptive parents.
You are attempting to compare families that have experienced divorce and re blending to families where the relationship of the parents has remained intact for the life of the child. Intact marriages are not the same as families of divorce and remarriage.
Adoption is not the same as a step child relationship:
"Although remarriage of a father or mother can have bad consequences for children, when a couple adopts a baby unrelated to either of them its prospects are much brighter... parents treat their adopted children just as well as biological children."
"Two recent studies help to clarify the issue of how well adoptive children are treated. The first, published in 2007, found that children in adoptive households are treated better than children in homes with two genetic parents."
Whatever the reasons for the Cinderella effect, it is now quite clear that it is not triggered by a lack of genetic relationship. After all, adoptive parents take better care of children than birth parents do. It seems that caring for children, related or not, involves a deep human need that is better satisfied by adoption than step-parenting." http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human...
Nice gay twirl. Sorry, but I've addressed this before and was waiting for your slither.

1. The principle is that a biological parent has more care and interest in a child than a none biological substitute. A gay couple ALWAYS involves at least one none biological substitute.

2. Look at the specifics of adoptive family studies. Do you know what they mean when they say adoptive parents take better care? Children in adoptive homes have much more severe problems than children in biological homes. Adoptive parents are FORCED to spend more time and care dealing with the problems. In spite of that extra attention, children in adoptive homes fare far worse than children in normal homes.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#35470 Sep 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice gay twirl. Sorry, but I've addressed this before and was waiting for your slither.
1. The principle is that a biological parent has more care and interest in a child than a none biological substitute. A gay couple ALWAYS involves at least one none biological substitute.
2. Look at the specifics of adoptive family studies. Do you know what they mean when they say adoptive parents take better care? Children in adoptive homes have much more severe problems than children in biological homes. Adoptive parents are FORCED to spend more time and care dealing with the problems. In spite of that extra attention, children in adoptive homes fare far worse than children in normal homes.
And as usual, your response relies on demeaning, dehumanizing, pejorative terminology and insults while failing to provide any scientific justification or legitimate governmental interest sufficient to deny equal treatment under the law as required by the constitution.

You still confuse step parents who may resent the child they had no interest in having, with adoptive parents who are motivated to be good parents. Adoptive parents are always motivated to be a parent, while many biological parents and step parents are not so motivated. Again, the science shows adopted children are treated better than biological children.

While true some adopted children have more problems when adopted after being abused and discarded by their straight parents, children adopted at birth or as infants don't have those same challenges.

But regardless, we don't deny equal rights to straight families based on whether the child is adopted by one or both parents, or even how likely they are to be decent parents. We don't even deny equal marriage rights to convicted child abusers, rapists, and others even while serving time in prison for their crimes against spouses and children.

Again, you provide no valid excuse for harming gay couples and their children through denial of equal treatment under the law.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#35472 Sep 9, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
And as usual, your response relies on demeaning, dehumanizing, pejorative terminology and insults while failing to provide any scientific justification or legitimate governmental interest sufficient to deny equal treatment under the law as required by the constitution.
You still confuse step parents who may resent the child they had no interest in having, with adoptive parents who are motivated to be good parents. Adoptive parents are always motivated to be a parent, while many biological parents and step parents are not so motivated. Again, the science shows adopted children are treated better than biological children.
While true some adopted children have more problems when adopted after being abused and discarded by their straight parents, children adopted at birth or as infants don't have those same challenges.
But regardless, we don't deny equal rights to straight families based on whether the child is adopted by one or both parents, or even how likely they are to be decent parents. We don't even deny equal marriage rights to convicted child abusers, rapists, and others even while serving time in prison for their crimes against spouses and children.
Again, you provide no valid excuse for harming gay couples and their children through denial of equal treatment under the law.
You are going to fall and hurt yourself gay twirling that hard!

I simply clarified exactly what the Cinderella Effect says and what the adoptive parent study actually said.

Both of which you misrepresented. You should be apologizing for lying.

The fact that the truth offends you is simply exposure of your denial.

The fact that gay couples inherently hold dangers to children ALONG with denying them one gender and at least one parent both disqualifies them being equated to marriage and should deny them adopting or fostering children.

The fact is, you are desperately trying to make a bent rod fit in a straight hole.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#35473 Sep 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are going to fall and hurt yourself gay twirling that hard!
I simply clarified exactly what the Cinderella Effect says and what the adoptive parent study actually said.
Both of which you misrepresented. You should be apologizing for lying.
The fact that the truth offends you is simply exposure of your denial.
The fact that gay couples inherently hold dangers to children ALONG with denying them one gender and at least one parent both disqualifies them being equated to marriage and should deny them adopting or fostering children.
The fact is, you are desperately trying to make a bent rod fit in a straight hole.
And again, another post that relies on personal insults and demeaning, dehumanizing, pejorative terminology while failing to provide any scientific justification or legitimate governmental interest sufficient to deny equal treatment under the law as required by the constitution.

You misrepresent the science. You are adding your own "twirl" to support your prejudice. It is you who should apologize for lying. Again; "Whatever the reasons for the Cinderella effect, it is now quite clear that it is not triggered by a lack of genetic relationship. After all, adoptive parents take better care of children than birth parents do. It seems that caring for children, related or not, involves a deep human need that is better satisfied by adoption than step-parenting." http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human ...

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#35474 Sep 9, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are going to fall and hurt yourself gay twirling that hard!
I simply clarified exactly what the Cinderella Effect says and what the adoptive parent study actually said.
.....
Your whole "twirling" schtick is silly. You seem to use it when you don't have any rational argument against something a poster types.

And, really, if you are against adoption, what do you suggest we do with unwanted children?

Orphanages? Euthanasia?

I know two gay couples who adopted older special needs kids. I've seen the strength of character and commitment it takes, and the rewards it can bring. You should be thankful when good folks step up to that plate.

I wish there were more of them willing to do so.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#35475 Sep 9, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
And again, another post that relies on personal insults and demeaning, dehumanizing, pejorative terminology while failing to provide any scientific justification or legitimate governmental interest sufficient to deny equal treatment under the law as required by the constitution.
You misrepresent the science. You are adding your own "twirl" to support your prejudice. It is you who should apologize for lying. Again; "Whatever the reasons for the Cinderella effect, it is now quite clear that it is not triggered by a lack of genetic relationship. After all, adoptive parents take better care of children than birth parents do. It seems that caring for children, related or not, involves a deep human need that is better satisfied by adoption than step-parenting." http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human ...
I have to admit I threw a little pejorative terminology in the last time. I just didn't want you to be a total liar.

Smirk.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#35476 Sep 9, 2012
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Your whole "twirling" schtick is silly. You seem to use it when you don't have any rational argument against something a poster types.
And, really, if you are against adoption, what do you suggest we do with unwanted children?
Orphanages? Euthanasia?
I know two gay couples who adopted older special needs kids. I've seen the strength of character and commitment it takes, and the rewards it can bring. You should be thankful when good folks step up to that plate.
I wish there were more of them willing to do so.
'smirk' is a twist of the reality knife sunk to the hilt into denial.

For instance, you and I both know we aren't talking about adoption.

I have worked around family issues professionally all my life. My wife and I have fostered children all through our thirty six years of marriage. We have counseled and supported adoptive families. I talked last night to a friend who with his wife adopted six children of various nationalities. My wife talked Friday with another friend who 15 years ago adopted a drug baby. You have no idea what they have dealt with.

There is not a single parent I know who fostered, step-parented or adopted that wouldn't have preferred seeing those children with their biological parents in a healthy situation.

What I resent is someone who pretends they can match what God and nature designed. They don't do it for the child, they do it to pretend their denial is real. Even worse, they have the perversion to deliberately birth a child without a parent.

The life of a child put in a twisted situation and told it is normal. And forever that child lives between reality and denial. That is what your denial leads to.
Huh

Schaumburg, IL

#35477 Sep 9, 2012
Just another case of Dems gone wild!!! Mike Madigan and Quinn can be real proud of jumping on the gay band wagon!!! How can such a small % of population have a sympathic ear in Springfield when we are BROKE and the same guys have a tin ear to solutions to real problems ???? KEEP VOTING FOR THOSE GUYS in a very few years we will all head for Indiana!

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#35478 Sep 9, 2012
OldTimer JOE wrote:
It clearly states in the bible that marriage is between a Man and Woman, PERIOD!!!!!!!
The Bible is Gods Word and it cannot b argued with or changed.
Gods word is written in stone, so who do these homo's think they are challenging Gods word.
If not for Gods generoous mercy towards these confused, sick, sad Homosexuals,,,,they would of been struck down by lightning 100 times over.
Its not too late for faggs to apologize to the lord for not trustiing his word.
Therefore God is even willing to forgive gays for there ignorence and selfish lust.
that was pretty funny, joe... especially the bit about the bible stating that marriage is between a man and a woman, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!

oh yeah, and tie bit about god's word being written in stone. that was pretty funny, to.
ugh

Dallas, TX

#35479 Sep 9, 2012
You guys. God is Jesus' imaginary friend. He is something made up. The bible is a book that was created to control people's minds. Look at how you bible thumpers are talking. Kill this gay put that gay on a stake and burn. If there was a god I'm sure he will look down on you and shake his head. On the bible it also states that if a child disobeys his/her parents then the parents must kill the child then eat it. Also says eating shellfish is an abomination too. God doesn't promote hate. You guys are. He is one that loves and accepts everyone. If god was the creator of mankind and hates gays do you think he would create them in the first place?
Bump

Fontana, KS

#35480 Sep 9, 2012
KarmasGonnaGetcha wrote:
<quoted text>
Ann Margret looked great in Carnal Knowledge, showing her big ol' titties and nice luscious booty!
<smirk>
<sneer>
<audible fart>
Bumpity bump bump!
ugh

Grand Prairie, TX

#35482 Sep 9, 2012
OldTimer JOE wrote:
<quoted text>How dare you talk this way.
You young whippersnappers best repent.
Sticking penises in another mans butt, cannot make God happy.
In fact, it probably makes him puke, because poor God has to watch that nasty filthy activities that's pulluting the souls and air of Earth. God sees everything you do, so don't try to put a blanket over your gay little heads while you are buttbumping.
He sees anyway.

And so does the Devil. The devil must be very pleased with all the gay rubbing and bumping in the tub.
so is god ok with women prostituting themselves? They are having sex with men. And I doubt god also wants to see 2 really old bodies clunking around in the bedroom either. We can go at this all night. Just know you're gonna look like an idiot and I'm gonna win
really

De Soto, IL

#35483 Sep 9, 2012
OldTimer JOE wrote:
<quoted text>
How dare you talk this way.
You young whippersnappers best repent.
Sticking penises in another mans butt, cannot make God happy.
In fact, it probably makes him puke, because poor God has to watch that nasty filthy activities that's pulluting the souls and air of Earth. God sees everything you do, so don't try to put a blanket over your gay little heads while you are buttbumping.
He sees anyway.
And so does the Devil. The devil must be very pleased with all the gay rubbing and bumping in the tub.
rubbing and bumping in the Tub!!! REALLY.. you sound like you have done this before with another man or fantasied about it. You have no right to judge people at all. I'm sure u could be judged. No way your perfect. None of you bizz what people do in the bed or the tub. How they live their life. He is watching you also, being rude and nasty to people. Also watching you play with yourself. Hmmmmmm..

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#35484 Sep 10, 2012
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
'smirk' is a twist of the reality knife sunk to the hilt into denial.
For instance, you and I both know we aren't talking about adoption.
I have worked around family issues professionally all my life. My wife and I have fostered children all through our thirty six years of marriage. We have counseled and supported adoptive families. I talked last night to a friend who with his wife adopted six children of various nationalities. My wife talked Friday with another friend who 15 years ago adopted a drug baby. You have no idea what they have dealt with.
There is not a single parent I know who fostered, step-parented or adopted that wouldn't have preferred seeing those children with their biological parents in a healthy situation.
What I resent is someone who pretends they can match what God and nature designed. They don't do it for the child, they do it to pretend their denial is real. Even worse, they have the perversion to deliberately birth a child without a parent.
The life of a child put in a twisted situation and told it is normal. And forever that child lives between reality and denial. That is what your denial leads to.
I hope you aren't as abusive in person as you are on line. I would never knowingly place children in a foster home where they would be exposed to the destructive irrational prejudice you promote. Your prejudice makes it difficult to find appropriate homes, especially for gay children and those who might be gay. It is the prejudice you promote that leads many to suicide and other self destructive behavior.

"In a healthy situation"... Of course children do best with their birth parents in a healthy situation. But as you should know all too well, many biological parent homes don't qualify as "a healthy situation". In my 40 plus years of professional training and experience working directly with abused children, which included residential treatment settings as well as placing them in foster homes, group homes, and residential treatment, I have seen very few kids that I believed were better off with their abusive natural parents. Reality does not live up to what you can imagine as the best placement for a child. As you should know, many don't survive.

No matter what you or I believe is the best environment for a child, the reality remains, many straight people have children accidentally and with no motivation to be a parent, while others may want a child but have no ability to care for it. This often includes women who have no stable relationship with the father if they even know who the father is. Yet we don't restrict civil rights based on ability to parent.

We do know, despite your belief to the contrary, it is the relationship between the parent and child that best determines success, not the gender of the parents. We also know children adopted early in life have an equal chance of doing as well as biological children.("drug babies" excepted) We further know adopted children do better than children left in institutional settings. And again, reality tells us there are around 100,000 more children in need of parents every year in the US alone than there are homes that want them.

Whether through adoption or assisted reproduction, parents who are highly motivated to actually be parents have the highest rates of success, regardless of gender. Your prejudice fails to provide any scientific justification or legitimate governmental interest sufficient to deny equal treatment under the law as required by the constitution.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Marion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
junk car on Lingale. 15 min taxidrver 1
Morgan Ave interchange..... 2 hr idot 24
Tabitha Neely 2 hr pffft 27
Harley Davison 3 hr meep meep 3
phil little (Aug '14) 3 hr Anita Gurly 14
Jimmy Jackson (Jul '14) 5 hr Anita Gurly 80
News 3 wsil (Jan '15) 7 hr proplayer 39
Extra Help In Marion 8 hr Yep 29
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Marion Mortgages