[CanadianJeff]

westmanguy westmanguy:

I don't know how a black and white ideology of striving for "only the best case scenario" and "ideal and perfect or nothing at all" is not three different shades of "evil".

Explain to me, (seriously, please do), how in states where same-sex marriage/unions and adoption is illegal, that an orphan is better off a ward of the state drifting from group home to foster home as opposed to two financially sound members of the same-sex who have planned ahead and will meet every need of that child and will strive and provide for their future?

Here's a surprise for you Bart: I do not deny the fact that having one's biological parents raise them is ideal. But our world far from ideal. Children have their parents killed, are orphaned, have their mom or dad run off on some affair and abandon them, have a single mother, are raised by grandparents, are wards of the state, are in group homes, god knows what.

Of course, society should strive to have a child be raised by its two parents in a loving, stable home. But I cannot comprehend the ideology that would seek to keep a child struck by bad luck to not have both parents from being raised by two individuals who will love and care for them just because they are of the same-sex.

Actually I can say I would be more than willing to listen to the arguments if we ever reached a point where every single child had a home. I really would because I would want the best possible outcome for those kids.

As it stands we are far far away from that goal so why on earth would we ever deny a child an exit door from state care and foster homes? Having two loving adults same sex or not has to be better then state care. Especially if and when Catholic nuns and priests get involved in any way. Yep I went there.

[pineywoodslim]

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

I hate that you can chorkle and cheer how 'American' this is when America has been and still is so far behind this issue that they get lumped with third world countries for it

Not exactly.

In 14 states, including my own, gay marriage/civil partnership is perfectly legal, and has been for awhile

In the West, gay marriage is not yet recognized in Switzerland, Germany (pending), the UK (pending), Italy, or Australia. Most of Scandinavia only recognized gay marriage in 2009, the same year my home state of Iowa did. France approved of gay marriage only last month--30 days ahead of the US.

To say the US is "so far behind this issue that they get lumped with third world countries" is an inaccurate and misleading statement.

[Brenda]

pineywoodslim pineywoodslim:

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

I hate that you can chorkle and cheer how 'American' this is when America has been and still is so far behind this issue that they get lumped with third world countries for it

Not exactly.

In 14 states, including my own, gay marriage/civil partnership is perfectly legal, and has been for awhile

At state level, not at federal level.

Until last week.

[westmanguy]

I don't think its fair to deride America as incredibly "behind the times" on this issue in terms of the Western world.

The opposition in France was ridiculous. The majority supports gay marriage there, but France has a culture with strong strains of chauvinism, xenophobia, Franco-superiority, etc.

U.K. will get it soon, but you're having a lot of nuts put up a stink there. Australia is still not close to even considering it. I'm not sure where Germany is. I don't see Italy anytime soon.

And don't even get started with Asia. Vietnam might actually legalize it. But "western liberal democracies" in Asia aren't anywhere close. South Korea has an incredibly large and powerful evangelical right movement, and Japan has a lot of sexism/nuclear family BS to deal with. Philippines is incredibly religious. In China, its just too taboo still, even though small changes are starting there.

So no, the USA isn't decades behind the rest of the world.