(2009-05-14) — The boom in childbirth by unwed mothers has some American homosexuals concerned about the sanctity of their newly-minted marriages, according to a spokesman for the Defense of Gay Marriage Association (DOGMA).
Some 40 percent of all children are now born to unwed mothers, according to National Center for Health Statistics. Among minority groups, the news is even more stunning. Black single Moms give birth at twice the White rate, and Hispanic solo mothers bear babies at triple the rate.
“All of this is bad news for the institution of traditional gay marriage,” said the unnamed source at DOGMA. “It’s hard not to see this as another example of homophobia. Gays finally start getting the right to marry, and what happens? We see straights abandoning the practice. Heterosexual bigots are looking at marriage and apparently saying, ‘That’s so gay!’”
The advocacy group claims that no society has survived the collapse of the institution of marriage, and it backs a Constitutional amendment forcing cohabiting couples to wed.
38 responses so far ↓
1 gafisher // May 14, 2009 at 12:21 pm
The marriage “traditions” being defended by “DOGMA” are related to property rights and legal benefits, things which unwed mothers are coincidentally denied. Children are not even a reasonable by-product of gay marriage, except by purchase.
2 Jesse Raphial // May 14, 2009 at 12:31 pm
I think we are over-looking the real problem here, women are just using men to breed, unless ofcourse you are gay. I think there needs to be compensation for this act.
3 golightly1963 // May 14, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Are you kidding me? Do you really think that all those women WANT to be single mothers? Some, maybe - but not all!
Talk about putting the spin on statistics! Wow!
4 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 2:05 pm
golightly, the article did claim that many were indeed doing so by choice.
Did you catch the Popes insistance on “family values” today? There are about 2000 couples nationwide that still fit that model. I happen to be one of them (30th anniversay looming) but I don’t know or know of many others that qualify which I’m betting is a large part of the reason we are in this mess today…what do you know, the Pope and I agree on something…
Good stuff Scott
5 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 2:06 pm
golightly, the article did claim that many were indeed doing so by choice.
Did you catch the Popes insistance on “family values” today? There are about 2000 couples nationwide that still fit that model. I happen to be one of them (30th anniversay looming) but I don’t know or know of many others that qualify which I’m betting is a large part of the reason we are in this mess today…what do you know, the Pope and I agree on something…go figure
Good stuff Scott
6 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 2:07 pm
doh!
7 R.A.M. // May 14, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Don’t you just love Obama-bots who claim they are smarter than others, yet not only ignore Scott’s “built in” notification that, “it appears you have ALREADY said that”, BUT change or add a few words to MAKE SURE they get something posted twice, then add an EXTRA post acting like it was all a mistake!
The other “personality”, (Yapping@You—half human, half Chihuahua), did the same thing a few posts back. These “idjits” are some real rocket scientists!
No one wants to read the jibberish these “blabberers” have to say the first time, let alone double posts of mis-information!
BTW, that should be it’s real name—-blabberinyetagain.
30 years of marriage my eye!
PS: That good troll, bad troll thing you two fools pull here is NOT fooling anyone.
Is it JL3?
8 Emily_Dallas // May 14, 2009 at 3:44 pm
So, does this article say gay marriage will cause society to crumble?
I’m sure that the US could do it even though it has caused other societies to instantly crumble. I’m sure that none of us remember countries that no longer exist such as Canada, Spain, England or the Netherlands since they recognized gay marriage and collapsed into anarchy.
9 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Looks like Scott is in the “prediction” business…cause he covered this story days ago…
Pelosi in public dispute with CIA over interrogation
and it’s a headline in the news today. Scott, what’s the “pick 6″ number for Saturday?
10 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Love you too RAM, always have, always will.
Which one am I? Good cop or bad? Can I be Starsky, LAY can be Hutch and you dear RAM can be Huggy Bear.
How’s that sound?
11 JamesonLewis3rd // May 14, 2009 at 3:57 pm
http://www.redstate.com/blog/2009/05/14/nancy-pelosi-is-the-most-gullible-person-alive/
12 R.A.M. // May 14, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Finally! The APA now admits there is no “gay gene”, something we have known all along, that being a homosexual it is a CHOICE!!!
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=528376
This news may make Perez Hilton and Wanda Sykes have a kidney failure or heart attack!
13 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 4:11 pm
A choice eh? And what would make anyone “choose” that sort of thing. Give me one reason, anything at all. I’ll wait
14 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 4:14 pm
What are the “perks” so to speak?
15 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 4:33 pm
JL3…we “get it”…Nancy is guilty and…brace yourself…torture is wrong. Get over it already eh. I liked you better when you were iinsulting me (like RAM still apparently loves to do)
16 baragirl // May 14, 2009 at 4:43 pm
I’ve only known a few Gay people (that I am sure are gay) but those chose being gay to make Mummy And Daddy really mad,and hurt.Yet in today’s climate M and D have to accept it ,if they ever want to see the child again.
One I know sleeps in a different bedroom than it’s mate, so I don’t think there is really a lot of “Gaity ” involved.
17 baragirl // May 14, 2009 at 4:48 pm
JL3 ,do you ,or anyone else on here care if Bobber likes you?
18 baragirl // May 14, 2009 at 4:52 pm
RAM maybe Perez and Wanda will marry each other and become the 2001st married couple in the USA, you know just to mess up the statistics?
19 Emily_Dallas // May 14, 2009 at 5:09 pm
So if it’s not a gene, it’s a choice? I don’t remember learning that in college. Actually, the prevailing theory is that the mother’s body produces antigens when she’s carrying a boy. These antibodies think that the male chromosome needs to be fought off. These antigens are what causes homosexuality in males. Know something about what you’re speaking of before you spout off “facts”, people.
20 upnorthlurkin // May 14, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Great link, JL3! Next thing you know, she’ll giggle and claim old age! Maybe her last face lift is causing forgetfulness!
21 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Bara girl, it must be wonderful to be so completely clueless. You are soooo cute, I could just give you a big hug!
22 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm
RAM, you really have those smiley faces down. Who says you can’t teach and old dog really silly tricks?
Seriously, I can’t decide which, between those and you calling me names, makes you appear more foolish.
I miss Hank, he knew how to fight
23 Newsman // May 14, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Pretty bluntly stated there Jesse. Of course in essence it is basically true at the insistence of nature. In truth there is more to it then that for a woman.
Woman was put on earth to propagate the species, whether you figure that god is involved or not. Naturally she does not want her child fathered by just any schmuck that bops along. She wants a man who cares for her, who is successfull in the world, who will provide security for her and her child, etc., etc., because the child is, and should be, her priority # 1.
Now when it comes to man he is by nature a pretty promiscuous animal. Thank god, or whatever, women are not as basically promiscuous as men. Otherwise there would not be space left for a single jack rabbit on our planet !
Boberhead obviously is a good example of the old fashioned values that used to hold sway in our society, and hopefully will return someday ! And Boberhead is to be congratulated and admired for his loyalty to those old fashioned values.
Too many today give evidence that they have any values at all !
24 Jesse Raphial // May 14, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Having had six children and been married several times, I am not sure where the women’s head is sometimes. But it does seem like a trend to have children without both parents around. Which can’t be healthy, regardless of which parent is the schmuck. Values have everything to do with it, our soceity is lacking in this department. I think being blunt is pretty much all that is left.
25 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Our kids have always been annoyed that we’ve stayed together. Actually now that they are “grown up” they’re pretty amazed and grateful after all was said and done. Of course the youngest just returned home, unwed and pregnant so, example isn’t everything…but we love all 3 and they love us back and in about 6 weeks I guess our newest grnaddaughter can start to be annoyed by us as well.
But w/o both parents (mostly ageeing) I don’t see how anyone stands a fair shot…most of the posters here had 2 parents that stayed together.
Sad
26 U NO HOO // May 14, 2009 at 8:26 pm
It isn’t a matter of right or wrong. It is a matter of what got society to where it is. Gay marriage didn’t produce a world population of 6 billion. That’s all.
27 camojack // May 14, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Sanctity of gay marriage?
Now there’s an oxymoron for you…
28 boberinyetagain // May 14, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Who you calling an ox?
29 JamesonLewis3rd // May 14, 2009 at 10:30 pm
http://www.redstate.com/brianfaughnan/2009/05/14/pelosi-beclowns-herself/
30 Fred Sinclair // May 14, 2009 at 11:42 pm
From prior thread - Re: torture
El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles de la Porciúncula a/k/a The Village of Our Lady, the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola [English] a/k/a Los Angeles, California a/k/a L.A. is still pretty much where it belongs.
Los Angeles has an estimated population of 3.8 million and spans over 498.3 square miles (1,290.6 km) in Southern California. Additionally, the Los Angeles metropolitan area is home to nearly 12.9 million residents. Who, thanks in no small part to “Waterboarding” are still pretty much where they belong.
Without regard to what some may think of Rush Limbaugh (love him or hate him) he does have a reputation of getting his facts straight before airing them. According to him, on today’s show, the plot for the attack on L.A. - designed to make the terrorist attack of 9/11/01 pale in comparison was stymied as a result of information garnered by way of “waterboarding”.
Since our military troops are routinely subjected to “waterboarding” as part of their training - I cannot view the practice as torture by any stretch of the word or imagination.
The liberal leftists get their panties all twisted up in a knot over “waterboarding” for one reason and one reason only. It works! And of course that does not play well with their agenda of bringing America to it’s knees, abrogating their drive for total power and control of every facet of life of the American people. Without aggrandizing the ramifications of one crisis after another they cannot succeed in creating their Socialist Union.
31 Laughing@You // May 15, 2009 at 2:01 am
“Don’t you just love Obama-bots who claim they are smarter than others,”
Maybe not all, but you for sure!
You put five happy faces in post 7 alone. How many other happy faces do you see here?
This, not to mention the other moronic content of your posts. It’s clear you didn’t finish grade school, let alone grad school. Now, get back on your scooter, and quit sticking out your tongue at the adults, you simpleton!
Everthink
32 Laughing@You // May 15, 2009 at 2:27 am
“According to him, on today’s show, the plot for the attack on L.A. - designed to make the terrorist attack of 9/11/01 pale in comparison was stymied as a result of information garnered by way of “waterboarding”.”
What is wrong with you Fred!
The day that lard can druggie proves to anyone, whose mind hasn’t stopped functioning altogether, that this is true, I and most other Democrats will clear the front row for him to sit.
“Since our military troops are routinely subjected to “waterboarding” as part of their training - I cannot view the practice as torture by any stretch of the word or imagination.”
So, I guess you were waterboarded when you were in the Air Corps; is that true? Where do you get this stuff? Oh, yeh, from “Ol’ Lard Can”. Did they waterboard him when he was in the service, or what?
Everthink?
33 gafisher // May 15, 2009 at 7:41 am
Well said, Fred Re#30. Though it’s all but impossible to prove what might have happened, we can say with certainty that the terror attacks which occurred elsewhere didn’t happen here in the U.S. under the Bush-Cheney administration. And, to give credit where credit is due, we must also note the approval and encouragement these policies received, however privately, from Nancy Pelosi.
(Interesting to note how quickly your post received its first twisted-p@nty response, by the way. Though the troll’s comments are themselves content-free, they often point to the worthwhile posts.)
34 Fred Sinclair // May 15, 2009 at 9:15 am
It’s more than just obvious that like so many others who hate Rush there are certain despots who parrot what they’ve heard others say, without ever having listened to him for 3 hours Mon - Fri for even one week, let alone one month. They rely on someone else to do their thinking for them.
Some call them “brain dead”; however I am more generous as I refer to them as “the uninformed”. If in fact they were informed, it would be impossible for them to continue quoting the Daily Koz’s mantra.
Mark Levin on Pelosi (talk about brain dead - I feel so sorry for her)
You may have listened to this….it’s about three weeks old…..but Levin and many others will push hard to have her admit this under oath in court. I’ll bet that Nobama throws her under the bus before it’s all over, just to shut her up…. I really believe she’s hanging herself slowly and will be booted out as Speaker……we’ll see.
By the way, where is Sandy Berger? LOL
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ME5dHWJEk4
35 JamesonLewis3rd // May 15, 2009 at 10:00 am
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/05/15/gallup-more-americans-pro-life-pro-choice-first-time-forecast-establishm
36 R.A.M. // May 15, 2009 at 4:21 pm
blabbermouse re#13, Maybe the same reason ANYONE would still be a lib and or defender of Obama? That defies common sense too—-:lol
blabbermouse re#22: Crying about me calling you names, while doing the same thing to me makes YOU look the foolish one. It’s like Clinton describing the meaning of “is”, or Pelosi saying she was never told about the waterboarding.
As for fighting, I bet you have not been in a fight in your entire life. I would bet EVERYTHING I own on that FACT!!!
Here are some more smilies for you since I don’t do the double post thing you and your sweetheart “Yapping@You” do so often.
re#25: My apoligies to your kids, (if you really have any). I am sure they will be in therapy for MANY years to come having a dad like you!
37 R.A.M. // May 15, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Fred re#34:
Have you considered that Obama may have set old Nancy up for this fall? If she goes down, then he can blame ALL this “Stimulus” crap, and a lot of other stuff on her.
Who would be the next Speaker? Someone “Barry” could control, maybe Conyers?
Check out the “Pelosi first heard of 9/11 attacks-” thread. It appears we have some new posters and it is hilarious to see the trolls on their best behavior towards them.
Remember Eddie Haskell trying to pull the wool over the eyes of adults? The trolls are CLASSIC Haskell!
38 Friday night funny: waterboarding, same-sex marriage and capitalism « Wintery Knight Blog // May 16, 2009 at 2:33 am
[...] Our next funny is also from Scott Ott. It turns out that proponents of same-sex marriage are not at all happy with the way that heterosexuals undermining the sanctity of same-sex marriage. [...]
You must log in to post a comment.