>pride parades are constitutionally protected free speech
mostly, yes, and rightly so, even if you disagree with the message
>gay marriage and child adoption are constitutionally protected private concerns
total non sequitur
Potentially adopted children (aka all children) have rights of their own.
Arguably, among those rights is that NOBODY has the right to permanently forbid them from having a father or a mother.
>Arguably, among those rights is that NOBODY has the right to permanently forbid them from having a father or a mother.
Ergo…
>Gays shouldn't adopt children.
>maybe you should stop using the constitution as your ultimate authority if you don't actually know what it does and does NOT say
The Constitution is clearly grounded in the Declaration of Independence, which holds that certain truths are self-evident…
>>holds that certain truths are self-evident
>SPECIFICALLY, the God given right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
>married faggots can claim adoption as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
>i'm NOT arguing FOR any of those things
>i'm only trying to get YOU to explain the basis of your BELIEFS as a way to get you to EXAMINE them more critically
Clearly there must be restrictions on liberty and "happiness" (if happiness is conceived of as accumulation of pleasure) since the liberty and "happiness" of one can impinge upon the liberty and happiness of another.
Surely I do not have the right to embrace a total joy in torturing others unto death.
Some homosexuals may proclaim that their well-being hinges on the "right" to adopt children.
It is a fact of life that not every child will have a functional father and mother.
Our Vice-President had no functional father.
But he was aware of the absence and that shaped his life, seemingly much for the better (in the long term).
Nobody has the right, as part of their pleasure-seeking, to permanently strip children of awareness that they desire a mother or father.
ERGO: homosexuals have no right to adopt children.