Random Politics & Religion #00

That was my thought process as well.

God forbid (literally, apparently) a child go to a loving home just because it would have two moms or dads instead of one of each.

They'd be much better off around their terrible birth parents, of a diddly-diddly-do priest.

Hey churches you only adopt to parents you deem qualified. We're going to change the law so you have to adopt to people you don't deem qualified.

Nope that's not an infringement on religious liberty at all.

Welp, at least we know how the argument will proceed, they will attack churches and just deny that it's an attack. I was hoping for something a little more exciting. Shame on me for giving you guys that much credit.

<The forces of tolerance will not tolerate you anymore.>

Zip up, Nausi.

Your victim complex is hanging out again.

Are homosexual couples somehow "not qualified" to be parents? If so, what would make them unilaterally unqualified?

If I was ever in a position and I had to/decided to put my child up for adoption; I'd be happy they're going to a loving home, regardless if there's two moms or two dads or even one of each.

Refusing a same sex couple a child because "a child needs a mother and a father" is a terrible argument, most, if not all same sex couples will love any child 200% because they had to FIGHT, harder than a man and a woman couple, for that child. Couples with one man and one women sometimes don't even WANT their child; so why do we deny someone who WANTS to raise a child, that ability to do so?

As long as the adoptive couple is a loving couple that are able to support a child and able to love that child unconditionally (especially since that child isn't even their biological child), why does/should it matter if it's two men, two women or one man and one woman?

Lots of different reasons depending on the circumstances.

Some reasons are better than others, but they're all pretty big walls to make people knock down to give a child a loving home.

Religion. Morality. Preconceived public bias. Checks and balances to ensuring proper placement.

For instance, do you know how much easier it is to adopt if you already have kids? Just...worlds.

The process is trying to protect kids from being put in bad homes, especially when so many of them may have come from bad homes and don't deserve to be put back with a new one. But at the same time, it does make it very difficult for those looking to adopt.

I wasn't saying just place the child in any random home to whomever wants them; perhaps my wording was a little confusing.

Anyways, like I said, some parents don't even want their child, especially if they find out that the child has a birth defect or any other abnormality; or they didn't even want that child to be conceived in the first place, that set of parents sometimes decides between abortion or adoption. If that couple decides to place the baby up for adoption and if a same-sex couple wants to adopt said child and meet all the criteria; why not let them? If they can prove themselves to be successful and able to take care of the child, what's so wrong with that?

If a traditional couple and a same sex couple both want to adopt the same child, its more than likely that the traditional couple will be the one to win adoption rights. Even if the same sex couple has a little more money, or a little more stability.

I guess it goes back to that old way of "a child needs a mother and a father to be successful" thinking, even though, time and time again, single parents have proven that thinking totally wrong.

Oh, yeah. I just have experience with the process for familial reasons and it's sort of a hot-button issue for me. You may not have been lurking in P&R last time we went round about this.


Because all gays are sexual predators that will turn the children into a...demon...or...something. I don't know. I sort of stopped listening to their claptrap.

Close-minded people can be so ignorant at times lol. I usually try not to let them get to me but lately everything's just getting to a point.

"Oh now gay marriage is legal! I guess next thing people are going to want to marry their dogs!!"

What, seriously?! How can anyone compare gay marriage to the bestiality fetish? It completely blows my mind.

It's not up to them to decide who is qualified.

They don't want to follow the law, so they don't get the privileged to operate that service.

Get over your persecution complex.

some cowboy here at work got all pissed off friday & was hollering around about "if god meant for dudes to have sex, one would be able to get pregnant" he was super mad & I just kept laughing. I said "dolphins do it just for fun, explain that!" then kept laughing. he was not impressed.

Between the shooting in SC and the associated issues and now the gay marriage issue, my brother-in-law's professional life is blowing up right now. I almost felt bad for him, but then I remembered he left a lucrative career in school administration to be a Methodist minister in the South, and he did it to himself.

Well, he should be, doing it while swimming in the open ocean is a feat of athleticism regardless of gender combination.


This was the crux of the defense. They claimed that children of "traditional" couples fair better than those of same-sex couples, however the research proves that children of same-sex couples actually fair slightly better in most cases or exactly the same.

You know, I started typing out various things you should ask him, just to make the point.

Then I gave up; it's not like reason or logic would change his mind.

I'm curious about the parameters on that study; I could see it happening overall because, well, same-sex couples don't exactly have children by accident. That's got to be a pretty determined choice, and "giving a ***" is a pretty important quality in a parent.

I'm headed to a meeting right now, but the studies are listed in the scotus decision, so I'm sure you can track it down if you don't want to wait until I have time to.

That's quite amusing, considering:

Which doesn't really align with this:

You had me at bestiality !

Found a story better than "gay cakes" How about ISIS cakes !

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/walmart-apologizes-making-isis-cake-man-denied-confederate/story?id=32103721



A man in Louisiana is asking for an explanation from Walmart after his request for a Confederate flag cake at one of its bakeries was rejected, but a design with the ISIS flag was accepted.

Chuck Netzhammer said he ordered the image of the Confederate flag on a cake with the words, "Heritage Not Hate," on Thursday at a Walmart in Slidell, Louisiana. But the bakery denied his request, he said. At some point later, he ordered the image of the ISIS flag that represents the terrorist group.

"I went back yesterday and managed to get an ISIS battleflag printed. ISIS happens to be somebody who we're fighting against right now who are killing are men and boys overseas and are beheading Christians," Netzhammer said.

"That's an ISIS battleflag cake that anybody can go buy at Walmart," he explains in a video posted on YouTube showing the sheetcake. "But you can't buy a Confederate flag toy, with like, say, a 'Dukes of Hazzards' car."



A man in Louisiana is asking for an explanation from Walmart after his request for a Confederate flag cake at one of its bakeries was rejected, but a design with the ISIS flag was accepted.

Chuck Netzhammer said he ordered the image of the Confederate flag on a cake with the words, "Heritage Not Hate," on Thursday at a Walmart in Slidell, Louisiana. But the bakery denied his request, he said. At some point later, he ordered the image of the ISIS flag that represents the terrorist group.

"I went back yesterday and managed to get an ISIS battleflag printed. ISIS happens to be somebody who we're fighting against right now who are killing are men and boys overseas and are beheading Christians," Netzhammer said.

"That's an ISIS battleflag cake that anybody can go buy at Walmart," he explains in a video posted on YouTube showing the sheetcake. "But you can't buy a Confederate flag toy, with like, say, a 'Dukes of Hazzards' car."

Last week, companies like Walmart, Amazon, Etsy and eBay announced that they were banning sales of Confederate flag merchandise in the wake of the shooting death of nine African Americans in Charleston, South Carolina, on June 17, allegedly by a racist gunman who was seen in photos wearing the flag.

"We never want to offend anyone with the products that we offer," Walmart said in a statement last week as it announced the ban. "We have taken steps to remove all items promoting the Confederate flag from our assortment -- whether in our stores or on our web site."

The shift followed a call by South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley to remove the Confederate flag from the state capitol in Columbia after the massacre.

Netzhammer shows what appears to be a form about the Confederate flag request from the bakery in his video with the words "cannot do cake."

Randy Hargrove, a spokesman for Walmart, told The Daily Caller last week, “Our local store made a mistake. The cake in the video should not have been made and we apologize.”

“We made the decision to stop selling Confederate flag related items promoting the flag's image. For that reason we did not make the cake," Hargrove said to The Daily Caller. "[Netzhammer] brought in the other image of ISIS and really, what happened, was our associate didn't recognize what that image was and what it meant or it wouldn't have been made.”

Video:

You work with cowboys ?

I live in a pretty rural area.

I see. I was picturing you riding a horse chasing cattle all day !

I actually live near a place where they train race horses now that I think of it.

Congratulations, "conservatives".

U.S. top court rules against Obama administration over air pollution rule

"It's okay to poison our air because it might cost you too much to change."

I did some of that when I was 15-19. except we chased cows in an old s-10, & I looked like a reject of an extra for SLC punk.

The solution is obviously gay churches !

The almighty dollar...

MURRICA

I grew up around a farm but to say I'm a farmer is farm from the truth. I do enjoy driving tractors though.

So all the EPA has to do is consider compliance costs when it issues its next ruling? Seems pretty simple.

Scalia's logic never fails to escape me. Well, except for once or twice.

Scalia's logic almost never fails to escape me.