I do not believe that children raised by two homosexual parents or by one or two parents who wish to pretend they're another gender than they are are being raised in a healthy environment.

As individuals, we are not the complete embodyment of the species. A man and a woman must join to produce a child; an offspring in which a part of them lives on. This process, which offers the only sort of immortality we can know, many philosophers believe to be the ultimate form of transcendence we can know as well. Sex is a naturally good thing. Its qualities of friendship, unification, pleasure, and transcendence are all positive. Chemicals are released during sex which aid in bonding; the same chemicals released in a mother at child birth (and for months after) to aid in the bonding a mother has for her child.

Men and women are different; but only together can they produce a child. Only together is the ideal (ie, should be the aim) way for them to raise that child. Two men cannot produce a child. Two women cannot produce a child. Pretending that because two men or two women can technically meet a child's needs after it is born does not change the fact that children are not naturally raised this way.

Bloody Aussies. Can't tell the difference between a penis and a vagina any better than an X and a Y.

>>and there is exactlly the problem where us leftists call for regulations<<

Leftists calling for "fair" lending (ie, lending to people who couldn't repay their loans) contributed in large part to the problem.

I don't have to suffer for anyone's foolishness. They didn't mess up with my money. Sure, I could feel some hurt as a result of their retardation; but that would only be short-term and I'd feel less in the long run than if my money was used to bail out the retards. Of course, that's what we're doing. Press conference clips and power are what matter, not long term justice and wealth creation.

>>why in this economic climate would you be hoping for another 3 million Americans to loose their jobs? <<

Their companies are losing money. The purpose of a company is to create wealth. They're only creating FAILSAUCE. It only hurts us to give them more to waste==>lose.

>>And many of the gay men I know are more masculine than straight men I deal with on a daily basis.<<

Nonsense. In the past 20 years or so the [w00f!] of Amerika has resulted in these half-breeds. They're all gay. They're just too dumb to know it.

I wasn't talking about their own opinions of themselves. I have a psychologist buddy from college and a few other friends with degrees in psychology (having studied it a lil myself. fascinating stuff). I don't associate with many people who consider themselves mentally ill and in need of medication. I was just speaking from the experience of those I knew well enough to be well-aware the distress was there and real.

I don't have anything against homosexuals. I'm an avid fan of the individual; to each his own. It's really none of my business. It doesn't hurt me.

Half of my post was just playing the devil's advocate. But after saying the line above this one one time, a man asked me: "What if it was your kids?" It's true that I don't see it as mentally healthy.

I'm still amazed at how you made such a small minority %wise such a huge majority %wise of your friends.

>>He is right, to an extend that all babies are the same until one point in the pregnancy(healthy babies that is). <<

Which is some point before conception, since babies have their X-Y chromosome combination already at that point? And here I was thinking conception started the whole thing. Man I need an education.

lol @ insult to the English language. I should start a thread purely to educate posters on "your" / "you're" and "their" / "there". Hell, when I grew up we knew that you don't even say your/you're the same. Damn kids these days.

>>the problem is complacency.  we're happy to sit here and think we're the best while other countries are actually working their asses off (or sacrificing mass population) to get to where they need to be, that is, ahead of us.<<

Which is why those of us who work hard are terrified of the damage Obama will do to our great / once great nation and the futures of our children.

>>and a common pattern for those moral judgments are the consequences that affect a society<<

That's one.

>>The problem is when we run around and say that nature has these mighty laws, and that there is an imperative to follow them. It sounds a lot like religion when you do that.<<

What about those that look more like a social contract? Their basis is not religious.

>>I want a moral theory that is empirically testable. The ones that name an ought and a principle to decide what we ought to do are not empirically testable and are just as irrational as religion.<<

Only if you discount philosophy entirely in favor of mathematics. Which is not capable of the sort of reasoning necessary here.

>> If I asked you to prove that we ought to do x from an experiment, you would not be able to. I'm assuming you agree that experience or observation should be our guide to what we believe, yes?<<

I think reason and philosophy have more to offer than good fiction. I don't think mathematics can offer these sorts of answers. I think there's more to being an ideal human being than doing utilitarian math well. (as I explained in my The Official Thread of God thread)

420 always tells the truth more concisely than me without bothering to engage the heathens. I seek his wisdom. I shall eat his brains.

Thank you for your very basic statement of support for moral relativism, Justinian. Feel free to respond to my initial arguments against it at any time.

When a human being is a separate living being with unique DNA is semantics? Science has really changed since I studied it.

? I was quoting you. That's dictating to you what you said? Go learn to read or don't bother responding to me. If I wanted to deal with angry children I'm sure I could find plenty to help closer to home.

Cannibalism, incest, and all sorts of crazy things happen in nature. Okay, some animals rape others. What's your point? Man has raped woman before. What's your point? It's right because people/animals do it sometimes?

Don't get angry at me because you made repeated statements that rape is wrong for relativist reasons, which is to deny essentialist reasons. A person can hold both, but in choosing the one position they hold firm to it's the essentialist claim when it's both. You're a dolt. And it makes you angry. It's not my problem.

>>that would be less here since health care prices aren't driven up by insanely high insurance against claims<<

It's be $0. You wouldn't be able to provide it, and I'd be dead. It'd be a net-loss, because I pay a lot in taxes every year and will continue to, but it's important you not consider that in your socialized healthcare that gives poor care.

>>Why would you say that care wouldnt be available in say, Europe? We use the same research you do and the specialised hospitals are top notch.<<

You don't have the technology. You don't have all of the procedures. There's a reason people come to the USA for medical care and they don't come to your country. And it's not for the food, the women, or the scenery.

>>Your gender can be different from your sex. Anyone who uses them interchangeably in all situations is using them incorrectly.<<

Unless, of course, they're talking about healthy individuals.

>>and that's clearly not the case (e.g. two-spirits).<<

I'm not a witch? I don't believe witches have the best and most accurate account of the world? No one with knowledge of science does. And science has done great things for humanity! Let me buy you any textbook pubished in the past 300 years?

>>Aaaah, but then there would never be a logical explanation for the term "girly man!"<<

It's a word for all of the mentally troubled young girls and boys (like Theodora; who, in fact, has a penis) who want to pretend they're something other than their XY or XX genetics that make up human beings. I again want to point out that I have nothing ill to say of those with genetic disorders involving their X and Y chromosomes; it's the other-wise healthy retards who grow up to be so psychologically [ ]ED UP that want to redefine basic language and mislead because they want their illness to be legitimized.