His idea of equal protection is that it protects his right to screw people over.Okay. So, no study ever can be trusted is your contention? That's convenient, as that means that you can then ignore any empirical data that doesn't happen to fit with your personal world views.Ive linked the book before, but here it is again.You can have whatever views you want. No one is telling you you don't get to be a bigot; only that you don't get to force everyone else to behave according to your bigoted views.Where's your "tolerance" of me and my views asshole?Bigot - a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp. on religion, politics,or race. Considering your intolerant insistence on your opinion of homosexuals in spite of studies to the contrary, with which part of of that description do you take issue?
You mean, the book whose name you can't even remember, let alone whether you are citing it accurately? You mean That book? I think the fact that you can't even cite the source says everything about how much consideration your "source" deserves.Where's your consideration of the book and studies questioning the bias of numerous studies?
Tell you what. when you can actually give us an actual source, I'll be happy to go see what it has to say.
Wrong Why experts keep failing us--and how to know when not to trust them Scientists finance wizards doctors relationship gurus celebrity CEOs ... consultants health officials and more David H. Freedman 9780316087919 Amazon.com Books
Just read a story today in Discover magazine how when a number of cancer cell lines for scientific study were found to be misidentified,the scientist who propagated them sent out 69 letters to other scientists to cease using them, only 2 replied. 10,000 citations a YEAR are using studies made from these faulty cell lines. Now this is in an area of study that is very fact orientated. Studies about how well kids do in gay-marriages I think by nature are less objective.
Yeah...I think we're done...