*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 6645
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #980 on: May 27, 2022, 02:42:46 AM »
I don't see how my particular beliefs have anything to do with Joe Biden opposing the marriage of gays for multiple human generations though.
That depends.  Are you criticizing Biden for opposing gay marriage for many years or are you criticizing him for changing his mind and choosing to support gay marriage?  What position would you rather he support?
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

#firePete

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10065
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #981 on: May 27, 2022, 02:45:55 AM »
Quote from: BillO
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage?

You can find the discussion of that in the thread I linked. I don't think society should necessarily be paying out the same amount of money to homosexual and heterosexual couples if they are not providing equal benefit to society. There were links in that thread showing that 93% of opposite sex married people have children, and that the only 11% of gay couples adopt, and that an adopted child of a lesbian couple has a 69% chance of ending up on welfare, and so on.

It is not an equivalent benefit to society, and so the financial benefits should not be equivalent. My reasons were purely financial, and have pointed out that I am not against the officious recognition of their union. However, Joe Biden's reasons for opposing the marriage of gays in the video I posted earlier was because "Marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that!" and because "Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's the game going on here??"

Biden clearly thought that two men should not be together and was against the officious recognition of their love on basis of them not being a man and a woman.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 02:25:29 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1248
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #982 on: May 27, 2022, 03:10:09 AM »
Quote from: BillO
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage?

You can the discussion of that the thread I linked. I don't think society should necessarily be paying out the same amount of money to homosexual and heterosexual couples if they are not providing equal benefit to society. There were links showing that 93% of opposite sex married people have children, and that the only 11% of gay couples adopt, and that an adopted child of a lesbian couple has a 69% chance of ending up on welfare, and so on.

It's not an equivalent benefit to society, and so the financial benefits should not be equivalent. My reasons were purely financial. Joe Biden's reasons for opposing the marriage of gays were that "Marriage should be between a man and a woman!"

Biden clearly thought that two men should not be together because he was against the officious recognized union of their love in any manner.
Tom, your use of the word "officious" ( more than once in this thread) in place of the word "official" speaks way, way louder than your other words do.

Just to be clear, I did read the post you linked to.  It was offensive.  I'll try to put that aside.

So, you think a person's only worth in a marital union is how many offspring they can produce, is that correct?

What do you say about heterosexual unions that do not produce offspring?

 What do you say about his: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2020/09/fifteen-percent-of-same-sex-couples-have-children-in-their-household.html ?  Where it is shown that same sex unions foster or adopt more children than do "fruitless" heterosexual unions.
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8124
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #983 on: May 27, 2022, 03:22:22 AM »
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage? 

The purpose of marriage, first and foremost, is the continuation of the State and society as a whole. If it does not engage in that purpose (i.e. childless couples) then it should not confer any benefits to the parties involved.

That is to say: any marriage that doesn't result in procreation or adoption should be null and void within a few years from the government's perspective.

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1248
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #984 on: May 27, 2022, 04:46:34 AM »
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage? 

The purpose of marriage, first and foremost, is the continuation of the State and society as a whole. If it does not engage in that purpose (i.e. childless couples) then it should not confer any benefits to the parties involved.

That is to say: any marriage that doesn't result in procreation or adoption should be null and void within a few years from the government's perspective.
Source?  I'm not American so I don't know this from experience.  It would be appreciated if you could point me in the right direction.  I assume your statements are from a USA perspective as they do not apply globally.

However, is the continuation of the State and society as a whole solely based on reproductive success alone?  What about art, music, literature, engineering, technology, science, industry, commerce, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10065
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #985 on: May 27, 2022, 01:01:39 PM »
Quote from: BillO
So, you think a person's only worth in a marital union is how many offspring they can produce, is that correct?

Society pays out subsidies as incentive to do something that benefits and furthers society, yes. Marriage has traditionally been a structure to foster the creation of families. Financial benefits were not simply given for the fun of it, because a judge said "good for you, you like each other, here is money!". Money was given for a reason, clearly. Like when a farmer receives farming subsidies upon merely buying an empty plot of farm land without any further action, society gives tax breaks for marriage to foster the preparation for the creation of a family. Society then gives a second level break upon the birth of children. Children are future tax payers, future service workers, future college graduates, future engineers and so on. The larger benefit to society is obvious.

My objection was a based on giving out financial benefits to people who want the recognition of marriage without providing equal benefit to society, not that they shouldn't be together or receive recognition. Joe Biden's objection was because he doesn't like the idea of two men or two women being married to each other. Again, Biden's reasoning in the video is "Marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that!" and "Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's the game going on here?"

Why was Biden's reasoning better than mine?
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 01:24:24 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 9745
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #986 on: May 27, 2022, 01:12:30 PM »
Tom, no one here said Biden’s reasoning was good. Perhaps you can stop lying for a bit?
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10065
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #987 on: May 27, 2022, 01:40:15 PM »
You guys have been defending him and his choices for the last 50 pages, and seem to say that he is better than Trump. You certainly should defend Biden's lifetime of opposing gays as well.

Here is a link on Biden's prolific anti-gay past. Source links to the bullets are in the page:

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/campaign-press-release-nothing-be-proud-the-biden-lgbt-record

Quote
- In 1973, Biden suggested that gay federal employees were "security risks"

https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/The_Morning_News_Tue__Sep_25__1973_.pdf



- In 1993, Biden voted to block the immigration of HIV+ individuals into the United States

- In 1993, Biden voted for the bill that created "Don't Ask Don't Tell"

- In 1994, Biden voted to cut off federal funding for schools that taught "acceptance of homosexuality as a lifestyle"

For decades, Biden opposed same-sex marriage

- In 1996, Biden voted for the Defense Of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman

- In the 2000s, Biden claimed that same-sex marriage was a "state" issue and repeatedly said that marriage was "between a man and a woman"

Biden refused to characterize a Constitutional marriage amendment as "writing discrimination into the Constitution"

Biden suggested he was opposed to the "timing" of the marriage amendment, not its substance

 - In 2008, both before and after he became Obama's Vice-Presidential nominee, Biden said he opposed same-sex marriage

Biden is falsely claiming he was the first major leader to support same-sex marriage

- 12 years before Biden did, Vice President Dick Cheney opposed federal restrictions on same-sex marriage

Biden wasn't even the first Obama Cabinet member to support same-sex marriage

- In 2012, after Biden accidentally supported same-sex marriage, his staff and White House aides attempted to clean up and walk back Biden's remarks, saying he had not actually endorsed it
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 07:10:54 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 9745
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #988 on: May 27, 2022, 01:55:25 PM »
It’s been pretty widely acknowledged in this thread that Biden is a pandering corporatist. I bet you couldn’t find a quote of anyone saying Biden is generally a good person or politician. But it turns out you can have a homophobic past and it still makes you better than the guy who jokes about fucking his daughter and underage girls. Sorry you are butt hurt that sex offender Don is the worst.

Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8124
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #989 on: May 27, 2022, 02:07:21 PM »
Source?  I'm not American so I don't know this from experience.  It would be appreciated if you could point me in the right direction.  I assume your statements are from a USA perspective as they do not apply globally.

Asking me to source an opinion is comical. It's the same as someone saying "I think the death penalty is morally wrong" and you ask "Source?" in response.

However, is the continuation of the State and society as a whole solely based on reproductive success alone?  What about art, music, literature, engineering, technology, science, industry, commerce, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

A society that doesn't reproduce doesn't continue. Art, music, etc. are not a society but merely products of one. Those same products are often destroyed by societies that follow, so reproductive success of a society also impacts its products. There were plenty of societies throughout human history that made great art which is now lost because they failed continuation and were destroyed.

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1248
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #990 on: May 27, 2022, 02:12:07 PM »
Why was Biden's reasoning better than mine?
Biden is a politician.  Reasoning is not a qualification for the job.

I'm not sure how the Americans approach it, but there are benefits for society when people create unions and work together in a familial setting.  These are usually recognized by providing tax breaks for those willing to declare that union under contract (marriage).  These should apply regardless what genitals the people in that union have as the societal benefits will be the same.  In most countries I know of there are also tax benefits and possibly even cash benefits for caring for children.  These are usually separate from and not tied to being married.  In Canada for instance, anyone couple or single person can claim these benefits if they are the primary caregivers to children under 17 years of age.

I am not a Biden supporter, or a supporter of any particular political party or politician.  Almost all politicians are reprehensible, lying a'holes.  However I am a supporter of human rights, freedoms, benefits and privileges being applied without bias or prejudice.  If that's where a government wants to go I'm all for it.  Who it looks like is making the decision, or what they thought before is not material in my opinion.

The only recent politician I have any respect for is Angela Merkel.  One thing I'll say Biden has going for him is that he is not Trump.  A piece of e-coli and dysentery ridden shit would be better than Trump.

Anyway, I'll leave you guys to your discussion.  I not an American and we have our own useless politicians to worry about up here.
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1248
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #991 on: May 27, 2022, 02:26:01 PM »
Asking me to source an opinion is comical.
Sorry, you are right.  In my defense it did not read like an opinion to me.

A society that doesn't reproduce doesn't continue. Art, music, etc. are not a society but merely products of one. Those same products are often destroyed by societies that follow, so reproductive success of a society also impacts its products. There were plenty of societies throughout human history that made great art which is now lost because they failed continuation and were destroyed.
So then if the non-traditional couple were to adopt and care for children, then they should be treated the same as a traditional couple and given the same incentives, benefits and privileges, right?
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8124
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #992 on: May 27, 2022, 02:43:19 PM »
So then if the non-traditional couple were to adopt and care for children, then they should be treated the same as a traditional couple and given the same incentives, benefits and privileges, right?

Yes, that's a valid and productive relationship.

*

Offline Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1793
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #993 on: May 27, 2022, 02:53:07 PM »
Remove the tax benefits from any couple who use contraceptives in order to stay childless, or who can’t have kids. And anyone whose kids end up on welfare should need to pay a fee to the government.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3277
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #994 on: May 27, 2022, 04:19:40 PM »
My objection was a based on giving out financial benefits to people who want the recognition of marriage without providing equal benefit to society, not that they shouldn't be together or receive recognition.

What financial benefits do married people get? You've heard of the "marriage" penalty, right?

Joe Biden's objection was because he doesn't like the idea of two men or two women being married to each other. Again, Biden's reasoning in the video is "Marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that!" and "Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's the game going on here?"

Why was Biden's reasoning better than mine?

Yes, Joe Biden's reasoning is better than yours as he evolved and changed his stance a decade ago. You're still living in the 1840's.

As well, the study you keep citing is not without controversy:

Major academic organizations including the American Sociological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and American Medical Association dispute the validity of Regnerus's data and conclusions reached thereof, arguing that unlike previous studies, the statistically tiny number of same sex couples in a study whose sample group largely consisted of failed heterosexual marriages where one of the parents was allegedly homosexual, make it impossible to extrapolate any information about same sex parenting. A review carried out by the American Medical Association noted that:[20]

... The data does not show whether the perceived romantic relationship ever in fact occurred; nor whether the parent self-identified as gay or lesbian; nor whether the same sex relationship was continuous, episodic, or one-time only; nor whether the individual in these categories was actually raised by a homosexual parent (children of gay fathers are often raised by their heterosexual mothers following divorce), much less a parent in a long-term relationship with a same-sex partner. Indeed, most of the participants in these groups spent very little, if any, time being raised by a “same-sex couple.”[20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Regnerus#Same-sex_relationships_controversy

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7044
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #995 on: May 28, 2022, 07:55:22 AM »
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage? 

The purpose of marriage, first and foremost, is the continuation of the State and society as a whole. If it does not engage in that purpose (i.e. childless couples) then it should not confer any benefits to the parties involved.

That is to say: any marriage that doesn't result in procreation or adoption should be null and void within a few years from the government's perspective.

What about after the kids move out?  Or the woman goes through metapause and is unable to have kids?  Should the marriage be null and void in a legal sense?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3075
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #996 on: May 28, 2022, 09:57:37 AM »
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage? 

The purpose of marriage, first and foremost, is the continuation of the State and society as a whole. If it does not engage in that purpose (i.e. childless couples) then it should not confer any benefits to the parties involved.

That is to say: any marriage that doesn't result in procreation or adoption should be null and void within a few years from the government's perspective.

You think the Government should treat the populace as livestock, then?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3075
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #997 on: May 28, 2022, 10:03:14 AM »
You guys seem to say that he (Biden) is better than Trump

He is. By any reasonable metric, by his actions, by his life in general, he is better than Trump.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3075
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #998 on: May 28, 2022, 11:23:26 PM »
Another metric has emerged where Biden may be judged better than Trump. Despite the ongoing furore around the Uvalde school shooting, Trump went ahead and delivered his word salad to the assembled faithful at the NRA convention.

He read out the names of the children killed, struggling to pronounce them, and to top it all, he DANCED on stage at the end of his speech. These kids haven't even had a proper burial yet, and he's dancing. Dancing.

Biden took to the mic soon after to express his sympathies and offer hope for change for the better following this. Trump danced.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8124
    • View Profile
Re: President Joe Biden
« Reply #999 on: May 29, 2022, 12:30:31 AM »
What about after the kids move out?

Evidence of contribution is fine for the continuation of the marriage as a reward.

Or the woman goes through metapause and is unable to have kids?  Should the marriage be null and void in a legal sense?

Yes, if she already doesn't have any children.

You think the Government should treat the populace as livestock, then?

Already does. All of them.