If Christians are allowed to discriminate against gays ...

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So? What does procreation have to do with child rearing? If my wife and I weren’t together, they would not have been born.

Perhaps.

No, not "perhaps", for sure. And no "heterosexual coupling" was required for our children. There were no heterosexuals involved at all...until they were born.

So you're proudly deluding yourself that cutting out intercourse somehow makes a radical difference in the fact that children still require genetic material from one man and one woman to exist?

They don't even make medications powerful enough for your level of nuts.

So what? They are still children. The adults are still parents. Together that are a family. You along with Pop are ruminating about how gays have children in order to emphasis how they are different and therefore less valuable as members of society to justify discrimination. It's obvious. Don't lie.

Gosh, I'm SOOOO glad you came along to definitively dispute points no one was talking about. You certainly put ME in my place about thoughts you mistakenly believed I was having.

No go bother someone else about something they didn't say, because today is not my "Be Kind to Morons" day, and I'm not in the mood.

Oh really? You were not harping on the issue of how gay people have children? In any case, it's apparent what your motive is and I think that it hit it right on the head. If you think that I'm wrong perhaps you lake sufficient self awareness to know your own motives.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So? There was still zero heterosexuality that went into the making of our children. None.

Heterosexuality is the combining of male to female components. The male may be gay, but he is used in a way not of his sexuality.

No, you just described procreation. Procreation does not require sex therefore does not require heterosexuality.

Heterosexuality is not required for parenting or procrastination. I'm sorry if this somehow makes you feel less of a man, but that's your problem.

sure it is. why the fk you think we have so many kids fked up. Either missing a mother or a father. yep, statistics say kids need one of each for development and maturity.

Why Children Need a Male and Female Parent | Cornerstone Family Council

• "The cooperative input and influence of a male parent and a female parent is essential for proper child development.
• “As fathering expert Dr. Kyle Pruett of YaleMedicalSchool explains in Fatherneed: Why Father Care is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child, “fathers do not mother.” Psychology Today explains, “fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children.” A father, as a male parent, brings unique contributions to the parenting project.
• Likewise, a mother, as a female, uniquely impacts the life and development of her child, as Dr. Brenda Hunter explains in her book, The Power of Mother Love: Transforming Both Mother and Child. Erik Erikson, a pioneer in the world of child psychology, explained that father love and mother love are qualitatively different kinds of love. As cited in Kyle D. Pruett, The Nurturing Father, (New York: Warner Books, 1987), p. 49."

Cornerstone is affiliated with the Family Research Council which is a religious right propaganda mill and ant gay hate group

According to whom?

Family Research Council

 

[WorldWatcher]

According to whom?

Their own website: "We are associated with Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, Alliance Defense Fund, and 34 other Family Policy Councils nationwide."

Our Mission, Associations & Approach | Cornerstone Family Council

.>>>>

 

[Seawytch]

Yes they can. My wife and I are a gay couple who, with a little help from a friend, created Life, and much of our lives has been spent providing for the offspring created by our interaction between each other.

Your Homosexuality did not create the child. It can't.

Only the coupling between one male and one woman can create a child. Even in the case of your child (AND THE BEST TO HIM OR HER. HOPE IT IS HAPPY AND HEALTHY), that is the case.

So? What does procreation have to do with child rearing? If my wife and I weren’t together, they would not have been born.

Perhaps.

No, not "perhaps", for sure. And no "heterosexual coupling" was required for our children. There were no heterosexuals involved at all...until they were born.

So you're proudly deluding yourself that cutting out intercourse somehow makes a radical difference in the fact that children still require genetic material from one man and one woman to exist?

They don't even make medications powerful enough for your level of nuts.

Not at all. I’m saying that sexuality and procreation have nothing to do with each other. Same goes for sexuality and parenting. It’s not difficult to comprehend.

 

[Seawytch]

Too many boys, male children, of homo's dress up like homo's for me to believe they are not being psychologically harmed by allowing gay parents to adopt.
I have a 1/2 sister daughter to a Lesbian whom my father says thinks she's a lesbian too. Coincidence? I think children of gays, adopted of course, are more likely to be gay than children of heterosexuals.

I find it disturbing to see boys pretending to be girls and girls pretending to be boys before they have even reached puberty. We didn't used to have this problem.

That you find it disturbing is also irrelevant.

The question is whether it is detrimental to the child?

There is a sound argument that children of same-sex couples may tend to suffer from gender dysphoria, which is clearly a psychological disorder. So, that is a legitimate argument, but I am not certain that anyone has proved it. Your anecdotal example is not evidence on a whole.

Really? You have any data to support this allegedly "sound argument"? All the data from reputable sources say that children raised by gay parents are no different than those raised by straight parents.

I'm gonna say that your phrase "from reputable sources" says it all, in case anyone was in doubt that your position is always, "Science supports me, because I refuse to accept anything that contradicts me as science".

Reputable sources are pretty easy to come by. Peer reviewing isn’t that difficult when you’re not a quack.

 

[Pop23]

Wow. You need court proceedings to tell you you don’t and never will be able to procreate with your partner?

Fascinating

What is fascinating to me is that continue to cling to the issue of procreation even after I demonstrated that it is a legal dead end and has nothing to do with the rights or status of gay people.

And you cling to the idea that the law does not apply to biological reality.

I clearly demonstrated that the law is not concerned about the biology of procreation in relation to gay rights and marriage. Get over it!

Funny when you research the meaning of the Wedding Cake in Marriage.

The cake was a symbol of fertility of the Bride and Groom.

Irony if anything is. Same Sex couples want a symbol of fertility as part of the celebration.

Funny that you do not seem to understand that a Lesbian is in fact fertile and can carry a child and a gay man can produce a sperm.

What is not funny is the pathetic way in which you cling to the issue of fertility and procreation, and obsession with the fact that gay couples do not have children in the exact same way that heterosexuals do At the same time, you refuse to answer my question of why it matters and what the implication is for gay rights and discrimination which is the topic of this thread.

However, I'm pretty sure that I know why. It is your not so subtle way of casting gay people as different and not as valuable to society as other, in order to justify marginalizing them and discriminating against them. Man up nd admit it!

Yet the two aren't getting married, or are they inviting the donor into the marriage? The cake is not bestowed upon the donor, now is it!

You can't help but love the Irony here! Especially that PP added a THIRD dancing dude

You cannot make this shit up folks, you really just can't!

 

[GreenBean]

sexuality and procreation have nothing to do with each other.

Seriously ---- dude, my guess is you went to an institution of higher yearninng where they ripped out your eyeballs and skull fucked you ---- now you are not only too blind to see, but you're totally fucked in the head !

 

[Seawytch]

Did that make sense in your head? It didn't translate.

Sure did.

Homosexuality is composed of two of the same sex

Unless the donor was a chick, the process was that of opposite sexes.

So? There was still zero heterosexuality that went into the making of our children. None.

Heterosexuality is the combining of male to female components. The male may be gay, but he is used in a way not of his sexuality.

No, you just described procreation. Procreation does not require sex therefore does not require heterosexuality.

Heterosexuality is not required for parenting or procrastination. I'm sorry if this somehow makes you feel less of a man, but that's your problem.

sure it is. why the fk you think we have so many kids fked up. Either missing a mother or a father. yep, statistics say kids need one of each for development and maturity.

Why Children Need a Male and Female Parent | Cornerstone Family Council

• "The cooperative input and influence of a male parent and a female parent is essential for proper child development.
• “As fathering expert Dr. Kyle Pruett of YaleMedicalSchool explains in Fatherneed: Why Father Care is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child, “fathers do not mother.” Psychology Today explains, “fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children.” A father, as a male parent, brings unique contributions to the parenting project.
• Likewise, a mother, as a female, uniquely impacts the life and development of her child, as Dr. Brenda Hunter explains in her book, The Power of Mother Love: Transforming Both Mother and Child. Erik Erikson, a pioneer in the world of child psychology, explained that father love and mother love are qualitatively different kinds of love. As cited in Kyle D. Pruett, The Nurturing Father, (New York: Warner Books, 1987), p. 49."

Divorce is why so many kids are “fucked up”. Kids do best with two parents. The gender is immaterial.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100121135904.htm

In their analysis, the researchers found no evidence of gender-based parenting abilities, with the "partial exception of lactation," noting that very little about the gender of the parent has significance for children's psychological adjustment and social success.

As the researchers write: "The social science research that is routinely cited does not actually speak to the questions of whether or not children need both a mother and a father at home. Instead proponents generally cite research that compares [heterosexual two-parent] families with single parents, thus conflating the number with the gender of parents."

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

What is fascinating to me is that continue to cling to the issue of procreation even after I demonstrated that it is a legal dead end and has nothing to do with the rights or status of gay people.

And you cling to the idea that the law does not apply to biological reality.

I clearly demonstrated that the law is not concerned about the biology of procreation in relation to gay rights and marriage. Get over it!

Funny when you research the meaning of the Wedding Cake in Marriage.

The cake was a symbol of fertility of the Bride and Groom.

Irony if anything is. Same Sex couples want a symbol of fertility as part of the celebration.

Funny that you do not seem to understand that a Lesbian is in fact fertile and can carry a child and a gay man can produce a sperm.

What is not funny is the pathetic way in which you cling to the issue of fertility and procreation, and obsession with the fact that gay couples do not have children in the exact same way that heterosexuals do At the same time, you refuse to answer my question of why it matters and what the implication is for gay rights and discrimination which is the topic of this thread.

However, I'm pretty sure that I know why. It is your not so subtle way of casting gay people as different and not as valuable to society as other, in order to justify marginalizing them and discriminating against them. Man up nd admit it!

Yet the two aren't getting married, or are they inviting the donor into the marriage? The cake is not bestowed upon the donor, now is it!

You can't help but love the Irony here! Especially that PP added a THIRD dancing dude

You cannot make this shit up folks, you really just can't!

I made my point. You did not even bother to deny it . Let the record show that I nailed you. My work is done here. Your are exposed for what you are . A bigot who is too cowardly to admit it.

 

[GreenBean]

Peer reviewing isn’t that difficult when you’re not a quack.

This is true ... look at Evelyn Hooker and Masters and Johnson. Threee proven quacks who were bolstered by politicized science and bullshit 'peer reviews' .... all bogus

 

[Esmeralda]

I really can't understand why someone would want to ruin their life with a lifelong commitment to a relationship.

Not very many Gay Marriages last that long.

LOL Not many heterosexual marriages last that long.

 

[GreenBean]

discriminate against Jews and Blacks

Not true - if they did then they would be Democrats - who feel Blacks are too inferior to make their way in the world and Jews are to blame for all the worlds woes.

 

[Pop23]

Your Homosexuality did not create the child. It can't.

Only the coupling between one male and one woman can create a child. Even in the case of your child (AND THE BEST TO HIM OR HER. HOPE IT IS HAPPY AND HEALTHY), that is the case.

So? What does procreation have to do with child rearing? If my wife and I weren’t together, they would not have been born.

Perhaps.

No, not "perhaps", for sure. And no "heterosexual coupling" was required for our children. There were no heterosexuals involved at all...until they were born.

So you're proudly deluding yourself that cutting out intercourse somehow makes a radical difference in the fact that children still require genetic material from one man and one woman to exist?

They don't even make medications powerful enough for your level of nuts.

So what? They are still children. The adults are still parents. Together that are a family. You along with Pop are ruminating about how gays have children in order to emphasis how they are different and therefore less valuable as members of society to justify discrimination. It's obvious. Don't lie.

How same sex couples are different than opposite sex couples..... Fixed it for you

Shall we count the ways

Opposite Sex Couples often create offspring through the sexual interaction between the two - Same sex couples cannot

Opposite Sex Couples can have accidental pregnancy through sexual interaction between the two - Same sex couples cannot

Opposite Sex Couples will sometimes have to go outside of the relationship to produce offspring - Same Sex couple always have to.

Opposite Sex Couples will most often have offspring that have the common DNA with those within the couple relationship - Same Sex Couples never do.

Shall I go on, or should we simply agree that the two types are not even close to being the same?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Sure did.

Homosexuality is composed of two of the same sex

Unless the donor was a chick, the process was that of opposite sexes.

So? There was still zero heterosexuality that went into the making of our children. None.

Heterosexuality is the combining of male to female components. The male may be gay, but he is used in a way not of his sexuality.

No, you just described procreation. Procreation does not require sex therefore does not require heterosexuality.

Heterosexuality is not required for parenting or procrastination. I'm sorry if this somehow makes you feel less of a man, but that's your problem.

sure it is. why the fk you think we have so many kids fked up. Either missing a mother or a father. yep, statistics say kids need one of each for development and maturity.

Why Children Need a Male and Female Parent | Cornerstone Family Council

• "The cooperative input and influence of a male parent and a female parent is essential for proper child development.
• “As fathering expert Dr. Kyle Pruett of YaleMedicalSchool explains in Fatherneed: Why Father Care is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child, “fathers do not mother.” Psychology Today explains, “fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children.” A father, as a male parent, brings unique contributions to the parenting project.
• Likewise, a mother, as a female, uniquely impacts the life and development of her child, as Dr. Brenda Hunter explains in her book, The Power of Mother Love: Transforming Both Mother and Child. Erik Erikson, a pioneer in the world of child psychology, explained that father love and mother love are qualitatively different kinds of love. As cited in Kyle D. Pruett, The Nurturing Father, (New York: Warner Books, 1987), p. 49."

Divorce is why so many kids are “fucked up”. Kids do best with two parents. The gender is immaterial.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100121135904.htm

In their analysis, the researchers found no evidence of gender-based parenting abilities, with the "partial exception of lactation," noting that very little about the gender of the parent has significance for children's psychological adjustment and social success.

As the researchers write: "The social science research that is routinely cited does not actually speak to the questions of whether or not children need both a mother and a father at home. Instead proponents generally cite research that compares [heterosexual two-parent] families with single parents, thus conflating the number with the gender of parents."

As I said.

If evidence is proffered that shows a high probability that children suffer from some psychological or developmental defect based SOLELY on the fact that their parents are same-sex, I will reconsider.

But I will bet the motherfucking farm that no such evidence will ever be produced, even if there is underlying truth to such a claim (there's not). The study would need to include hetero families and somehow exclude all the other factors or potential factors. Nobody would pay for such a study anyway, so I think we can put the issue to bed.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So? What does procreation have to do with child rearing? If my wife and I weren’t together, they would not have been born.

Perhaps.

No, not "perhaps", for sure. And no "heterosexual coupling" was required for our children. There were no heterosexuals involved at all...until they were born.

So you're proudly deluding yourself that cutting out intercourse somehow makes a radical difference in the fact that children still require genetic material from one man and one woman to exist?

They don't even make medications powerful enough for your level of nuts.

So what? They are still children. The adults are still parents. Together that are a family. You along with Pop are ruminating about how gays have children in order to emphasis how they are different and therefore less valuable as members of society to justify discrimination. It's obvious. Don't lie.

How same sex couples are different than opposite sex couples..... Fixed it for you

Shall we count the ways

Opposite Sex Couples often create offspring through the sexual interaction between the two - Same sex couples cannot

Opposite Sex Couples can have accidental pregnancy through sexual interaction between the two - Same sex couples cannot

Opposite Sex Couples will sometimes have to go outside of the relationship to produce offspring - Same Sex couple always have to.

Opposite Sex Couples will most often have offspring that have the common DNA with those within the couple relationship - Same Sex Couples never do.

Shall I go on, or should we simply agree that the two types are not even close to being the same?

 

[skews13]

... then gays should be allowed to discriminate against Christians.

Agree or Disagree?

Should gays be allowed to discriminate against Christians?


I'm sure some gays already do...Humans are clannish by nature and tend to group people...

Maybe some. Most aren’t stupid enough to turn away business.

 

[dblack]

What discrimination, based on immutable traits, is allowed? Other than gays of course...

All immutable traits that aren't listed in the protected classes lists are fair game. A business owner can discriminate against people because they're ugly (or pretty), because of their accent, their socio-economic status, because they're fat or skinny, because they stink, or because they remind her of her creepy Uncle Joe.

Some states and localities DO bar discrimination based on weight, height, looks, etc.

So what?

It's also worth noting that several of the 'protected classes' aren't innate traits. So I'm not sure why you all are fixated on that.

 

[Pop23]

And you cling to the idea that the law does not apply to biological reality.

I clearly demonstrated that the law is not concerned about the biology of procreation in relation to gay rights and marriage. Get over it!

Funny when you research the meaning of the Wedding Cake in Marriage.

The cake was a symbol of fertility of the Bride and Groom.

Irony if anything is. Same Sex couples want a symbol of fertility as part of the celebration.

Funny that you do not seem to understand that a Lesbian is in fact fertile and can carry a child and a gay man can produce a sperm.

What is not funny is the pathetic way in which you cling to the issue of fertility and procreation, and obsession with the fact that gay couples do not have children in the exact same way that heterosexuals do At the same time, you refuse to answer my question of why it matters and what the implication is for gay rights and discrimination which is the topic of this thread.

However, I'm pretty sure that I know why. It is your not so subtle way of casting gay people as different and not as valuable to society as other, in order to justify marginalizing them and discriminating against them. Man up nd admit it!

Yet the two aren't getting married, or are they inviting the donor into the marriage? The cake is not bestowed upon the donor, now is it!

You can't help but love the Irony here! Especially that PP added a THIRD dancing dude

You cannot make this shit up folks, you really just can't!

I made my point. You did not even bother to deny it . Let the record show that I nailed you. My work is done here. Your are exposed for what you are . A bigot who is too cowardly to admit it.

Oh, I have no doubt you wouldn't love to "nail me".

And I am the one that proved the point and made you look like nothing more than an attention whore drama queen.

You actually think a Wedding Cake, a symbol used to bestow fertility upon a Bride and a Groom is anyway appropriate in a same sex marriage. Then you are either deranged or just plain stupid.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I clearly demonstrated that the law is not concerned about the biology of procreation in relation to gay rights and marriage. Get over it!

Funny when you research the meaning of the Wedding Cake in Marriage.

The cake was a symbol of fertility of the Bride and Groom.

Irony if anything is. Same Sex couples want a symbol of fertility as part of the celebration.

Funny that you do not seem to understand that a Lesbian is in fact fertile and can carry a child and a gay man can produce a sperm.

What is not funny is the pathetic way in which you cling to the issue of fertility and procreation, and obsession with the fact that gay couples do not have children in the exact same way that heterosexuals do At the same time, you refuse to answer my question of why it matters and what the implication is for gay rights and discrimination which is the topic of this thread.

However, I'm pretty sure that I know why. It is your not so subtle way of casting gay people as different and not as valuable to society as other, in order to justify marginalizing them and discriminating against them. Man up nd admit it!

Yet the two aren't getting married, or are they inviting the donor into the marriage? The cake is not bestowed upon the donor, now is it!

You can't help but love the Irony here! Especially that PP added a THIRD dancing dude

You cannot make this shit up folks, you really just can't!

I made my point. You did not even bother to deny it . Let the record show that I nailed you. My work is done here. Your are exposed for what you are . A bigot who is too cowardly to admit it.

Oh, I have no doubt you wouldn't love to "nail me".

And I am the one that proved the point and made you look like nothing more than an attention whore drama queen.

You actually think a Wedding Cake, a symbol used to bestow fertility upon a Bride and a Groom is anyway appropriate in a same sex marriage. Then you are either deranged or just plain stupid.

I can't take you seriously. Never really did.

 

[GreenBean]

I really can't understand why someone would want to ruin their life with a lifelong commitment to a relationship.

Not very many Gay Marriages last that long.

LOL Not many heterosexual marriages last that long.

Sure did.

Homosexuality is composed of two of the same sex

Unless the donor was a chick, the process was that of opposite sexes.

So? There was still zero heterosexuality that went into the making of our children. None.

Heterosexuality is the combining of male to female components. The male may be gay, but he is used in a way not of his sexuality.

No, you just described procreation. Procreation does not require sex therefore does not require heterosexuality.

Heterosexuality is not required for parenting or procrastination. I'm sorry if this somehow makes you feel less of a man, but that's your problem.

sure it is. why the fk you think we have so many kids fked up. Either missing a mother or a father. yep, statistics say kids need one of each for development and maturity.

Why Children Need a Male and Female Parent | Cornerstone Family Council

• "The cooperative input and influence of a male parent and a female parent is essential for proper child development.
• “As fathering expert Dr. Kyle Pruett of YaleMedicalSchool explains in Fatherneed: Why Father Care is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child, “fathers do not mother.” Psychology Today explains, “fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children.” A father, as a male parent, brings unique contributions to the parenting project.
• Likewise, a mother, as a female, uniquely impacts the life and development of her child, as Dr. Brenda Hunter explains in her book, The Power of Mother Love: Transforming Both Mother and Child. Erik Erikson, a pioneer in the world of child psychology, explained that father love and mother love are qualitatively different kinds of love. As cited in Kyle D. Pruett, The Nurturing Father, (New York: Warner Books, 1987), p. 49."

Divorce is why so many kids are “fucked up”. Kids do best with two parents. The gender is immaterial.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100121135904.htm

In their analysis, the researchers found no evidence of gender-based parenting abilities, with the "partial exception of lactation," noting that very little about the gender of the parent has significance for children's psychological adjustment and social success.

As the researchers write: "The social science research that is routinely cited does not actually speak to the questions of whether or not children need both a mother and a father at home. Instead proponents generally cite research that compares [heterosexual two-parent] families with single parents, thus conflating the number with the gender of parents."

Queer and Dike parenting is not adequately represented statistically to make that presumption with any level of certainty ... any writer or researcher who does so is a quack and engaging in politicized science, which like most left wing queers studies is not true science at all but simply propagagnda masquerading as such