Maine Voters Reject Gay Marriage

[balerick42]

Quest wrote:

<quoted text>
So, you believe that the children born to gay couples should never exist, since they might not know parents of both gender? That they would have been better off never born?
Why not ask our children themselves if they would rather have never existed at all, then to know the horrer of two loving parents who wanted them, and supported them?
Then, explain how people who choose to live for others--their children--providing the love and support and money needed to guide them to productive adulthood can be ever called selfish?
Good parents give of themselves every day. Explain in detail why that is different for gay parents.
And you are forgetting that many of our children are adopted--tossed away by the heterosexual couples who gave birth to them. Do you call the gay couples who open their lives and homes to these kids selfish? Or do you rightfully rant against the straight couples who abandoned them?

"And you are forgetting that many of our children are adopted--tossed away by the heterosexual couples who gave birth to them. Do you call the gay couples who open their lives and homes to these kids selfish? Or do you rightfully rant against the straight couples who abandoned them" I would only support placing an older child with a gay person, and then only I they cannot find a heterosexual married couple to place the child with. In that case I would not call the gay person selfish. I base my opinion on what is in the best interest of the child, not on what makes you feel good. I believe the proper order for raising children would be:

1. In a two parent Mom and Dad stable home, preferably where Mom or Dad is stay at home.
2. Same, but if both parents have to work for major financial reasons.
3. Single parent household if the parent is a widow or widower.
4. Divorced household where both parents stay single and involved in their childrens lives on a daily basis until the kids are grown.
5. Adoptive two parent Mom and Dad household (see 1 and 2).
6. All other situations should only be as a last resort.

Remember, I said from the perspective of what is in the best interest of the child, not what makes you feel good or what you want.

[balerick42]

TomSawyer65 wrote:

<quoted text>
Right...... so you've never met a dead beat dad?

I had no choice but to raise my two children on my own from the time they were 9 and 3. They are now 21 and 15. Yes, I know dead beat dads (and moms). They should be held accountable (and are). I am not one of them. I know what it is like to have help from the Mom to raise children, just as I know how difficult it is to raise children on my own after their Mom is gone. I speak from experience.

[balerick42]

Fabioso wrote:

<quoted text>
Link, source, or it never happened.
You don't understand my statement enough to assess its accuracy, dullard.

too many lazy people who want others to do research for them. Look it up your own damn self.

[balerick42]

Barney Stinson wrote:

<quoted text>
i don't really care about whatever you're talking about, but Dateline and 'to catch a predator' are stupid because journalists and tv cameras don't belong in a police squad.
Also, the police have an obligation to arrest the suspect as soon as they can, and by allowing that douchey host to interview them first is violating their duty to serve and protect. What would happen if the teenage girl walks to the other room to put the laundry away, then the host guys comes out and is like "what were you going to do with that girl?" and the perp pulls a gun and blasts the host in the face? That would make pretty good tv, wouldn't it?
Lastly, that set-up is bordering on entrapment and it's sick. They find a desperate guy on the internet, say they are a 15 year old girl and (with terrible webspeek) act all interested in him. They tell the guy that they are interested in older men, say they like to have sex, they offer to send him pictures. They are the ones that invite the guy to the house and give him the address and time to show up. They find guys that probably had no intention of committing these crimes and bait them into doing it by letting all of the pieces come together for them.
It's like if an undercover cop finds a guy that just wants to make some money, and he offers to sell him some drugs for cheap, and tells him about his friend (also an undercover cop) that will buy the drugs for twice as much. Desperate people will take that easy buck because all of the pieces fell into place around them. When they woke up that morning, they had no intention of running drugs, but when they go to sleep that night they're in prison for doing so.
Dateline doesn't get pedophiles off the street. No REAL pedophile (the ones into human trafficking) are dumb enough to fall into a Dateline trap. Dateline CREATES pedophiles and put them in jail by taking advantage of desperate guys.
They are almost as sick as the REAL pedophiles that they are failing to catch while they waste their time on some desperate losers that were only on the chatroom because World of Warcraft servers were down for the day.

Online predators were being found online, arrested, tried and convicted by police departments and the FBI using these same tactics long before Dateline started doing it. Dateline just knew it would make good tv. It is NOT entrapment. I have no problem getting sickos in prison using these lawful tactics.

[cpeter1313]

There is never a reason to conflate the police and the press. There was no need for the raid; they knew where he lived and where he worked, and he was not a flight risk. They were lucky; it could just as easily have become a shoot-out.

Possession of child porn is only meaningful if it is ILLEGAL child porn. Photographs and video are illegal; it's much harder to prosecute for drawings and prose.

Honest AbeL wrote:

That was all in Texas. They have had many that stuck. The man who killed himself was a prosecuter and he was in possesion of child born. I guess that is no reason in your book?
<quoted text>

[cpeter1313]

Usually, it's the cops shooting the innocent people.

The man was innocent until proven guilty in court--that is the only standard under which cops can operate. They are certainly not supposed to take their cues from network television.

The whole show was ridiculous, since most molestation happens within the child's home or neighborhood.

Honest AbeL wrote:

By the way people who have done nothing wrong seldom take their own life when the cops come to the door. I don't know of one.
<quoted text>

[Barney Stinson]

Honest AbeL wrote:

Haha you are full of crap. First you know nothing now you know it all. Which time were you lying?
<quoted text>

i didn't say i know nothing, i said i don't care about what you were talking about... i.e. i knew i was changing the subject and felt no shame about it.

Reading comprehension does wonders. I suggest going to this site: http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/learning/... and figuring out what reading level you are currently, and they can suggest good books for you to start with to help you practice. If 'Green Eggs and Ham' is on your list, I highly recommend it. I loved it back in kindergarten.

[Barney Stinson]

balerick42 wrote:

<quoted text>Online predators were being found online, arrested, tried and convicted by police departments and the FBI using these same tactics long before Dateline started doing it. Dateline just knew it would make good tv. It is NOT entrapment. I have no problem getting sickos in prison using these lawful tactics.

here: http://www.barnabainstitute.org/

they are fighting to end human trafficking. Even domestically, there are an estimated 200,000 US citizens that are at high risk of being trafficked for sexual purposes, mostly children and young women.

The people involved in these trafficking rings are far worse than your everyday 'pedophile' that dateline nabs. These people are sick. And there is no way they fall into the trap of trying to sleep with a girl that flirts with them in a chatroom. These people are selling children amongst themselves, trading up for the 'new models' when their current sex slaves start to get too old.

The police work of catching your garden variety pedophile is good, but it isn't enough. And when it is put on dateline, it only lets every potential predator know how they might get caught. It only teaches them to be smarter and sneakier, therefore dateline keeps catching dumber and more desperate guys.

Not only that, Dateline is a mockery of the true fight to stop pedophiles in america and abroad. There is a much bigger battle to be fought. Dateline is claiming minor victories in battles that don't matter in the long run. And all the while, children are being sold to the highest bidder.

[Appalled]

Registered Voter wrote:

<quoted text>
How can you say you have a family and be homosexual?? The only way you obtained a family was by adopting, being artificially inseminated or having a segregate have the child for you. 2 men or 2 women can’t have an offspring on their own. Nothing normal at all about that. You can raise a child and be a family but you did not create that family. Your child would be just like any heterosexual familys child it would be able to draw benefits from either parent but not both just like mine.
You or your Children aren't less worthy than anyone elses or to me they wouldn't be.

Are you saying that adopted children are less than biological children? If so, you are a mean & nasty person.

[Appalled]

andet1987 wrote:

<quoted text>
somewhat related.
gays waste a lot of semen. one sperm could have fertilized an egg and turn into a baby. but the baby is not formed because the semen is deposited into a wrong hole, wasted somewhere else.
abortion is killing and wasting the lives of unborn babies.
in both cases, a baby is not given the chance of a real life.

What an idiotic posting!

[AngieluvsJoyce]

balerick42 wrote:

<quoted text>Intentionally having a son (or daughter) knowing they would grow up without the benefit of a father's input is a selfish thing to do, no different than a straight woman doing the same thing. Fathers DO matter! You had a baby because YOU wanted it to feel better about yourself. You prove what I suspect, gay people are all about me....I want it cause I want it.

Wrong buddy he does have his fathers benefit. Don't assume something when you know nothing!

[AngieluvsJoyce]

balerick42 wrote:

<quoted text>Intentionally having a son (or daughter) knowing they would grow up without the benefit of a father's input is a selfish thing to do, no different than a straight woman doing the same thing. Fathers DO matter! You had a baby because YOU wanted it to feel better about yourself. You prove what I suspect, gay people are all about me....I want it cause I want it.

Please don't come on here calling people selfish and telling me I did something to feel better about myself you know nothing of me. I was married to his father, his father and I got a divorce for reasons that had nothing to do with me! His father is still very much apart of his life. His father knows of our living situation and has no problem with it. I know this because we are still very good friends and we talk all the time. You judging anyone is the pot calling the kettle black. You stereotype, and generalize everyone. You believe that some how Christians have the right to restrict behavior in America, when the forefathers of this country are turning in their graves because you fanatics are trying to inject your religion into our government. You use Christ, a figure of love and forgiveness as a shield to your hate. If anyone is a disgrace on these boards it is people like you!

[Fabioso]

Honest AbeL wrote:

It seems your ignorance has no end.
<quoted text>

And you still have nothing substantive to say.

We all know why.

[Fabioso]

balerick42 wrote:

<quoted text>too many lazy people who want others to do research for them. Look it up your own damn self.

Your side makes the claim, you provide the proof, the burden is on you.

I say you are full of bullshit.

[Oh My]

Shadow Dragon wrote:

<quoted text>
Nope that just proves to the court that people can not vote anyone rights and it make the argument more stronger.

Gaydom is a right?

Think not.

[cpeter1313]

Being gay, straight, or bi is legal in all 50 states because you cannot make laws about people, only actions.

The right in question here is not being gay, but having equal protection under the laws of marriage.

Oh My wrote:

<quoted text>
Gaydom is a right?
Think not.

[Alter Ego]

Personal liberty is a right. Gay people don't have it unless the laws that apply to everyone else also apply to them.

When was the last time a minority won rights by popular vote?

[what about]

Oh My wrote:

<quoted text>
Gaydom is a right?
Think not.

So people in the U.S. do not have the right to have a relationship with who they want? Yes, they do. As long as it is two conscenting adults they do gave the right to have a relationship, they can even have sex if they want. I am straight and I have the same right to have a relationship and sleep with whom I choose. So, yes it is a right. And gaydom is not a word.

[Cfoote]

what about wrote:

<quoted text>
So people in the U.S. do not have the right to have a relationship with who they want? Yes, they do. As long as it is two conscenting adults they do gave the right to have a relationship, they can even have sex if they want. I am straight and I have the same right to have a relationship and sleep with whom I choose. So, yes it is a right. And gaydom is not a word.

Two consenting adults is all it takes? What about a father-daughter, a son and mother? Brother and Sister? Do they have the right to choose who they sleep with as well as long as they are old enough anc consenting?

[Barney Stinson]

Cfoote wrote:

<quoted text>Two consenting adults is all it takes? What about a father-daughter, a son and mother? Brother and Sister? Do they have the right to choose who they sleep with as well as long as they are old enough anc consenting?

well what are your reasons for denying them that choice?