Child Of Lesbian Couple Speaks Against Same-sex Marriage.

[elektra]

There was a thread created awhile back with a video of a child from a same sex couple speaking in favor of gay marriage. Does that one child's opinion cancel out this one child's opinion?

No, that child is the biological son of the lesbian.

This man was an orphan adopted by Lesbians, not related.

 

[elektra]

Yes, Loving family, Scientific studies, all nice propaganda. How

Nice, anyone can link ot the American Academy of Pediatrics, so what, they are the Activists.

Link to the scientific research you speak of, it is so flawed and narrow that its ridiculous. I bet you never even read what you think exists.

A simple statement by a political organization is hardly valid.

wrong, AAP is THE most valid medical organization focused on the well being of children, and their medicine is based on science, so just follow the AAP links, IF you really care to understand the validity of the scientific evidence behind their statement...




“If a child has two loving and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond, it’s in the best interest of their children that legal institutions allow them to do so.”



A great deal of scientific research documents there is no cause-and-effect relationship between parents’ sexual orientation and children’s well-being, according to the AAP policy. In fact, many studies attest to the normal development of children of same-gender couples when the child is wanted, the parents have a commitment to shared parenting, and the parents have strong social and economic support. Critical factors that affect the normal development and mental health of children are parental stress, economic and social stability, community resources, discrimination, and children’s exposure to toxic stressors at home or in their communities -- not the sexual orientation of their parents.



According to the policy statement, the AAP “supports pediatricians advocating for public policies that help all children and their parents, regardless of sexual orientation, build and maintain strong, stable, and healthy families that are able to meet the needs of their children.”

American Academy of Pediatrics Supports Same Gender Civil Marriage

There are no links to follow to studies at the AAP site, you made the claim, produce a link that goes straight to this science you speak of.

Link to a study,

 

[frigidweirdo]

The key difference, which you have read in my posts before but are dishonestly pretending that you haven't, is one of cultural values and mores. Of course there will always be drunken stupidity in either the homo culture or the normal one. But what we have in your photos are random antics of a bunch of inebriated fools who will in no way the next day brag loudly in "pride" over what they did in public.

The DIFFERENCE is that we have LGBTs of all walks getting behind, marching in and never denouncing the gay pride parades that routinely, as a matter of sober pride, display lewd sex acts where they know, anticipate, expect, hope and see children of all ages in attendance.

I notice there were no children in the photos you posted of the random non-proud lewdness that wasn't going down main street at high noon on floats with bright colorful [you know how kids like bright primary colors] streamers and "drill ass not gas" signs for all the kids to see.

Gonna keep playing pretend? Or are you going to fess up to the stark and obvious difference of encouraged and "proud" mores [or complete lack of them ] displayed for all to see [hoping kids will see in the case of an organized "pride" parade..]?

In other words, my photos of the pride parades show what your culture is proud of and ENCOURAGES. Your photos show what the normal culture is not proud of and DISCOURAGES. And you pretend there is no difference between the two. Shame on you.

What makes you think I'm ignoring what you say?

You talk culture and morals as if there is only one way to proceed and everyone should stick to how it is.

USA 1789, culture and morals were different. USA 2014 no longer thinks owning slaves is acceptable, no longer thinks women are second class citizens, no longer thinks only some people should be able to vote, but that most should.

The culture and the morals of the USA have changed, they've changed since the 1950s, which had chanced from the 1900s, which had changed from the 1850s and so on. Within society there are different ways of seeing things, conflicts between people on what is and what isn't.

You have your morals, at times I think they are a little immoral. That's because I see things differently. Doesn't mean I don't understand these are your morals, just I reject them.

Maybe you live in a different world to me, but a LOT of people get amazingly drunk and spend a lot of time bragging about what they've done. It happens, it happens a lot. You might not hear of it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. They just might not tell you. Then again I only remember one gay person who bragged about his nonsense, but then he'd just come out and went a little crazy because he was free for the first time.

So, in the world I live in I'm FAR more likely to hear stories of drunken idiots, people sleeping with others and getting STIs (the last one was a guy who entered a PhD course about 1 year later in some biological subject, very smart and yet very stupid).

So you have a problem with gay pride events. Okay, what does this have to do with gay marriage? The answer is simple, nothing.

Does a gay person have to be married to take part in a gay pride event? Does a person in a gay pride event automatically have to want to get married.

PLEASE tell me the link between gay pride events and gay people getting married. Because, other than they're both gay, I don't see the link.
Like I've said somewhere, I lived with a guy with a very good degree in Philosophy who was training to be a high school teacher and his boyfriend was a professor at a very, VERY prestigious university. Would they go to gay pride events? Hell no they wouldn't.

So how moral is it to stop these two getting married because others have gay pride events?
How cultural is it to stop these two getting married because others have gay pride events?

Are gay pride events spontaneous? No. Usually you know they're happening. You don't want your kids to see them, then don't go.
Just like who would take their kid to a drunken bar street at midnight?

To summaries, you don't want gay marriage because of gay pride events which have nothing to do with gay marriage.

Where's the logic? I think it fell out the window.

 

[Silhouette]

No, that child is the biological son of the lesbian.

This man was an orphan adopted by Lesbians, not related.

You make a very good and important distinction. It is very difficult to remove from a natural parent a child, both legally and psychologically. Even if we know the situation is abusive on some levels. There is a threshold and we monitor it carefully. Professionals in child protective services balance the wellbeing and situation at the suspect home weighed against the damage that might be done moreso if the child was put in another even worse situation [foster care shuffles]. Foster care shuffles are just like orphanages only without the oversight. It is the shoving of children behind closed doors. Whereas public audits are allowed and done routinely on professional or official orphanages to insure the safety of the kids there.

In the situation of children in orphanages, we have the same people doing lewd sex acts soberly as a matter of pride hoping kids will be watching those parades, trying to access these orphans in the "best of the worst situation" to pull them into what all should know will be a an unmonitored nightmare for them. We have the evidence right in front of us:

Note the lesbians in the background demonstrating cheerful support of this and worse...

Orphans rely on society to monitor their safety and insure that any home they wind up in does not do things like this, or support things like this as a matter of professed subcultural "proud" values. The obvious here is that if they are doing this soberly, proud and in an organized display of what their culture's proud values are en masse and unrepentantly, we know that behind closed doors it will only get worse for orphans adopted out to people holding that type of "justified mindset".

If I was an adoption agent I would kill myself before I adopted a child into a home of any of the people in either of those photos.

 

[Silhouette]

PLEASE tell me the link between gay pride events and gay people getting married. Because, other than they're both gay, I don't see the link.
...So how moral is it to stop these two getting married because others have gay pride events?
How cultural is it to stop these two getting married because others have gay pride events?

Are gay pride events spontaneous? No. Usually you know they're happening. You don't want your kids to see them, then don't go.
Just like who would take their kid to a drunken bar street at midnight? .

The link is in the photos above. Particularly the second one. It shows a huge crowd marching along in full view of the lewd sex act performance. To my knowledge [and maybe you can correct me here] the gay community EN MASSE supports, promotes and condones gay pride parades knowing in advance what goes on there in front of all ages....purposefully....and no single gay person to my knowledge has spoken up to say "I do not condone gay pride parades and I think what they do there is completely inappropriate in front of children." You get an official statement from any gay leader or significant person, or any person willing to go to the mainstream media who is gay to say that and then get back to me, OK?

And it gets worse for those calling themselves gay or "LGBT". They just sponsored [over 60 groups in Canada, the US and Mexico] the release of the Harvey Milk postage stamp complete with rainbow "USA" on it. Also they have enshrined in law in California [again, with zero protests from the LGBT community or any single gay person] that all children in public schools need to celebrate Harvey Milk's gay accomplishments because, and I quote the actual written law here:

"Harvey Milk... perhaps more than any other modern figure, Harvey Milk’s life and political career embody the rise of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) civil rights movement in California, across the nation, and throughout the world." Bill Text - SB-572 Harvey Milk Day official designation.

And the people in charge of these actions knew that Harvey Milk liked young boys on drugs to sodomize:

From his biography, page 180:

"Harvey Milk always had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems"

And indeed he was sodomizing an underaged boy [Jack McKinley, 16, who later killed himself] while officiating publicly as his father figure/guardian.

So don't pretend why you can't understand why people object to both the gay culture at large and the quiet, complacent nods of assent of individual gays themselves having control over underaged children they're after to adopt.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The link is in the photos above. Particularly the second one. It shows a huge crowd marching along in full view of the lewd sex act performance. To my knowledge [and maybe you can correct me here] the gay community EN MASSE supports, promotes and condones gay pride parades knowing in advance what goes on there in front of all ages....purposefully....and no single gay person to my knowledge has spoken up to say "I do not condone gay pride parades and I think what they do there is completely inappropriate in front of children." You get an official statement from any gay leader or significant person, or any person willing to go to the mainstream media who is gay to say that and then get back to me, OK?

"the gay community", who is the "gay community" exactly? I mean, you're using the expression, can you please define this for me, because I really can't answer you until I know who is, and who isn't in the "gay community".

Like I said, the person I lived with at uni, is he part of the "gay community" because he's gay, or is he not part of the "gay community" because he doesn't participate in stuff like this?

If you mean that the "gay community" is people who appear in such photos, then what difference does it make what the "gay community" think? If it's all gay people, then how do they support en masse?

Second, can you tell me what the hell this has to do with marriage please?

And it gets worse for those calling themselves gay or "LGBT". They just sponsored [over 60 groups in Canada, the US and Mexico] the release of the Harvey Milk postage stamp complete with rainbow "USA" on it. Also they have enshrined in law in California [again, with zero protests from the LGBT community or any single gay person] that all children in public schools need to celebrate Harvey Milk's gay accomplishments because, and I quote the actual written law here:

"Harvey Milk... perhaps more than any other modern figure, Harvey Milk’s life and political career embody the rise of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) civil rights movement in California, across the nation, and throughout the world." Bill Text - SB-572 Harvey Milk Day official designation.

And the people in charge of these actions knew that Harvey Milk liked young boys on drugs to sodomize:

From his biography, page 180:

"Harvey Milk always had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems"

And indeed he was sodomizing an underaged boy [Jack McKinley, 16, who later killed himself] while officiating publicly as his father figure/guardian.

So don't pretend why you can't understand why people object to both the gay culture at large and the quiet, complacent nods of assent of individual gays themselves having control over underaged children they're after to adopt.

So what? What does this have to do with marriage.

As for Harvey Milk, many, MANY people who are celebrated had BAD parts to them.

Columbus Day. Ef me. This guy Christopher Columbus started the ball rolling on the genocide of the Native American peoples from the very north to the very south of the Americas. His own killing amounts to a hefty amount to make him no angel or sait.

George Washington. Well, he was a slave owner. He did emancipate his slaves, but of the Founding Fathers who had slaves, he was the only one, meaning others, six I believe, did not.
As well as slavery, Washington, as a military commander, killed lots of Native Americans, in battle but also in cold blood.

One has his own day, another gets on the coins. What about Andrew Jackson? Oh, I could go on and on about the bad people have done. People celebrate the good people did for society, not the bad they may have done.

So to Criticise Harvey Milk and not criticise George Washington for being in a more prominent position than Milk is ridiculous.

Again, what the hell does this have to do with marriage?

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, that child is the biological son of the lesbian.

This man was an orphan adopted by Lesbians, not related.

You make a very good and important distinction. It is very difficult to remove from a natural parent a child, both legally and psychologically. Even if we know the situation is abusive on some levels. There is a threshold and we monitor it carefully. Professionals in child protective services balance the wellbeing and situation at the suspect home weighed against the damage that might be done moreso if the child was put in another even worse situation [foster care shuffles]. Foster care shuffles are just like orphanages only without the oversight. It is the shoving of children behind closed doors. Whereas public audits are allowed and done routinely on professional or official orphanages to insure the safety of the kids there.

In the situation of children in orphanages, we have the same people doing lewd sex acts soberly as a matter of pride hoping kids will be watching those parades, trying to access these orphans in the "best of the worst situation" to pull them into what all should know will be a an unmonitored nightmare for them. We have the evidence right in front of us:

Note the lesbians in the background demonstrating cheerful support of this and worse...

Orphans rely on society to monitor their safety and insure that any home they wind up in does not do things like this, or support things like this as a matter of professed subcultural "proud" values. The obvious here is that if they are doing this soberly, proud and in an organized display of what their culture's proud values are en masse and unrepentantly, we know that behind closed doors it will only get worse for orphans adopted out to people holding that type of "justified mindset".

If I was an adoption agent I would kill myself before I adopted a child into a home of any of the people in either of those photos.

SO which of these people in the photos has tried to adopt a child and which haven't?

 

[Silhouette]

SO which of these people in the photos has tried to adopt a child and which haven't?

It doesn't matter. What matters is that none of them are fit to adopt. And since no gay or lesbian or "whatever" from your nebulous "LGBTQ" group has EVER stood up and denounced these displays of "pride" in front of kids [find the statement and send me a link if I'm wrong], we err on the side of caution. A child's civil right to a safe home free of sexual abuse trumps an adult's wishes to access those children, having displayed for all to see a penchant to involve children in sex acts....viewed or actualized...

As to your comments about Harvey Milk...the LGBT community celebrates Milk FOR his sexuality. His political accomplishments are utterly unremarkable besides pushing gay sexuals out in the open with what they do. What HE did was to sodomize a 16 year old minor while officiating as his father figure/guardian. And many other teen boys like him. People who get behind that and support that cannot legally adopt, according to the federal bylaws protecting children from sexual predators.

 

[frigidweirdo]

SO which of these people in the photos has tried to adopt a child and which haven't?

It doesn't matter. What matters is that none of them are fit to adopt. And since no gay or lesbian or "whatever" from your nebulous "LGBTQ" group has EVER stood up and denounced these displays of "pride" in front of kids [find the statement and send me a link if I'm wrong], we err on the side of caution. A child's civil right to a safe home free of sexual abuse trumps an adult's wishes to access those children, having displayed for all to see a penchant to involve children in sex acts....viewed or actualized...

As to your comments about Harvey Milk...the LGBT community celebrates Milk FOR his sexuality. His political accomplishments are utterly unremarkable besides pushing gay sexuals out in the open with what they do. What HE did was to sodomize a 16 year old minor while officiating as his father figure/guardian. And many other teen boys like him. People who get behind that and support that cannot legally adopt, according to the federal bylaws protecting children from sexual predators.

Okay, none in the photos are fit to adopt. None in the photos I presented are also fit to adopt.

So what?

The point here isn't to say "oh, those in my photos are gay therefore ALL gay people are unfit to adopt" but "when couples come to adopt kids they should meet certain requirements that show they are fit to adopt."

Wouldn't you agree?

Surely in a country like the US everyone should be viewed on their own ability, and not on the ability of a group they happened to share something with.

Also, A) how do you know gay people don't denounce these people? You haven't shown this.
B) Do you have to denounce these people in order to adopt? Have straight couples who want to adopt denounced these people as well? Does this denouncing have to be officially or can it be done in private where YOU haven't heard them do it, seeing as you seem to be denouncer officer or something.

Err on the side of caution huh?
Most child abuse is committed by men. Maybe we should stop men from being able to adopt, because they are far, FAR more likely to do this.

I don't think you understand why people celebrate Milk. They celebrate him for WHAT HE DID. He helped gay people become far more accepted. But I guess this would make it harder for you to have an easy target to attack, and why would you want to attack reality when you can attack something made up?

So Harvey Milk perhaps sodomized a 16 year old.
Washington killed people in cold blood in acts that were genocide.
Columbus killed people in cold blood in acts that were genocide.

Which is worse?

You gonna stop using coins with Washington on them? Demand Columbus Day is banned? According to your "logic" you should be denouncing these people.

Oh, and what does this have to do with marriage? You haven't mentioned marriage in connection with your argument for a long, LONG time. This thread is about marriage.

So what does this have to do with marriage? You've avoided this question too long.

 

[Silhouette]

Oh, and what does this have to do with marriage? You haven't mentioned marriage in connection with your argument for a long, LONG time. This thread is about marriage...

..So what does this have to do with marriage? You've avoided this question too long.

Actually, the thread is about a child put into a lesbian home who didn't like the experience. And as you know, in many states in order to adopt as "a couple" you have to be married...

Your pictures and mine differ starkly. In context and CULTURE. I've explained this to you in detail. You showed some random people mainly at night, drunk, running around naked. And we're not even sure they belong to the hetero culture. But let's say for argument's sake that they do.

My photos in stark contrast show an organized crowd holding up signs that are reflective of your culture-at-large's value system: "Drill Ass, Not Gas" says the sign the lesbians were holding up. As a man sprawls spread eagle in receptive anal pose to jeering onlookers. And this is important here....so pay close attention now...the name of this collective display is 'LGBT PRIDE'. It is an organized, sober display of cultural values put on down main street in the middle of the day. They HOPE children will be in attendance. There are even vendors for this organized event. It is the LGBT culture telling the entire world in all complete seriousness, who they are, what their value system is, and what they stand for.

Again, I will note that you have not provided a link to any LGBT person who has stood up publicly to say "these parades do not reflect the LGBT lifestyle"...or words to that effect. I anxiously await this press statement. Just as I anxiously await a similar one saying "Harvey Milk's buggering teen boys on drugs does NOT reflect the LGBT lifestyle."...

...So far....bupkiss.

The difference is cultural. Heteros see your pictures as "oh God, what assholes" as a general cultural rule. Their behavior is discouraged and frowned upon. Your culture sees your sober pride parade as its badge of honor. It sees Harvey Milk as "representative of the LGBT movement across the nation and the world". Bill Text - SB-572 Harvey Milk Day official designation. I know you know the difference. And the fact that you are here pretending like you don't is indicative of the level of denial associated with that value system... "Nothing to see here!" Kids don't belong in homes where people support Harvey Milk or gay pride parades, either overtly....or with a silent wink and a nod...

 

[frigidweirdo]

Oh, and what does this have to do with marriage? You haven't mentioned marriage in connection with your argument for a long, LONG time. This thread is about marriage...

..So what does this have to do with marriage? You've avoided this question too long.

Actually, the thread is about a child put into a lesbian home who didn't like the experience. And as you know, in many states in order to adopt as "a couple" you have to be married...

Your pictures and mine differ starkly. In context and CULTURE. I've explained this to you in detail. You showed some random people mainly at night, drunk, running around naked. And we're not even sure they belong to the hetero culture. But let's say for argument's sake that they do.

My photos in stark contrast show an organized crowd holding up signs that are reflective of your culture-at-large's value system: "Drill Ass, Not Gas" says the sign the lesbians were holding up. As a man sprawls spread eagle in receptive anal pose to jeering onlookers. And this is important here....so pay close attention now...the name of this collective display is 'LGBT PRIDE'. It is an organized, sober display of cultural values put on down main street in the middle of the day. They HOPE children will be in attendance. There are even vendors for this organized event. It is the LGBT culture telling the entire world in all complete seriousness, who they are, what their value system is, and what they stand for.

Again, I will note that you have not provided a link to any LGBT person who has stood up publicly to say "these parades do not reflect the LGBT lifestyle"...or words to that effect. I anxiously await this press statement. Just as I anxiously await a similar one saying "Harvey Milk's buggering teen boys on drugs does NOT reflect the LGBT lifestyle."...

...So far....bupkiss.

The difference is cultural. Heteros see your pictures as "oh God, what assholes" as a general cultural rule. Their behavior is discouraged and frowned upon. Your culture sees your sober pride parade as its badge of honor. It sees Harvey Milk as "representative of the LGBT movement across the nation and the world". Bill Text - SB-572 Harvey Milk Day official designation. I know you know the difference. And the fact that you are here pretending like you don't is indicative of the level of denial associated with that value system... "Nothing to see here!" Kids don't belong in homes where people support Harvey Milk or gay pride parades, either overtly....or with a silent wink and a nod...

Actually the thread is about a guy who doesn't like gay marriage. It's about gay marriage.

The article that was put up was this Child of lesbian couple speaks out against gay marriage Denny Burk

Child of lesbian couple speaks out against gay marriage is going to be about what? Gay marriage.

As I know you have to be married to adopt? Do I. Which states require you to be married.

Single Parent Adoption Single Mother Adoption Single Father Adoption - A Love Beyond Borders - Denver Colorado

"According to a 2013 National Survey of Adoptive Parents, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 27 percent of adoptive parents are single men and women. Approximately 22.7 percent are female, 5.5 percent male."

Can Single Parents Adopt Independent Adoption Center

"Do any states prohibit single parent adoptions?

No state prohibits a single heterosexual person from adopting. Unfortunately, at this time, both Mississippi and Utah prohibit adoptions by lesbians and gay men. There is no legal way for a gay man or lesbian to adopt a baby born in those states, nor to adopt from another state if they are residents of Mississippi or Utah. Please note, that the laws regarding gay male and lesbian adoption change frequently. The best source for current information is the Human Rights Campaign web site at: Maps of State Laws Policies Resources Human Rights Campaign."

So, according to my info not a single state refuses single parent adoptions, some might make it difficult, and two make it impossible for MARRIED gay people to adopt.

So your info is completely wrong.

You seem to have looked a lot at photos of gay people do some weird stuff, personally it's not my thing, but if you enjoy looking at it and describing it, that's your thing.

However your description is just pointless. So what what they are doing? They're doing it at a GAY PRIDE event. How many have you been to? I'm making the assumption that you don't get kicks out of this sort of thing, so the answer is probably zero.

My pictures are what they are, I didn't put the actual picture up there as evidence of what happens, but merely as a suggestion so make my point. You don't seem to know very much about what happens in clubs, bars and so on, then fine, but I'm telling you don't know much, so don't act like you're an expert on this stuff. I'm not an expert and I've seen enough to make your eyes pop out.

I'm not going to provide a link of a gay person who has denounced this, because it's a freaking stupid pathetic kind of thing to demand such a thing in the first place. You seem to think if I don't provide evidence for something that therefore it's not the case.
You're making a case, and it's a case with MASSIVE holes in it. There are lots of gay people who don't go to gay pride, you can accept that truth or you can sit in your ignorance, I DON'T CARE. But don't come on here telling me to provide evidence for something so bloody obvious. I do not need to provide evidence that gay people breath oxygen, and I don't need to provide evidence that not all gay people go to gay pride events and stick their ass in people's faces and use stupid placards with silly messages on them.

It's just so, get over it.

The difference clearly is culture. You're stuck in the 1950s paradise where everything's nice and wonderful, Native Americans and Blacks are ignored, who gives a damn, gay doesn't exist and so on.
Sorry, it's 2014, 60 years later, you can accept the REAL WORLD or you can live in your little hole, but don't come onto the internet and tell people the 50s were better, if they were better you wouldn't need the internet.

Your Harvey Milk argument is worse than a High School paper. You have no logic, no consistency, and you're sending this around in circles, using arguments that have nothing to do with anything, ignoring anything logical and real and you're clearly having fun looking at the photos.

 

[Silhouette]

However your description is just pointless. So what what they are doing? They're doing it at a GAY PRIDE event. How many have you been to? I'm making the assumption that you don't get kicks out of this sort of thing, so the answer is probably zero.

..I'm not going to provide a link of a gay person who has denounced this, because it's a freaking stupid pathetic kind of thing to demand such a thing in the first place. .

I cut out the vitrole and editorializing from your post and picked out the most pertinent details to focus on that set all the rest out the window anyway. The premise of my objections to gays adopting is that anyone can google gay pride pictures to see what I've posted or worse on full display where children are expected and hoped and in fact are in attendance...all...sorry to say...a matter of "LGBT pride". It is as obvious a fact as the nose that is on the front of everyone's face. Denying it just makes it look like you have mental issues. It would be akin to denying that the earth is a sphere or that 2 + 2 = 4. Yeah, it's that bad.

So feeling embarassed for you, I'll continue to say that I note you will not provide a link for a single gay person who denounced publicly a gay pride event with such lewd antics being an accepted household fact. You ask what it would prove, as if it isn't germane to my points. When you know for a fact it is. This is another of your dishonesties. As long as nobody in the LGBT culture speaks out against sexualizing children in these parades, or celebrating a known pedophile for his sexuality, this is a thumbs down on their eligibility to adopt kids.

The argument about Harvey Milk may seem like a highschool paper to you, but the fact remains that he committed sodomy and statutory rape on at least one underaged boy while officiating as his father/guardian. And he was reported to have a penchant for young teens to sodomize who were on drugs at the time. This man's sexuality is what you folks have en masse enshrined in CA law as 'representative of the LGBT culture throughout the nation and the world". And that's also really, REALLY bad..

 

[frigidweirdo]

I cut out the vitrole and editorializing from your post and picked out the most pertinent details to focus on that set all the rest out the window anyway. The premise of my objections to gays adopting is that anyone can google gay pride pictures to see what I've posted or worse on full display where children are expected and hoped and in fact are in attendance...all...sorry to say...a matter of "LGBT pride". It is as obvious a fact as the nose that is on the front of everyone's face. Denying it just makes it look like you have mental issues. It would be akin to denying that the earth is a sphere or that 2 + 2 = 4. Yeah, it's that bad.

So feeling embarassed for you, I'll continue to say that I note you will not provide a link for a single gay person who denounced publicly a gay pride event with such lewd antics being an accepted household fact. You ask what it would prove, as if it isn't germane to my points. When you know for a fact it is. This is another of your dishonesties. As long as nobody in the LGBT culture speaks out against sexualizing children in these parades, or celebrating a known pedophile for his sexuality, this is a thumbs down on their eligibility to adopt kids.

The argument about Harvey Milk may seem like a highschool paper to you, but the fact remains that he committed sodomy and statutory rape on at least one underaged boy while officiating as his father/guardian. And he was reported to have a penchant for young teens to sodomize who were on drugs at the time. This man's sexuality is what you folks have en masse enshrined in CA law as 'representative of the LGBT culture throughout the nation and the world". And that's also really, REALLY bad..

So, you say that a child can type in LGBT pride and they get pictures like that, so they shouldn't be able to adopt.

Type in "woman" on google or yahoo and click images and see what you get.

Nobody in their right mind would deny adoption to a group of people because of the images a child might see if they typed in something very specific into the internet and got some dodgy pictures. What are you on?

It's such a problematic argument for you because you can type in lots of things and get lots of bad images from every group out there.

Again, I'm not going to down to the level of an idiot to satisfy your nonsense.

Okay, Harvey Milk may have committed a crime. Did he get convicted of any crime?

Did Washington commit a crime? Did he get convicted of a crime?

 

[Silhouette]

So, you say that a child can type in LGBT pride and they get pictures like that, so they shouldn't be able to adopt.

Type in "woman" on google or yahoo and click images and see what you get.

Nobody in their right mind would deny adoption to a group of people because of the images a child might see if they typed in something very specific into the internet and got some dodgy pictures. What are you on?

Your intellectual dishonesty is skyrocketing. You know we were talking about LIVE, ACTUAL GAY PRIDE PARADES HELD ON PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES WHERE KIDS ARE INVITED TO WATCH.

vs your COMPLETE STRAWMAN. Hang your head in shame. Websites like that can be blocked from children viewing them. A child invited by and delivered to watch a gay pride parade is a completely different topic.

And back to that topic. LGBTs do these acts IN PUBLIC [and not on the internet which can be screened] as a matter of "pride" in front of kids. And again, to my knowledge and apparently yours too, no singular LGBT cultee has ever stood up and denounced them as lewd and unacceptable.

It's a difference in cultural values. Heteros frown on drunken or indulgent PUBLIC, REAL WORLD displays of lewd sexual behavior where children can view it. Gays welcome those displays in sober "pride". Harvey Milk is like the cherry on top of that shit-sundae...

Are you suggesting a child's everyday world should become as lewd as adult porn sites just because lewd adult internet porn sites exist?

We are talking about two different worlds. At least I am. Children should be protected from viewing lewd adult behavior until they are ready to handle such material and sights mentally. We protect them from this because we know they will get there eventually. And our goal is to prolong the lower monkey behaviors as long as possible so a person can focus learning about more important things before they start up with that. We protect their innocence for as long as we can. Or aren't you for that?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Your intellectual dishonesty is skyrocketing. You know we were talking about LIVE, ACTUAL GAY PRIDE PARADES HELD ON PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES WHERE KIDS ARE INVITED TO WATCH.

I'm being dishonest because YOU talk about the internet, I respond to the internet, then you switch to talk about kids being invited to gay pride events. How is this me being dishonest? This is you being a complete mess and being very difficult to follow.

vs your COMPLETE STRAWMAN. Hang your head in shame. Websites like that can be blocked from children viewing them. A child invited by and delivered to watch a gay pride parade is a completely different topic.

Yeah, only you'd think that parents who don't want their kids to go to gay pride would have the ability to not make their kids go to gay pride.
What is the point of all of this. Because a kid can get invited to gay pride therefore no single gay person, regardless of whether they go to gay pride or not, should be able to adopt? Do you not see that this isn't a logical argument?
Men go to strip clubs, so men shouldn't be allowed to go to strip clubs.

What about nude beaches? Men and women go to those. Damn, I even accidentally ended up on one. Kids can go there. In fact in places like Germany, Austria and other such countries public nudity is NORMAL, especially on FKK beaches/lakes and in saunas. So they shouldn't be able to adopt because of this?

You go around and around and around in circles making the same disconnected sentences as if they're logical. They're NOT.

And back to that topic. LGBTs do these acts IN PUBLIC [and not on the internet which can be screened] as a matter of "pride" in front of kids. And again, to my knowledge and apparently yours too, no singular LGBT cultee has ever stood up and denounced them as lewd and unacceptable.

LGBTs, do you mean ALL of them, some of them, a minority of them. What percentage are you talking here?

It's a difference in cultural values. Heteros frown on drunken or indulgent PUBLIC, REAL WORLD displays of lewd sexual behavior where children can view it. Gays welcome those displays in sober "pride". Harvey Milk is like the cherry on top of that shit-sundae...

So, someone has different values to you. Oh no, shocking. I'd have thought many people have different values to you. Prove to me that heterosexuals have denounced.... oh why do I bother, it's a waste of time. WHO GIVES A DAMN whether someone has publicly denounced or not? It doesn't mean anything.

You can't ban a group from adopting simply because they haven't denounced something anyway (hence why this argument of yours is a complete waste of time), so why are you still talking about it?
Why not talk about rainbow colored donuts? It's make more sense.

Are you suggesting a child's everyday world should become as lewd as adult porn sites just because lewd adult internet porn sites exist?

No. You've switched the topic again. It's not about kids looking at porn. It's supposed to be about marriage. Your claim that gay people shouldn't marry because they can then adopt (which by the way is rubbish as single parents can adopt in all states and gay people can't adopt in two, regardless of marriage status), and now your claim is that gay people shouldn't be able to adopt kids because kids can go onto the internet and look up stuff, when there's far more HETEROSEXUAL porn in the world, but you're not saying that straight people shouldn't be able to adopt because of this. It's contradictory beyond belief.

We are talking about two different worlds. At least I am. Children should be protected from viewing lewd adult behavior until they are ready to handle such material and sights mentally. We protect them from this because we know they will get there eventually. And our goal is to prolong the lower monkey behaviors as long as possible so a person can focus learning about more important things before they start up with that. We protect their innocence for as long as we can. Or aren't you for that?

Okay, children can be protected from viewing lewd adult behavior.

1) What does this have to do with gay people getting married?
2) What does this have to do with gay people adopting?

The answer is Sweet FA.

You go so far out of your way to change topic and use a rubbish argument for the next line of nothingness that this is actually becoming funny. If I were good enough at writing, which clearly you can see I'm not, I'd write a book with you in it, and you'd be the funny guy everyone laughs at.

 

[Silhouette]

Your intellectual dishonesty is skyrocketing. You know we were talking about LIVE, ACTUAL GAY PRIDE PARADES HELD ON PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES WHERE KIDS ARE INVITED TO WATCH.

I'm being dishonest because YOU talk about the internet, I respond to the internet, then you switch to talk about kids being invited to gay pride events. How is this me being dishonest? This is you being a complete mess and being very difficult to follow.

vs your COMPLETE STRAWMAN. Hang your head in shame. Websites like that can be blocked from children viewing them. A child invited by and delivered to watch a gay pride parade is a completely different topic.

Yeah, only you'd think that parents who don't want their kids to go to gay pride would have the ability to not make their kids go to gay pride.
What is the point of all of this. Because a kid can get invited to gay pride therefore no single gay person, regardless of whether they go to gay pride or not, should be able to adopt? Do you not see that this isn't a logical argument?
Men go to strip clubs, so men shouldn't be allowed to go to strip clubs.

What about nude beaches? Men and women go to those. Damn, I even accidentally ended up on one. Kids can go there. In fact in places like Germany, Austria and other such countries public nudity is NORMAL, especially on FKK beaches/lakes and in saunas. So they shouldn't be able to adopt because of this?

You go around and around and around in circles making the same disconnected sentences as if they're logical. They're NOT.

And back to that topic. LGBTs do these acts IN PUBLIC [and not on the internet which can be screened] as a matter of "pride" in front of kids. And again, to my knowledge and apparently yours too, no singular LGBT cultee has ever stood up and denounced them as lewd and unacceptable.

LGBTs, do you mean ALL of them, some of them, a minority of them. What percentage are you talking here?

It's a difference in cultural values. Heteros frown on drunken or indulgent PUBLIC, REAL WORLD displays of lewd sexual behavior where children can view it. Gays welcome those displays in sober "pride". Harvey Milk is like the cherry on top of that shit-sundae...

So, someone has different values to you. Oh no, shocking. I'd have thought many people have different values to you. Prove to me that heterosexuals have denounced.... oh why do I bother, it's a waste of time. WHO GIVES A DAMN whether someone has publicly denounced or not? It doesn't mean anything.

You can't ban a group from adopting simply because they haven't denounced something anyway (hence why this argument of yours is a complete waste of time), so why are you still talking about it?
Why not talk about rainbow colored donuts? It's make more sense.

Are you suggesting a child's everyday world should become as lewd as adult porn sites just because lewd adult internet porn sites exist?

No. You've switched the topic again. It's not about kids looking at porn. It's supposed to be about marriage. Your claim that gay people shouldn't marry because they can then adopt (which by the way is rubbish as single parents can adopt in all states and gay people can't adopt in two, regardless of marriage status), and now your claim is that gay people shouldn't be able to adopt kids because kids can go onto the internet and look up stuff, when there's far more HETEROSEXUAL porn in the world, but you're not saying that straight people shouldn't be able to adopt because of this. It's contradictory beyond belief.

We are talking about two different worlds. At least I am. Children should be protected from viewing lewd adult behavior until they are ready to handle such material and sights mentally. We protect them from this because we know they will get there eventually. And our goal is to prolong the lower monkey behaviors as long as possible so a person can focus learning about more important things before they start up with that. We protect their innocence for as long as we can. Or aren't you for that?

Okay, children can be protected from viewing lewd adult behavior.

1) What does this have to do with gay people getting married?
2) What does this have to do with gay people adopting?

The answer is Sweet FA.

You go so far out of your way to change topic and use a rubbish argument for the next line of nothingness that this is actually becoming funny. If I were good enough at writing, which clearly you can see I'm not, I'd write a book with you in it, and you'd be the funny guy everyone laughs at.

Going for buckshot so I can't chase just any one of the bullets effectively eh? Nice technique for a spin.

I have never EVER been talking about porn on the internet. You brought it up. I'm talking about real, live actual people doing lewd acts on a public street as a matter of their subculture's "pride" in front of kids. Heteros frown upon that. Gays celebrate that.

What that has to do with marriage is that in Utah, only married people living together can adopt. Other people living together cannot. And this is true of other states too. Marriage therefore, is also partly about legal adoption. And legal adoption is about kids.

There, I've tied it together [but you already know the logical arrangement and were hoping to sideline it]. Let's see you try to hit it again with some more buckshot.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Going for buckshot so I can't chase just any one of the bullets effectively eh? Nice technique for a spin.

I have never EVER been talking about porn on the internet. You brought it up. I'm talking about real, live actual people doing lewd acts on a public street as a matter of their subculture's "pride" in front of kids. Heteros frown upon that. Gays celebrate that.

What that has to do with marriage is that in Utah, only married people living together can adopt. Other people living together cannot. And this is true of other states too. Marriage therefore, is also partly about legal adoption. And legal adoption is about kids.

There, I've tied it together [but you already know the logical arrangement and were hoping to sideline it]. Let's see you try to hit it again with some more buckshot.

You said

The premise of my objections to gays adopting is that anyone can google gay pride pictures to see what I've posted or worse on full display where children are expected and hoped and in fact are in attendance...all...sorry to say...a matter of "LGBT pride".

did you not? Or is google not part of the internet?
Therefore, I pointed out that while there are pictures such as you have presented on the internet, there is also heterosexual stuff on the internet of a similar, and perhaps worse manner for kids to be able access if they can/want etc. Hence the reason why you managed to get the topic right over this way.

Anything to do with marriage? Nope
Anything to do with adoption? Nope (do you get a theme running through your posts?)

Okay, you're making a claim. All gay people love lewd acts in public, all straight people hate it. Prove it. I wouldn't bother if I were you, you can't prove it because it's complete rubbish, but you can either try or drop it.

What it has to do with Utah is, only married STRAIGHT people can adopt in Utah.
Also, unless Utah is really stupid, is they can make a law saying that gay people can't adopt, oh, which they already have.

So what is your point again? Apart from the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about here?

You've tied it together? Really?

Point 1 "I didn't talk about the internet", yes you did.
Point 2 "all gay people love lewd acts in public, all straight people hate it" wrong
Point 3 "Anyone married can adopt in Utah" not true.

Yes, you've tied it together with stinky brown stuff, it's all WRONG.

 

[Silhouette]

] did you not? Or is google not part of the internet?
Therefore....

The actions being done in the photos are what's being discussed. They weren't taking place at a private residence or in a porn studio for display on the screenable internet. They were taking place IN PUBLIC, DOWN A PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE, in hopes kids would be there watching.

You can see the difference...what that means to hetero vs homo cultural values when we're discussing which can be trusted to suppress or deter exposure of children to lewd sex acts and which culture promotes it.

Everything after your false premise doesn't stand. Hence why I cut off your post at "therefore". There is no "therefore" after a false premise.

 

[frigidweirdo]

] did you not? Or is google not part of the internet?
Therefore....

The actions being done in the photos are what's being discussed. They weren't taking place at a private residence or in a porn studio for display on the screenable internet. They were taking place IN PUBLIC, DOWN A PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE, in hopes kids would be there watching.

So????? What does this have to do with marriage? What does it have to do with adoption?

You know I have this chocolate bakery thing in front of me, I could eat it, or I could not eat it. This also has nothing to do with marriage or adoption. Wonderful huh?

You can see the difference...what that means to hetero vs homo cultural values when we're discussing which can be trusted to suppress or deter exposure of children to lewd sex acts and which culture promotes it.

Everything after your false premise doesn't stand. Hence why I cut off your post at "therefore". There is no "therefore" after a false premise.

You're trying to claim that ALL gay people are like this huh? Still? When they clearly aren't all like that. You're going to have to learn at some point that not all gay people go to gay pride events and expose themselves in public.
Also, not everyone who goes to gay pride, exposes themselves. Gay pride isn't just the photos you have presented.

You can either accept it or you can pretend that gay pride is just exposing yourself. Either way, you can open your eyes to the truth or not.

False premise huh?

You're starting off with "All gay people do this and that" when clearly they don't. You should know about false premises.

Fact is, you ignored the first thing I said, you DID refer to the internet. Then you've managed to ignore everything else I said. Probably doesn't make much of a difference seeing as everything you are saying is based around all gay people being sexual perverts who want to touch your ass. When clearly they don't.

 

[Silhouette]

The actions being done in the photos are what's being discussed. They weren't taking place at a private residence or in a porn studio for display on the screenable internet. They were taking place IN PUBLIC, DOWN A PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE, in hopes kids would be there watching.

Again, the acts were done in public, not at a private home or studio..

So????? What does this have to do with marriage? What does it have to do with adoption?
...You're trying to claim that ALL gay people are like this huh? Still? When they clearly aren't all like that. You're going to have to learn at some point that not all gay people go to gay pride events and expose themselves in public.
Also, not everyone who goes to gay pride, exposes themselves. Gay pride isn't just the photos you have presented.

Once again, you avoided the point I made that no single gay person has ever spoken up against pride parades, where it is commonly known lewd sex acts are anticipated, expected and the integral essence of those parades since day one. Your CULTURE approves of them therefore. And until I hear a public denouncement from even one of them against these displays, or against Harvey Milk who sodomized teen boys on drugs, your CULTURAL VALUES have EVERYTHING to do with gay marriage. Because married couples are the only type of couples who can adopt in most states. And adoption means accessing vulnerable orphans.

Society therefore has to choose between the civil rights of the orphans in our care and trust vs the "civil rights" of the LGBT subcultural participants/enablers who approve of silently, overtly or even do lewd sex acts in front of kids down public streets in broad daylight, sober, as a matter of "pride".

I think I know which civil rights to get behind. And so do you, ultimately. And hence the reason you're squirming so hard on this topic..