Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares for Supreme Court decision

Full story: Fox News 1,568
Big change is coming to the lives of the lesbian couple at the center of the fight for same-sex marriage in California no matter how the Supreme Court decides their case. Full Story

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#687 Apr 9, 2013
Shit Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? How many gay parents did Regnerus study? How did he determine if they were gay?
He didn't study ANY parents, he studied children...

Idiot.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#688 Apr 9, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem Regnerus had was there were no long term SS couples raising children to measure the impact. Out of about 200 as couples, only two or three could be rated long term.
Doesn't look good...
Snicker.
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>so you agree that there was not a good sampling group for his study...
good to know.
Hardly.

He found over 200, out of which only 2 survived poorly in long term relationships.

That sampling size is the largest of ANY studies of children in lesbian relationships.

It is not his problem or job to pad the study with a world-wide search for healthy children in ss households so he can compare them to a sample size of 3000.

Again, by what logic does a ss couple as default parents rate not only better than hetero default parents, but even biological?

Care to give it a shot woodtick brain...

Smirk.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#689 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but marriage has no prerequisite of the promise to procreate.
the baby-making club you invented is not a real one.
try using real arguments, not made up ones.
I have clearly stated my reasons for dismissing the proven lies of religious cults.
That is one of the stupidest assertions ever made. Marriage doesn't need a 'promise to procreate', hence all the effort to PREVENT procreation!

According to sociologists, the whole and only purpose of marriage is to restrain parents to their offspring. Marriage would not exist if it were not for that constraint.

In fact, if you look at the divorce rate rise, you will see it coincides with the governments decision to create 'no-fault' divorce because 'fractured couples should not stay together for the sake of the children'.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#690 Apr 9, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and the American Sociological Association, to which Regnerus belongs, shredded his so-called staudy.
What conclusions were drawn???????? I bet you don't even know.
And promotes lesbian studies. You know, the ones you refuse to print the methodology of. The ones that have been debunked for blatant fraud and unscientific methodology.

Go figure.

Smirk.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#691 Apr 9, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That is one of the stupidest assertions ever made. Marriage doesn't need a 'promise to procreate', hence all the effort to PREVENT procreation!
According to sociologists, the whole and only purpose of marriage is to restrain parents to their offspring. Marriage would not exist if it were not for that constraint.
In fact, if you look at the divorce rate rise, you will see it coincides with the governments decision to create 'no-fault' divorce because 'fractured couples should not stay together for the sake of the children'.
Smile.
"restrain parents to their offspring"??? wtf does that mean? which sociologists said that? please be specific.

regardless of your pointless blather, there is absolutely zero requirement to procreate to exercise your right to enter into marriage. none. people that cannot possibley procreate get married all the time.

you need to learn about the issue you are attempting to sound off on... otherwise you'll sound like you did with the EX-IM bank debacle of yours...that made you look like an ass..

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#693 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>how many would be large enough?
Enough to get a good random sampling..which 'your' studies do not have...

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#694 Apr 9, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I ask for ONE example of methodology out of scores of studies that equate lesbian parenting with biological (there are NO gay studies...), and you can't produce?
Instead, you deny the latest, largest and most scientific study to date?
Here is your problem;
Step, adoptive, foster and single parents ALL rate below biological parents. You want to claim that ss couples who can only ever be a deprived HALF of those situations is EQUAL to biological parents.
Silly stupid. At the price of a child's welfare. Which makes it obscenely depraved.
<quoted text>
I keep asking you to provide one of those studies. Whats the problem honey???
Again, what would distinguish a ss couple, who can ONLY be an adoptive, step, foster or single parent (except ALWAYS depriving the child of one gender), distinct from heterosexual default parents?
You keep asserting ss couples are the same as marriage, now they are better???
Someone's advertising stupidity, but it isn't me...
Snicker smile.
Yup, that's Woodnick an Nocal for you!
Francisco dAnconia

Montpelier, VT

#695 Apr 9, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
So your reading skills aren't very good then either?
Okay, lets go direct, do you understand the difference between the legislative benefit offered by states and the constitutional right protected by the US Constitution?

For example, gay marriage is currently a state benefit in some states but NO constitutional right...
or how in NY, the court found no Constitutional right to marriage, yet the legislature offered the benefits anyway...

so, are were you using your ignorance as a sword?
yup.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#696 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>you said there weren't enough kids raised by ss couples for any study.
No, I didn't...

I said there weren't enough couples to confirm 'your' studies..quit lying..

Regnerus' study wasn't about the 'couples'...are you 'impaired'???

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#697 Apr 9, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Enough to get a good random sampling..which 'your' studies do not have...
then neither could yours have...simple logic.

if you don't even know how many are needed, tehre is no way you can logically say there weren't enough.

talking out of your ass again...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#698 Apr 9, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I didn't...
I said there weren't enough couples to confirm 'your' studies..quit lying..
Regnerus' study wasn't about the 'couples'...are you 'impaired'???
if there aren't enough ss couples raising kids, there aren't enough kids either.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#699 Apr 9, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
You 'do' realize it was published by an independent journal...right???
Independent? hahahahahahaha
ahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah

They were all in on it together.
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/anti-gay...

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/4-regner...

Regnerus Scandal Ripped Wide Open As UT Confesses To Major, Systemic Ethics Failures

Not only does Regnerus not make clear disclosures in his June, 2012 New Family Structures Study article and again in his November article of “Additional Analyses”; he actually lies about his relationships with his heterosupremacist, anti-gay-rights funders.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#700 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>then neither could yours have...simple logic.
if you don't even know how many are needed, tehre is no way you can logically say there weren't enough.
talking out of your ass again...
Okay, it's official...you 'are' impaired....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#701 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>if there aren't enough ss couples raising kids, there aren't enough kids either.
Can't teach Shakespeare to a turnip....you are living proof...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#702 Apr 9, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, it's official...you 'are' impaired....
no, you just can't admit you contradicted yourself, again...

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#703 Apr 9, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Independent? hahahahahahaha
ahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah
They were all in on it together.
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/anti-gay...
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/4-regner...
Regnerus Scandal Ripped Wide Open As UT Confesses To Major, Systemic Ethics Failures
Not only does Regnerus not make clear disclosures in his June, 2012 New Family Structures Study article and again in his November article of “Additional Analyses”; he actually lies about his relationships with his heterosupremacist, anti-gay-rights funders.
If they were all in on it together, 30 million scientists must be in on it then....

Experts

Elsevier serves over 30 million scientists, students and health information professionals. By delivering world-class information and innovative workflow tools to researchers, students, educators and practitioners worldwide, we help increase productivity and effectiveness.

Within Elsevier, there are many individuals offering a wide range of insights into diverse facets of STM publishing.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#704 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no, you just can't admit you contradicted yourself, again...
There is no contradiction, except the one playing in your head...

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#705 Apr 9, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, lets go direct, do you understand the difference between the legislative benefit offered by states and the constitutional right protected by the US Constitution?
For example, gay marriage is currently a state benefit in some states but NO constitutional right...
or how in NY, the court found no Constitutional right to marriage, yet the legislature offered the benefits anyway...
so, are were you using your ignorance as a sword?
yup.
You do understand that you aren't even addressing the issue you were called out for, right?

Shocker.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#706 Apr 9, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no contradiction, except the one playing in your head...
That is your game...when shown clearly that you made a mistake, just deny it.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#707 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>That is your game...when shown clearly that you made a mistake, just deny it.
Take your own advice there, chief...you were wrong..admit it...

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.

Family Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
For Once the Anti-Vaxxers Aren't (Entirely) to ... 17 min Vaccine Caused 6
Jim Bob Duggar Says Petition To Cancel '19 Kids... 22 min Gremlin 3
How to Witness to a Jehovah's Witness Ray Comfo... 27 min kjw51 164
Court bars kids from Jehovah's Witness activities 47 min kjw51 32
Why I'm still a Catholic (Oct '13) 3 hr Ben_Masada 137
Single mom, 5 kids homeless after fire 3 hr Red 5
Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) 4 hr speakthetruth 31,504
More from around the web