From: Jeff North 

On 19 Mar 2007 04:57:29 -0700, in alt.politics.homosexuality lorad474{at}cs.com
 wrote:

>| On Mar 18, 11:05 pm, "Radical Hippo"
 wrote:
>| > On Mar 19, 1:59 am, lorad...{at}cs.com wrote:
>| >
>| > > On Mar 18, 9:46 pm, "Richo"
 wrote:
>| >
>| > > > On Mar 19, 2:38 pm, lorad...{at}cs.com wrote:
>| >
>| > > > > On Mar 18, 4:19 pm, "Sound of Trumpet"

>| > > > > wrote:
>| >
>| > > > > >http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1799776/posts
>| >
>| > > > > "The bishop
>| > > > > referred to the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights where it
states
>| > > > > that "the family is the natural and
fundamental group unit of
society
>| > > > > and is entitled to protection by society and the
state."
>| >
>| > > > > "If family stability is weakened, the
fundamental group unit of
>| > > > > society is also weakened," Bishop Sgreccia
said. "
>| >
>| > > > > Sounds correct and obvious to me.
>| >
>| > > > And of course homosexuals have families and are part
of families.
>| > > > Mark.
>| >
>| > > Yes, they may be part of families.
>| > > But they cannot ever create families - other than by
artificial means.
>| > > Thus they cannot ever have normal families - nor have normal
>| > > marriages.
>| >
>| > Gays can have straight sex in the same way straights can have gay
>| > sex.
>|
>| If you say so.
>|
>| > And why are you so concerned about the ability to bear
>| > children?
>|
>| I am not overly concerned about procreative abilities. I am more
>| concerned about maintaining proper terminology and order in society -
>| as exists in the traditional family unit.

Are you sure you don't mean contemporary family unit? Todays family unit
(mum, dad 2.3 kids, house and white picket fence) only came about since the
1950's. Prior to that it was the extended family.

>| > This world is burgeoning with underfed, underloved
>| > children.
>|
>| Due, in large part to a breakdown of that same heterogenous marriage
>| unit - the family.
>| The same family unit that you, apparently, wish to even further
>| disempower - by equating it with less responsible abstract lifestyle
>| pairings.
>|
>| > You aren't helping the cause by standing in the way gay
>| > marriage, an institutional change that would benefit hundreds of
>| > thousands of people.- Hide quoted text -
>|
>| That's BS.
>| 'Gay marrige' produces no children.. so 'gay marriage' supporters have
>| absolutely no 'kids' in the debate anyway.
>|
>| Societies have usually allowed for odd pairings throughout history;
>| old bachelors or spinsters living togather.
>| Today those could be equated to 'civil unions', I suppose.
>| That should be enough.
>|
>|
>|
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau{at}yourpantsyahoo.com.au  : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag