Quote:
|
Quote by: Dirty Name Do you agree or disagree that the neighborhood in which your hypothetical gay couple lives would be better off if their heterosexual neighbor kid stayed in school, got good grades and went on to be a productive member of the society in which they all live? |
#1, i agree.
#2, having a gay couple or 2 in the community does not stop that.
#3, what does this have to with what’s under the debate?
Quote:
|
Quote by: Dirty Name Anyone can selfishly claim that they don't give a crap what happens to the child, since they didn't conceive her and they aren't responsible for her. But if you want to live in total anarchy, you're in the wrong country. If you want to live in total isolation, then go buy an island somewhere, raise your own food, build your own defenses, treat your own illnesses with whatever remedies you can come up with, and when your gay lover gets ill and dies, you can die knowing that you have no legacy with which to speak of, and that if everyone did it your way, mankind would last but a single generation. |
huh? is that your justification why a child-less gay couple (child-less hetero couple as well) should pay part of the cost for the education of their neighbor’s kids?
Quote:
|
Quote by: Dirty Name For the rest of us, reality dictates that we all do our share, so that there is food to eat, clothes to wear, and homes to live in. And a large community of people seem to do best when the children are educated and prepared for life when they become adults. |
share, by default, is a two-way street, dirty. otherwise it’s called “exploit”.
Quote:
|
Quote by: Dirty Name You can either pay for their education now, or you can pay for their welfare check later. So in order to reap the benefits of living in a community with other people, it's necessary to pay for some of the common costs which the majority believes is in the best interest of the society at large.
I can't believe you people are actually making me explain this basic stuff. |
so as gay couple, you’d better pay (way) more to get the approval of “the majority” and their “best interest” “at large”, eh?