DescentBB

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/texas-g ... marriages/

I can't tell if this is satire or not but blaming violence on gay marriage? LOL. Sure made my night.

I wonder what's next. Blaming an Ebola outbreak on gay marriage?

It reminds me of this.

[youtube]9S4cldkdCjE[/youtube]

Here's the logic to his argument:

“A lot of these problems are created by the breakdown of the family, which the redefinition of would only accelerate,” Perkins opined.

No.. being poor and uneducated causes crime to go up.

He tried to justify his opposition to gay marriage by tying it to a very real proven catalyst for trouble. The problem (well, one of his problems) is those 'evil gay people' aren't any more prone to single parenthood than straight people.
So, yea, loony.

If he benefits at the voting booth from selling loony it Is proof that gerrymandering must go.

Isaac wrote:Here's the logic to his argument:

“A lot of these problems are created by the breakdown of the family, which the redefinition of would only accelerate,” Perkins opined.

No.. being poor and uneducated causes crime to go up.

I’ll say it again…wrong.

There is no direct connection between poverty, crime and violence, some of the poorest societies on earth are also the most non-violent. (but, even monks can be driven to violence, just look at the current situation in the east)

Just take organized crime as the perfect example, those gangs are rolling in cash…yet they are one of the most violent cultures in existence.

Plenty more examples…Mass murders…911 perpetrators…are mostly well to do families…etc.

When looking for the causes of violence and crime you must look elsewhere, and mostly you will find some kind of oppression or other root causes.

The dysfunctional family “can” be a root cause of dysfunctional society, but that being said…gay marriage has nothing to do with a dysfunctional society. And that’s what I find as the main problem with people like him, you take a proper message and taint it with loonytoon associations, then people have ammo against the true parts, and the entire message goes to hell.

It’s a shame the only people left with the balls to point out things like the dysfunctional family has to be bigots, the rest have been shouted down.

Darn middle class people keep trying to rob me a the the ATM.

Spidey, if I was as limber as your logic, I'd be a yoga master.

Isaac wrote:Darn middle class people keep trying to rob me a the the ATM.

Spidey, if I was as limber as your logic, I'd be a yoga master.

I suggest you take another look at your conclusions, because Spidey brought a pretty strong argument. Be careful about causation vs. correlation.

Furthermore, consider that there's a relatively strong case for strong family support causing better education, and better education causing better financial status.

I'd argue that the causation relationship that makes the most sense is that strong families cause lower crime... and that better education and financial status only happen to coincide with lower [blue collar] crime only because strong families also cause those, too.

So help me god, I will start posting maps and stats all over this thread. Don't make me do it! I'm gonna! It's almost my lunch break! I'll do it! I'm kicking dirt up as we speak!

I don't think this guy is a loon because he thinks familial breakdown contributes to poverty and violence. I think he's a loon because he thinks allowing gay couples the secular legal benefits of marriage contributes to familial breakdown.

I think some clarification is in order. Spidey said two different things:

1.

Spidey wrote:There is no direct connection between poverty, crime and violence...

When looking for the causes of violence and crime you must look elsewhere, and mostly you will find some kind of oppression or other root causes.

Not sure that I completely agree there (by itself, the poverty/crime correlation doesn't make it a causal relationship, but I do think there is likely some level of causal linkage there).

[This is probably a good enough topic for its own thread.]

2.

Spidey wrote:The dysfunctional family “can” be a root cause of dysfunctional society, but that being said…gay marriage has nothing to do with a dysfunctional society.

Agreed.

Seems that even if we disagree on #1 above, there's at least a consensus (so far) here that the "gay marriage makes the society dysfunctional" part of the representative's claim is loony.

Spidey wrote:I’ll say it again…wrong.

There is no direct connection between poverty, crime and violence, some of the poorest societies on earth are also the most non-violent. (but, even monks can be driven to violence, just look at the current situation in the east)

sorry, but it is YOU who is wrong. While there are cultural differences that cause variation between different societies and nations, within a given society, it is WELL documented that poverty and lack of education are the primary indicators of adult violence.

\Just take organized crime as the perfect example, those gangs are rolling in cash…yet they are one of the most violent cultures in existence.

ask any Italian. Organized crime was BORN of extreme poverty and lack of access to education in the early Italian immigrant community. The idea that they are rolling in money, by the way, is a myth. Virtually every soldier I've ever known lived pretty close to the edge, dependant upon ongoing criminal work. The guys at the top are rolling in cash, not the vast majority, who are uneducated and mainly grew up poor.

Plenty more examples…Mass murders…911 perpetrators…are mostly well to do families…etc.

now you are tossing in psychopaths and religious fanatics, with separate drivers, not common criminals at all.

When looking for the causes of violence and crime you must look elsewhere, and mostly you will find some kind of oppression or other root causes.

well, if you do, you are ignoring plain facts that you find inconvenient, nothing more.

callmeslick wrote:sorry, but it is YOU who is wrong. While there are cultural differences that cause variation between different societies and nations, within a given society, it is WELL documented that poverty and lack of education are the primary indicators of adult violence.

At least when it comes generally to crime:

I argue correlation and not causation. Strong family values in poverty are much less likely to produce crime than the lack of family values in poverty. Conversely, wealth & education don't seem to eliminate crime so much as make it take more palatable forms. (say, tax fraud)

Spidey, GET ON MY LEVEL

-----------------------------------------------------------------


In the American Sociological Review journal, based on the data of 1,223,000 people or a 1% sample (p.120) size of the US, Judith and Peter Blau, from the State university of New York at Albany and the Columbia University, concluded that “High Rates of Criminal Violence are apparently the price of racial inequalities.”(p.126)

http://www.soc.umn.edu/~uggen/Blau_ASR_82.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------------

"A representative population sample of 1420 rural children aged 9 to 13 years at intake were given annual psychiatric assessments for 8 years (1993-2000)."

"An income intervention that moved families out of poverty for reasons that cannot be ascribed to family characteristics had a major effect on some types of children's psychiatric disorders, but not on others. Results support a social causation explanation for conduct and oppositional disorder, but not for anxiety or depression."

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... eid=197482

-----------------------------------------------------------------


"This paper presents a set of empirical results on the relationship
between income and crime victimization and
how that pattern has changed over time. National victimization
data suggest that property crime victimizations
have become increasingly concentrated among the poor
over the last twenty years."

http://www.ny.frb.org/research/epr/1999 ... df#page=93

--------------------------------------------------

"The main conclusion of this paper is that income inequality, measured by
the Gini index, has a significant and positive effect on the incidence of crime."
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEC/ ... uality.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------


I just grabbed those because I didn't need to login to access them. If I actually logged in, I could go on for days. You just let me know if you need more, spidey.

Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

Spidey wrote:Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

I like how you go "who needs peer reviewed journals when I have an opinion I invented by watching the news?" You're going to make me login to the database, aren't you? You really need me to wash you with a hundred articles you're not going to read. You're amazing. I'm going to do it just so you can go, "Duh...Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them." I want to see how many times you're going to side-line what I wrote and go back to your boiler-plate response.

Well, your very first link pretty much proves my point, so why should I keep reading?

So you're saying: “High Rates of Criminal Violence are apparently the price of racial inequalities." Exactly that?

Did you read that article?

Yes, did you? You didn't answer my question.

Well, I'd like to quote some of it, but the pdf is not in text format.

The answer is they properly identify the "root" problem, but then go on to misidentify it in the same article.

Spidey wrote:Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

and underlying causes would be, again? Oh, yes, using your own examples: deep, nasty prejudices encountered. Once again, ask any third generation Italian American

Ferno wrote:http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/texas-g ... marriages/

I can't tell if this is satire or not but blaming violence on gay marriage? LOL. Sure made my night.

I wonder what's next. Blaming an Ebola outbreak on gay marriage? ...

From the commentary I wondered if it was perhaps a bit of a stretch, but having read it I believe he is right on--he's not exaggerating. Respect, to someone with sense enough to acknowledge the importance of the family, and integrity enough to stand in opposition to the insane LGBT social movement.

Even when I was growing up, among my peers a family as healthy as mine was a very rare thing. My parents didn't do everything right, but they were determined to have a healthy family, and as a result of that determination they did quite a remarkable job of raising 5 kids. My parents are the only ones in their respective families who have a healthy family--the only ones who have stuck it out (not divorced). Many people around us/them did and still do too lightly dismiss their determinations in favor of lightly-held, popular opinions. Things can be a lot more important than an ignorant perception of reality and shallow emotionalism can allow for. Healthy families are huge. How can you have a healthy society unless you first have healthy families?

Spidey wrote:Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

Quoted for truth.

Also agree with Snoopy's comments so far about correlation and causation.

callmeslick wrote:

Spidey wrote:Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

and underlying causes would be, again? Oh, yes, using your own examples: deep, nasty prejudices encountered. Once again, ask any third generation Italian American

Lol, you are the one showing your prejudices, I said organized crime…and you assumed the Italian mafia, when in fact there are many types of organized crime gangs, and the ones I had in mind are in South America.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Respect, to someone with sense enough to acknowledge the importance of the family, and integrity enough to stand in opposition to the insane LGBT social movement.

Can you explain how allowing gay marriage will weaken a family?

Vander wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Respect, to someone with sense enough to acknowledge the importance of the family, and integrity enough to stand in opposition to the insane LGBT social movement.

Can you explain how allowing gay marriage will weaken a family?

Vander, there must be some mistake on your part. With LGBT there is no family... There is LGBT. For a family you need a husband and a wife. I'll leave it to Top Gun to explain why in detail, because I'm sure he went further in biology than I did.

I can explain how absolutely wrong you are, but I don't think that'd satisfy you too much. Last time I checked, even between a husband and wife, functional reproductive bits have absolutely nothing to do with being good parents.

It is a start, though!

No, the truth is neither TG nor Vander will be satisfied with my argument--it is less than comprehensive. I thought I would just stick with the simple stuff. Someone that is going to argue that gay couples can make a good family are in violation of logic--a family is what came first--what got the great ball rolling, if you will, and now they believe they can change it while in play and claim the same merit as what that which society is founded on. Doesn't even begin to make sense. We're dealing with very creative and loose definitions here, and I would say a total lack of appreciation for the value of a healthy family.

These same people might as well argue that a good business can be birthed using bad business principles. It's still insanity to sanction bad business principles as good just because you claim a good business could come out of it. Sound results are a result of sound principles. There is nothing good or sound about LGBT no matter how many times the lie is repeated.

@Vander Gay marriage is an issue of morality, not economy. It has never been a matter of fairness in taxation. Maybe I wish I could get the same benefits as a married couple even though I'm single. Or maybe I should petition the government to allow me to enter into an economic partnership with any random person so that I can have the same benefits while raising a child singly, or with a girlfriend. You see the point of benefits is lost if the importance of a traditional family to society is not recognized. You may all congratulate yourselves on being blind to some very basic truths while foolishly believing yourselves to be the saviors of humanity.

Spidey wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

Spidey wrote:Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

and underlying causes would be, again? Oh, yes, using your own examples: deep, nasty prejudices encountered. Once again, ask any third generation Italian American

Lol, you are the one showing your prejudices, I said organized crime…and you assumed the Italian mafia, when in fact there are many types of organized crime gangs, and the ones I had in mind are in South America.

um, let's take any other organized criminal organization you'd like to cite. I chose the longest established group currently operating, plus the one I have seen closest up. I'm pretty sure you can extend it to all organized crime in this nation since day one, however. You see, the way 'organized crime' works is this: lots of low level troops scurrying around hustling and taking orders, scraping by. A handful of middle men and specialists(think bookmakers,loan guys,club owners,etc) who do okay and an upper echelon who gets the true rewards by way of organizational structure. One can also glean why such groups have internal violence. The need to break into or shrink that upper echelon is sometimes a financial imperative. Plus, before you consider the cash flow, remember that big chunks have to flow out in bribery to keep in any sort of regular operation. Organized crime in the US, while it pales compared to a lot of other places in the world is a quite substantial sub-economy. And, mirroring the 'real' economy, a handful reap the big bucks.

Yea yea yea, most of the money is concentrated at the top, and that top is exactly where the culture of violence stems from.

Nothing you have said counters my point in the least.

Oh…and organized crime didn’t start from poverty, it springs from the opportunities presented by stupid vice laws.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:@Vander Gay marriage is an issue of morality, not economy. It has never been a matter of fairness in taxation. Maybe I wish I could get the same benefits as a married couple even though I'm single. Or maybe I should petition the government to allow me to enter into an economic partnership with any random person so that I can have the same benefits while raising a child singly, or with a girlfriend. You see the point of benefits is lost if the importance of a traditional family to society is not recognized.

What happens if you meet the love of your life but it turns out she's infertile? Should you be denied the legal protections and benefits of marriage because "there is no family?" Of course not. Does your marriage cheapen or detract in any way from someone else's marriage or family? Of course not. Why should that change if the love of your life turns out to be a guy?

You may all congratulate yourselves on being blind to some very basic truths while foolishly believing yourselves to be the saviors of humanity.

We saviors do our best.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Vander, there must be some mistake on your part. With LGBT there is no family... There is LGBT. For a family you need a husband and a wife. I'll leave it to Top Gun to explain why in detail, because I'm sure he went further in biology than I did.

The ability to copulate does not mean a family.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:No, the truth is neither TG nor Vander will be satisfied with my argument--it is less than comprehensive. I thought I would just stick with the simple stuff. Someone that is going to argue that gay couples can make a good family are in violation of logic--a family is what came first--what got the great ball rolling, if you will, and now they believe they can change it while in play and claim the same merit as what that which society is founded on. Doesn't even begin to make sense. We're dealing with very creative and loose definitions here, and I would say a total lack of appreciation for the value of a healthy family.

So the numerous medical studies exhibiting that children raised by same-sex couples turn out exactly the same in pretty much every respect as those raised by heterosexual couples are "illogical" now? What matters for any child is that they have parents who love them and raise them well, not what dangly bits they happen to have.

Spidey wrote:Well, I'd like to quote some of it, but the pdf is not in text format.

The answer is they properly identify the "root" problem, but then go on to misidentify it in the same article.

That's some low effort bs...

Spidey wrote:Yea yea yea, most of the money is concentrated at the top, and that top is exactly where the culture of violence stems from.

Nothing you have said counters my point in the least.

Oh…and organized crime didn’t start from poverty, it springs from the opportunities presented by stupid vice laws.

the drive to make money via crime stems from poverty and second-class status in society. The laws merely present the opportunities, and were those opportunities not there, others will be found. Hence, such crime can be seen worldwide, despite different laws.

I think all cultures today have a common foundation where societies were/are designed around the roles females and males had. The maternal nurturing female and the strong provider male. One of each was required to produce offspring and the relationship they forged created what is the 'traditional marriage.

There is still enough of that paradigm at the core of societies everywhere that it is a universally cultural norm.

So if you have two mommies or two daddies you have an imbalance of roles. As well as the stigma of an 'abnormal' family culturally speaking.

If you remove the perception of the society that it is not normal you wipe out the stigma and that is what is underway with civil rights for gay people. However you can not legislate the removal of the legacy of hundreds of generations having created the roles of male and female and how that is now built into our history, art, etc. etc. and many sub cultural routines that shape behavior and gender specific expectations.

That adjustment will take its natural course and not be accelerated.
So until then two mommies or two daddies are a bit of a handicap or a distraction at the least when they replace the 'normal' parental unit.

callmeslick wrote:the drive to make money via crime stems from poverty and second-class status in society. The laws merely present the opportunities, and were those opportunities not there, others will be found. Hence, such crime can be seen worldwide, despite different laws.

I see you neglected to address my disagreements with this line of logic. My argument: the drive to make money via crime stems from our human greed. Poverty and second-class citizenship simply gives people much less to lose... so they have less incentive to stay away from the "splashy" crimes.... hence correlation but not causation. If you're rich enough, you get away with criminal behavior by bending the law around your actions.

Top Gun wrote:So the numerous medical studies exhibiting that children raised by same-sex couples turn out exactly the same in pretty much every respect as those raised by heterosexual couples are "illogical" now? What matters for any child is that they have parents who love them and raise them well, not what dangly bits they happen to have.

The topic is so politically weighted and the eligible study population so small that I don't think it's possible (at least at the moment) to conduct such studies are get statistically significant and unbiased results.

snoopy wrote:

callmeslick wrote:the drive to make money via crime stems from poverty and second-class status in society. The laws merely present the opportunities, and were those opportunities not there, others will be found. Hence, such crime can be seen worldwide, despite different laws.

I see you neglected to address my disagreements with this line of logic. My argument: the drive to make money via crime stems from our human greed. Poverty and second-class citizenship simply gives people much less to lose... so they have less incentive to stay away from the "splashy" crimes.... hence correlation but not causation. If you're rich enough, you get away with criminal behavior by bending the law around your actions.

not much I could quibble with there. One gets to a chicken v egg argument eventually. Is it greed to want at least a LITTLE of the prosperity that the American society doesn't give you access to? I dunno.......

Spidey wrote:Poverty, violence, crime, drugs…etc. are the symptoms, not the causes…I know it’s a difficult concept for some, but the underlying causes are responsible for all of them.

"At length I recollected the thoughtless saying of a great princess, who, on being informed that the country people had no bread, replied, 'Let them eat cake.''" -- Jean Jacques Rousseau, Confessions

When people have nothing, they have nothing to lose. So once people have nothing, they will resort to crime just to survive. Isn't that what survival of the fittest is all all about in a dog eat dog society?