Gay Parents Ready Kids for White House Easter Egg Roll

jillian said:
Not really.... homosexual behavior occurs in nature. Haven't you heard about the gay penguins at the Central Park Zoo :beer: ?

Experts on animal behavior, that don't have an agenda, have said that the behavior in animals attributed to homosexual behavior is actually one animal exerting domination over another, kind of what assholes in prison do to weaker inmates.

I have always found it funny that the homosexual spokes people and defenders predictably try to use this behavior to prove that their behavior is natural because animals do it. Lions eat their young, chimpanzees play with their shit, cats give each other baths with their tongues, pedophiles molest children. All of these, although occuring in nature, are not actions any sane person would want to emulate. How can someone justify copying a chimp's dominate behavior over another as something normal for humans?

I would think that most people really don't care what others do in private, they would even tolerate it if it isn't constantly thrown in their face. That is the problem over anything else. If people that claim to be Christians rattle on and on about being saved and bother people to do the same they tend to not only bore but drive away others. My sister-in-law is a devout Christian, she lets her actions say who she is, she doesn't bother others with her story unless asked.....works a lot better.

This bullshit that is repeated over and over about all of the things that homosexuals don't get because they can't get married, is just that. If they want to let someone benefit from their death, see a lawyer, it is stronger than a marriage certificate. Look at Anna Nicole Smith, she was married to a very rich old man and he died. He left her his money and she has been in court for years because his actual son knows he was dillusional and she was basically acting as a prostitute to get his money, the marriage certificate doesn't insure anything.The only reason homosexuals want to get married is to feel better about themselves, to get society's approval. Society can't grant someone a true pride in who one is, only that person can give he or she that. I see no reason to change the word marriage to mean something different, go to a lawyer and do what is needed to secure relationship forever(or until the next hard body walks by), how is that different?

Mosts studies agree that a two parent family is the best for a child, a male and a female parent. Little girls naturally learn from their mother but their father is a huge influence on how she will do in future relationships. The same is true of boys. They need the strong male figure to emulate but the mother's influence is very important also. Sure, a child can turn out OK with only one or the other but that is not recommended for them to grow into a well adjusted adult . I see a huge difference between my brother's 3 daughters(raised by both parents), and my other brother's daughter(parents are divorced and she is living with her mother 250 miles away, she rarely sees her father).
 
sitarro said:
Experts on animal behavior, that don't have an agenda, have said that the behavior in animals attributed to homosexual behavior is actually one animal exerting domination over another, kind of what assholes in prison do to weaker inmates.

What experts "without an agenda"? Everyone I know who worked or works with animals has recognized that same-sex pairs mate. And it has nothing to do with anger or dominance. It has to do with choice of partner.

I have always found it funny that the homosexual spokes people and defenders predictably try to use this behavior to prove that their behavior is natural because animals do it. Lions eat their young, chimpanzees play with their shit, cats give each other baths with their tongues, pedophiles molest children. All of these, although occuring in nature, are not actions any sane person would want to emulate. How can someone justify copying a chimp's dominate behavior over another as something normal for humans?

The point isn't what you say. It's that when people throw around terms like "it's not natural", the responsive point is that isn't true and homosexual behavior occurs naturally ... as in nature.

I would think that most people really don't care what others do in private, they would even tolerate it if it isn't constantly thrown in their face. That is the problem over anything else. If people that claim to be Christians rattle on and on about being saved and bother people to do the same they tend to not only bore but drive away others. My sister-in-law is a devout Christian, she lets her actions say who she is, she doesn't bother others with her story unless asked.....works a lot better.

And what rights have been taken away from your sister-in-law because of her Christianity? I presume they haven't as yet outlawed marriage for Christians, right?

This bullshit that is repeated over and over about all of the things that homosexuals don't get because they can't get married, is just that. If they want to let someone benefit from their death, see a lawyer, it is stronger than a marriage certificate. Look at Anna Nicole Smith, she was married to a very rich old man and he died. He left her his money and she has been in court for years because his actual son knows he was dillusional and she was basically acting as a prostitute to get his money, the marriage certificate doesn't insure anything.The only reason homosexuals want to get married is to feel better about themselves, to get society's approval. Society can't grant someone a true pride in who one is, only that person can give he or she that. I see no reason to change the word marriage to mean something different, go to a lawyer and do what is needed to secure relationship forever(or until the next hard body walks by), how is that different?

First off, even if someone did everything you suggest, they still wouldn't be entitled to social security or health benefits by way of a "spouse". So your comment that all they have to do is see a lawyer is incorrect. Your reference to Anna Nicole isn't really applicable thought. And, btw, I figure Anna's entilted to the money cause she was what made the old man happy before he died. His son's just a greedy little creep... ;)

Mosts studies agree that a two parent family is the best for a child, a male and a female parent. Little girls naturally learn from their mother but their father is a huge influence on how she will do in future relationships. The same is true of boys. They need the strong male figure to emulate but the mother's influence is very important also. Sure, a child can turn out OK with only one or the other but that is not recommended for them to grow into a well adjusted adult . I see a huge difference between my brother's 3 daughters(raised by both parents), and my other brother's daughter(parents are divorced and she is living with her mother 250 miles away, she rarely sees her father).

You're mixing apples and oranges. Yes, a father's involvement has been found to be a VERY important influence on children. But there are absolutely no legitimate studies showing that children from gay families do less well than children from other two-parent homes. Nor is there any higher incidence in homosexuality found in the children of gay families than in the general population.
 
jillian said:
What experts "without an agenda"? Everyone I know who worked or works with animals has recognized that same-sex pairs mate. And it has nothing to do with anger or dominance. It has to do with choice of partner.

It isn't mating. When your dog humps your leg, is that mating?I have never seen a man hump a dog's leg.

Humans are capable of making decisions and most are even capable of intellectual thought, we are different from animals. I have never seen a man hump a dog's leg.

jillian said:
The point isn't what you say. It's that when people throw around terms like "it's not natural", the responsive point is that isn't true and homosexual behavior occurs naturally ... as in nature.

So does playing with shit and eating their kids.....so what?

jillian said:
And what rights have been taken away from your sister-in-law because of her Christianity? I presume they haven't as yet outlawed marriage for Christians, right?

What? What rights exactly have been "taken" from homosexuals?

jillian said:
First off, even if someone did everything you suggest, they still wouldn't be entitled to social security or health benefits by way of a "spouse". So your comment that all they have to do is see a lawyer is incorrect. Your reference to Anna Nicole isn't really applicable thought. And, btw, I figure Anna's entilted to the money cause she was what made the old man happy before he died. His son's just a greedy little creep... ;)

Most homosexuals die way before they qualify for social security.

Anna's entitled to a billion dollars because she supposedly made this guy happy before he died????????That is easily the most ridiculous thing I have read on this board. And you judge his son for being a greedy little creep, what do you know about his son? Maybe his son has been managing all of his business interests since he became so incompetent that he would marry that drunk, drugged, lesbian skank.

jillian said:
You're mixing apples and oranges. Yes, a father's involvement has been found to be a VERY important influence on children. But there are absolutely no legitimate studies showing that children from gay families do less well than children from other two-parent homes. Nor is there any higher incidence in homosexuality found in the children of gay families than in the general population.

Common sense and observing how people act tells me that nothing replaces the biological two parents and works as well. Sure, you can site cases that may work for you but then I can throw cases back at you showing pedophilia and worse. The homosexual lifestyle in general is not in any way condusive to raising a child correctly, look hard enough and I am sure you can find a pair of child molesters that adopted a kid and did a bang up job raising him but while you look you will find plenty of very gruesome stories.

Are you going to defend the child molester pedophiles that throw out the exact same argument you have made hear. Why not?

How many pet homosexuals do you have hanging around? Do you think of yourself as Grace Adler? I find the way women are so enamored by these idiot queens pathetic, it just says so much about what is lacking in your life that you need to hang around psuedo women trapped in a man's body. Pathetic really.
 
sitarro said:
Are you going to defend the child molester pedophiles that throw out the exact same argument you have made hear. Why not?

How many pet homosexuals do you have hanging around? Do you think of yourself as Grace Adler? I find the way women are so enamored by these idiot queens pathetic, it just says so much about what is lacking in your life that you need to hang around psuedo women trapped in a man's body. Pathetic really.

What does pedophilia have to do with homosexuality?
 
Dr Grump said:
What does pedophilia have to do with homosexuality?

Now you've opened the floodgates! This is one of the favorite rants on this board. Save yourself the hassle and search this topic in the archives, because nobody ever changes their mind on this issue.
 
Nuc said:
Now you've opened the floodgates! This is one of the favorite rants on this board. Save yourself the hassle and search this topic in the archives, because nobody ever changes their mind on this issue.

Interesting. Had this arguement with hardline conservatives before (re homosexual being abnormal), but they have never done the "homosexuals are pedophiles" routine. I have noticed that with this subject (in general) the naysayers don't pony up any evidence, just gut feelings etc. That doesn't mean much IMO...
 
Dr Grump said:
Interesting. Had this arguement with hardline conservatives before (re homosexual being abnormal), but they have never done the "homosexuals are pedophiles" routine. I have noticed that with this subject (in general) the naysayers don't pony up any evidence, just gut feelings etc. That doesn't mean much IMO...

Actuially, most pedophiles are heterosexual.
 
jillian said:
Both.....homosexuality and pedophilia are not interrelated.
Cool, you have a link? Links? The are not the same. I'll even give you the 'new' standard of 10% of pop. is homosexual. Go for it.
 
jillian said:
Seems this hasn't a think on percentages regarding pedophilia vs. heterosexuality/homosexuality. Rather a discourse on perceptions of each.

Unlike many here, I'm not hitting homosexuality for moral reasons, nor accusing them of being deviant. However, there seems to be an overrepresentation of homosexuals and pedophiles, above the 10% threshold.
 
Kathianne said:
Seems this hasn't a think on percentages regarding pedophilia vs. heterosexuality/homosexuality. Rather a discourse on perceptions of each.

Unlike many here, I'm not hitting homosexuality for moral reasons, nor accusing them of being deviant. However, there seems to be an overrepresentation of homosexuals and pedophiles, above the 10% threshold.

You have a link for that? BTW, even if only 90% of pedophiles are homosesxual, still means that pedophilia and homosexuality have a very low correlation.
 
jillian said:
You have a link for that? BTW, even if only 90% of pedophiles are homosesxual, still means that pedophilia and homosexuality have a very low correlation.
I'll leave the links to those who find this a particular subject of interest. However IF 10% of population is homosexual, which seems high in the norm; one would expect no more than that related to pedophilia attacks.
 
jillian said:
You have a link for that? BTW, even if only 90% of pedophiles are homosesxual, still means that pedophilia and homosexuality have a very low correlation.

We've discussed this many times here, and the conclusion from the statistics that have been posted show that the percentage of homosexuals that are pedophiles is greater than the percentage of heterosexuals that are pedophiles. Therefore, while not homosexuality is not shown to cause pedophilia, there is a higher correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia than there is between heterosexuality and pedophilia.
 
gop_jeff said:
We've discussed this many times here, and the conclusion from the statistics that have been posted show that the percentage of homosexuals that are pedophiles is greater than the percentage of heterosexuals that are pedophiles. Therefore, while not homosexuality is not shown to cause pedophilia, there is a higher correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia than there is between heterosexuality and pedophilia.

Statistics are easily manipulated. Thus, the reliability of the source is important. Anti-gay "family value"-type sites don't count.

So like I said... :link: :cool:
 
Kathianne said:
I'll leave the links to those who find this a particular subject of interest. However IF 10% of population is homosexual, which seems high in the norm; one would expect no more than that related to pedophilia attacks.

You asked me to substantiate my point. I did. And that link clearly shows that any correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia is a myth.
 
mattskramer said:
...

Kids are used left and right for political causes – From the way they are positioned for a candidate’s photo opportunity or televised speech to the way they are dragged on flag-waving marches. This Easter activity is much to do about nothing so get off your outrageous high horse.
So that makes it right, Matt? IMO it's all wrong. Just because children are exploited politicaly doesn't make this okay.
 
To be blunt...homosexuality is nothing more than sexual immaturity...oral sex and sodomy glorified...ultimate masturbation to some...I am so tired of the 'hey look at me I'm so special' and deserve all the marital rights of the hetrosexuals...damn dudes and dudetts go play, but stay away from the kids...and keep your perversion to yourself...and don't bother saying some hetros engadge in oral sex and sodomy I don't approve of this either...but marriage and kids are reserved for the normal adults...comprendo? :puke3:
 

Forum List

Back
Top