Comments on: Maggie Gallagher rebuts Maggie Gallagher

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:51:16 +0000

Simon said “Stealing children is not a way to bypass natural law”.

There is no such thing as natural law and gays and lesbians do NOT steal children. If you have any examples of gays and lesbians stealing children post a link or stop spreading your vicious lies intended to provoke violence against innocent people.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:48:32 +0000

Simon said (hee hee) “Prya, I listen to children instead of speaking for them.”.

You’re full of sh*t, you haven’t the slightest idea what any but an infintestimal amount of children have to say. The scientific research on the other hand has actually surveyed large amounst of children and shows children do just as well, if not better, with same sex parents as they do with opposite sex parents. And the children of same sex parents are overwhelmingly happy with their parents.

Simon said “I dream of the day where adults and government officials are sued for depriving children of their right to a father and a mother.”.

No one has a right to choose who their parents are. You can pick your friends but you can’t pick your family. If there was such a right I’d have much rather had two women raise me than my heterosexual parents. Would you support my right to to sue government officials for depriving me of same sex parents? Don’t you believe children have just as much a right to same sex parents as they do to opposite sex parents? No, of course not, because when you talk about equality you’re just a BS’er making absurd statments like “same sex parents don’t provide equality for children because there aren’t an equal number of men and women in the marriage” which is the logical equivalent of “Gays and lesbians have two arms just like heterosexuals so therefore they have already have equality.”.

By: Simon Alipio

Simon Alipio — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:14:29 +0000

Prya, I listen to children instead of speaking for them.
What children need is much more important than what adults want.
I dream of the day where adults and government officials are sued for depriving children of their right to a father and a mother.

It will come and the world will cry hearing their stories.

This video is very clear. Only a cold and selfish heart will not hear the message.

Marriage has never and will never be about civil union or domestic partnership. Stealing children is not a way to bypass natural law

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 01:02:05 +0000

Simon, it makes no difference to children what gender their parents are. The children of same sex couples do just as well, if not better than the children of heterosexuals. There is nothing unequal about having same sex parents rather than opposite sex parents. What is unequal is telling Ted he can marry Jane and telling Alice she cannot marry Jane.

By: Simon Alipio

Simon Alipio — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 00:32:01 +0000

What Maggie means by equality is that marriage is 50% a man and 50% a woman. For children, marriage is 50% a Dad and 50% of Mom.

It provides equality for children.

Homoparenting does not provide equality for children

Here is an adopted child who spoke clearly about this recently http://englishmanif.blogspot.com/2013/01/mind-blowing-speech-from-adopted-asian.html

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:02:14 +0000

Rob, this is an awesome find. It completely undermines what NOM has been saying for the past 5 years. Great work!

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:25:18 +0000

“Maggie and her anti-marriage colleagues like to say the essential public purpose of marriage is regulation of procreation for the benefit of society”.

I hope its not just me, but I find the idea of regulating procreation to be absolutely horrifying.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:19:18 +0000

Is this when she was surreptitiously employed by the Bush administration to write ‘spontaneous’ op-eds extolling the benefits of marriage?

Good find.

By: Gerald

Gerald — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:35:28 +0000

I recall reading a similar article (and shooting off a letter to the editor in response) years ago by Tony Perkins that made the same argument, something about how beneficial marriage is to society and how it needs protection. His arguments didn’t really distinguish between opposite-sex or same-sex couples in marriage; he just assumed his audience would understand his meaning. Wish I could locate it, too.

By: Shofixti

Shofixti — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:18:24 +0000

Here’s some current material… although it does partly contradict her.

http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/01/being-married-helps-professors-get-ahead-but-only-if-theyre-male/267289/