Can someone tell me when it was that Gays had different drinking fountains?...

[Seawytch]

So can we...and do.



Census 2010: One-Quarter of Gay Couples Raising Children

That's another topic altogether,and only the next decade or so will demonstrate how poorly these sad confused children function in the real world .

Your fears are unfounded, entirely.

He knows that, he's trolling. Don't reply so I don't end up reading.

 

[Pop23]

Yes, I could marry a man, but I don't want to,

That's quite an admission.

Do you think that because you choose not to vote you are being discriminated against?

Because you choose not to speak, your right to free speech is denied?

 

[GreenBean]

That's another topic altogether,and only the next decade or so will demonstrate how poorly these sad confused children function in the real world .

Your fears are unfounded, entirely.

He knows that, he's trolling. Don't reply so I don't end up reading.

A study that finds children of gay or lesbian parents are much more likely to have social and emotional problems. The Gay Mafia is up in arms, they don't like the findings are going out of their way to refute the facts - they can't, the truth always wins out - in the long run.

Oe such Study by Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at The University of Texas , surveyed more than 15,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 39, asking them questions about their upbringings. Its findings are published in Social Science Research. .. http://www.markregnerus.com/uploads/4/0/6/5/4065759/regnerus_july_2012_ssr.pdf

Beacuse of this Study , Mr. Regnerus has had his career ruined and been subjected to Death threats from Gay Militants - yet none of them can refute his findings - they simply attack him instead -in hopes of discrediting his work - They Can't refute hi work - the facts styand for them self.

One survey question asked whether a parent had been in a same-sex relationship during a child's upbringing; Regnerus wanted to see whether there were differences between kids raised in a household by a parent in a same-sex relationship compared with those who were raised by biological parents who were married and heterosexual.

The survey results were measured by a set of 40 outcomes on social, emotional and relationship factors. Outcomes included whether a child had grown up to need public assistance like welfare, were more likely to have anxiety or depression, were more likely to be abused, or were more apt engage in unhealthier habits such as having more sexual partners, smoking or using drugs.

Regnerus' analysis identified 175 now-adult children who said they were raised by a lesbian mother, along with 73 who said their father was in a same-sex relationship. Focusing on the larger sample, the study found respondents whose mother had a same-sex relationship fared worse on 24 of the 40 tested outcomes, compared with children of an intact heterosexual couple. Kids of gay parents fare worse, study finds, but research draws fire from experts - CBS News


That's only the tip of the iceberg

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Your fears are unfounded, entirely.

He knows that, he's trolling. Don't reply so I don't end up reading.

A study that finds children of gay or lesbian parents are much more likely to have social and emotional problems. The Gay Mafia is up in arms, they don't like the findings are going out of their way to refute the facts - they can't, the truth always wins out - in the long run.

Oe such Study by Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at The University of Texas , surveyed more than 15,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 39, asking them questions about their upbringings. Its findings are published in Social Science Research. .. http://www.markregnerus.com/uploads/4/0/6/5/4065759/regnerus_july_2012_ssr.pdf

Beacuse of this Study , Mr. Regnerus has had his career ruined and been subjected to Death threats from Gay Militants - yet none of them can refute his findings - they simply attack him instead -in hopes of discrediting his work - They Can't refute hi work - the facts styand for them self.

One survey question asked whether a parent had been in a same-sex relationship during a child's upbringing; Regnerus wanted to see whether there were differences between kids raised in a household by a parent in a same-sex relationship compared with those who were raised by biological parents who were married and heterosexual.

The survey results were measured by a set of 40 outcomes on social, emotional and relationship factors. Outcomes included whether a child had grown up to need public assistance like welfare, were more likely to have anxiety or depression, were more likely to be abused, or were more apt engage in unhealthier habits such as having more sexual partners, smoking or using drugs.

Regnerus' analysis identified 175 now-adult children who said they were raised by a lesbian mother, along with 73 who said their father was in a same-sex relationship. Focusing on the larger sample, the study found respondents whose mother had a same-sex relationship fared worse on 24 of the 40 tested outcomes, compared with children of an intact heterosexual couple. Kids of gay parents fare worse, study finds, but research draws fire from experts - CBS News

That's only the tip of the iceberg

There are reasons why it drew fire. It wasn't done very well but let's say, for the sake of argument, that kids raised in a gay household are going to take a few hits for being raised that way while living in our homophobic culture? They will hardly be alone because many, many families raising kids are hardly ideal today. So in answer to your concerns, so be it. They will just have to grow up that much faster, like lots of other kids raised in straight households under less than perfect conditions.

 

[GreenBean]

Hey PaintMyHouse -I can see that you replied me -but not what you had to say. Not to worry though because you simply never have anything of any substance to say anyway. Obviously I must be doing something to get your dander up because you stalk me like my shadow - do me a favor ****** - stop sniffing around my butt - Thanks Pal now FOAD

 

[bodecea]

Hey PaintMyHouse -I can see that you replied me -but not what you had to say. Not to worry though because you simply never have anything of any substance to say anyway. Obviously I must be doing something to get your dander up because you stalk me like my shadow - do me a favor ****** - stop sniffing around my butt - Thanks Pal now FOAD

:lmao" One of the lamer posts today.

 

[GreenBean]

Hey PaintMyHouse -I can see that you replied me -but not what you had to say. Not to worry though because you simply never have anything of any substance to say anyway. Obviously I must be doing something to get your dander up because you stalk me like my shadow - do me a favor ****** - stop sniffing around my butt - Thanks Pal now FOAD

:lmao" One of the lamer posts today.

Still deflecting huh Bode ? Can't refute the facts huh ****** ? What's the matter homo - can't type with your mouthfull ? Just spit it out pal .

Getting back on Topic - Children raised by Queers -

A study that finds children of gay or lesbian parents are much more likely to have social and emotional problems. ...

Regnerus' analysis identified 175 now-adult children who said they were raised by a lesbian mother, along with 73 who said their father was in a same-sex relationship. Focusing on the larger sample, the study found respondents whose mother had a same-sex relationship fared worse on 24 of the 40 tested outcomes, compared with children of an intact heterosexual couple. Kids of gay parents fare worse, study finds, but research draws fire from experts - CBS News

 

[Pop23]

I wonder how many people don't vote and then complain that they are being discriminated against because they could have voted, but didn't want too.

Is that strange logic or what?

 

[GreenBean]

I wonder how many people don't vote and then complain that they are being discriminated against because they could have voted, but didn't want too.

Is that strange logic or what?

Or how many people do vote , even though they are already dead - strange how they almost always seem to vote for Democrats and Liberals.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, I could marry a man, but I don't want to,

That's quite an admission.



Do you think that because you choose not to vote you are being discriminated against?



Because you choose not to speak, your right to free speech is denied?

Do you stay up all night thinking up really bad analogies?

Blacks could have married blacks and whites whites. Some chose not to. Like your bullshit analogy now?

 

[Seawytch]

I wonder how many people don't vote and then complain that they are being discriminated against because they could have voted, but didn't want too.

Is that strange logic or what?

The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.
http://hnn.us/article/4708#sthash.OUtVnLtQ.dup.

So, these people wanted to marry outside their race. They should have just married someone of their race, right Pop?

 

[Pop23]

Yes, I could marry a man, but I don't want to,

That's quite an admission.



Do you think that because you choose not to vote you are being discriminated against?



Because you choose not to speak, your right to free speech is denied?

Do you stay up all night thinking up really bad analogies?

Blacks could have married blacks and whites whites. Some chose not to. Like your bullshit analogy now?

Poor SeaWytch, failed argument after failed argument. A black man could not marry any women he could get to agree to marry him, you on the other hand CAN, as you already admitted to, marry any man that would agree to it.

You are the the bullshit artist, not I.

You live an illogical life and expect to be able to understand logic?

You just don't "want" something and call that discrimination. In your world anyone saying no to a marriage proposal are denying your civil rights. In mine it's just the way it is.

I'll take mine any day.

 

[Seawytch]

That's quite an admission.







Do you think that because you choose not to vote you are being discriminated against?







Because you choose not to speak, your right to free speech is denied?

Do you stay up all night thinking up really bad analogies?



Blacks could have married blacks and whites whites. Some chose not to. Like your bullshit analogy now?

Poor SeaWytch, failed argument after failed argument. A black man could not marry any women he could get to agree to marry him, you on the other hand CAN, as you already admitted to, marry any man that would agree to it.



You are the the bullshit artist, not I.



You live an illogical life and expect to be able to understand logic?

What? That doesn't make any sense...which is why you obviously don't understand that your argument was tried...and DID fail. (At the SCOTUS)

 

[Seawytch]

Pop...the Lovings wanted to marry outside their race. They should have just married inside their own race, right? That is the argument YOU are making.

 

[Pop23]

I wonder how many people don't vote and then complain that they are being discriminated against because they could have voted, but didn't want too.

Is that strange logic or what?

The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.
History News Network | Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation

So, these people wanted to marry outside their race. They should have just married someone of their race, right Pop?

Did they "want" to be the race they were? Nope.

Comparing a want to a race is weak.

But it's all you have I guess

 

[Pop23]

Pop...the Lovings wanted to marry outside their race. They should have just married inside their own race, right? That is the argument YOU are making.

The Lovings were a male/female.

Keep it up, your killing me

Race is a superficial trait, homosexuality is not.

 

[Pop23]

Do you stay up all night thinking up really bad analogies?



Blacks could have married blacks and whites whites. Some chose not to. Like your bullshit analogy now?

Poor SeaWytch, failed argument after failed argument. A black man could not marry any women he could get to agree to marry him, you on the other hand CAN, as you already admitted to, marry any man that would agree to it.



You are the the bullshit artist, not I.



You live an illogical life and expect to be able to understand logic?

What? That doesn't make any sense...which is why you obviously don't understand that your argument was tried...and DID fail. (At the SCOTUS)

I'm talking logic to someone who wants an illogical relationship

Interesting huh?

 

[GreenBean]

Pop...the Lovings wanted to marry outside their race. They should have just married inside their own race, right? That is the argument YOU are making.

The Lovings were a male/female.

Keep it up, your killing me

Race is a superficial trait, homosexuality is not.

Pops - he/she/it is trying to "Frame" the argument - by race baiting, and equating a mental illness [homosexulaity] to a race/civil rights issue. It's an insult to yours, mine and every sane person intelligence and certainly an insult to decent and respectable African Americans.

 

[GreenBean]

That's quite an admission.



Do you think that because you choose not to vote you are being discriminated against?



Because you choose not to speak, your right to free speech is denied?

Do you stay up all night thinking up really bad analogies?

Blacks could have married blacks and whites whites. Some chose not to. Like your bullshit analogy now?

Poor SeaWytch, failed argument after failed argument.

Don't pity her , she'sused to it . Myself, Silhouette, Mal and others have been beating her up for months -why do you think she won't engage - she's tired of the humiliation - you're next on the long list GO GIT ER POPS !

 

[Seawytch]

Pop...the Lovings wanted to marry outside their race. They should have just married inside their own race, right? That is the argument YOU are making.

The Lovings were a male/female.

Keep it up, your killing me

Race is a superficial trait, homosexuality is not.

Superficial? I don't think that's the word you want. You're still missing the point. You're using the same argument that was used to keep anti miscegenation laws on the books.