Discuss and talk about any general topic.
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
I saw a similar topic on another forum. I wonder if homosexuals 'married' couples are going to divorce at a higher or lower rate than real married couples.
With male-female couples, the government gives women an incentive to divorce. Generally, as a whole, the couple end up worse of financially than if they'd stayed together most times, but the man usually gets the brunt of it. In some jurisdictions, courts often give the woman the kids, even if she decided to break covenant for no reason, had an affair, etc. They force the man to pay child support which helps pay her rent and expenses. So if she wants more autonomy, gets bored, or wants to 'marry up', the state will often force the man to subsidize that.
I don't suspect homosexual 'marriage' to be as stable as real marriage. The whole thing is based on sexual perversion, and I wouldn't expect perversion and one-partner-for-life to usually go together, though I suppose some of them may do that. I expect higher divorce rates just for the perversion factor.
But when it comes to economic issues, and men may be a bit more rational creatures, economically, than women, what's going to happen to gay divorces? Will the judge give the more wimpy, effeminate one the kids? What if they act and sound about the same? Will the give the less 'butch' lesbian the adopted kids? Do the kids go with the biological parents while the other one pays child support? The courts will have no solid guidelines on who to victimize in a divorce. How will the family court judges sort this mess out?
Gays want 'gay marriage' as a part of their social agenda and to make themselves feel accepted by society, and to force a kind of acceptance into the legal sphere. But I suspect that soon, when dudes have to pay other dudes alimony and they start seeing other homosexuals paying child support, that they'll cool down to the idea of marriage and it will be a rare thing.
With this law, http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/10/in-california-more-than-2-parents/, it's pretty idiotic that if a lesbian gives birth in a lesbian 'marriage' that the other is presumed to be the other parent. That's just idiotic. It kind of makes sense in a real marriage to be legally presumed the father of children born in the marriage unless proven otherwise.
Money will flow from the wealthier spouse to the poorer one in those cases. They'll be very few gay divorces because most gays are not interested in marriage. They just want us to believe that two homosexuals are just like normal people who can love and cherish one another. This isnt true. Homosexuals are more or less just beasts who want to have sex with anyone and everyone they can, which can range up to 500 other homosexuals per year, and sometimes over 1000 in a lifetime.
I was listening to the radio of one married homosexual Olympian from the 80s. He was going on and on about how gays are discriminated against. Then almost at the end of the interview, he admitted that he and his partner arent even faithful to one another.
They mostly all cheat on each other constantly with random strangers.
This isnt about love or family. It is about making a political statement and further deceiving humanity.
The next time you hear one of these homosexuals talk about marriage, try to figure out if they are really interested in monogamy, or even fidelity. None of them are.
Just imagine having the heart of a beast. You're willing to do anything, and there is no female governor on sex that puts the brakes on. It would be like northern Europe, but times 100.
Look for women who automatically want to please you because it pleases them. Any woman who seeks to please her man is a treasure. Even better if you don't have to ask but rather suggest.
So they live for 2 years?
I think you are on to something. I don't expect two homosexuals to typically be with each other for life. But I know that in Indonesia, homosexual have a reputation for violence, where one would stab some other guy in a jealous feud about another dude. So some of them might want another one to be 'faithful' or just to show him attention. But I don't expect perversion to be channeled well into a two-person-only relationship in most cases. I won't call that monogamy. Maybe monogaymy.
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], gsjackson, Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests