Ignorance and homophobia run rampant

[Gunny]

Thanks, that explains everything.

I'm enlightened now ....

 

[Said1]

I'm enlightened now ....

Y-y-you mean that's all it took? :rotflmao:

 

[Gunny]

Y-y-you mean that's all it took? :rotflmao:

The lengths to which some will go to justify abnormal behavior is mind-boggling.

My concern with entire issue, and what it allegedly stemmed from -- not being able to call one's butt-buddy a beneficiary -- is that I disagree with these corporations telling anyone who they can and cannot leave their worldly crap to, or act as power of attorney.

Solve that unconstitutional little problem and you destroy the so-called basis of the gay marriage argument.

Now, I'm not so naive as to believe it will do anything of the kind. I just want to take away their facades.

 

[Bonnie]

Bottom line is people who believe strongly in something do not and should not back down.

 

[Avatar4321]

Theoretically that would happen. But unfortunately, a sizeable percentage of Homosexuals live in denial for alot or all of their lives and have their own kids, If people were more open to fags(or even embracing) they'd eventually dissapear because there wouldn't be any need to live in denial. Bit of a catch 22 isn't it.

But then again, the other theory of homosexuality is hormone imbalances that can happen to anyone.

Honestly, I can agree that they live in denial, but i think the denial is more that homosexual attraction is normal and right to indulge in.

And i cant believe anyone calling people fags is suggesting that we embrace anything.

 

[Avatar4321]

Better than a foster home...

Explain to me why a foster home in which two straight parents look after a child id somehow better than being adopted by a gay couple.

 

[dmp]

I'd feel better about a child dying, I suppose, than being forced into a homosexual family.

 

[Avatar4321]

The lengths to which some will go to justify abnormal behavior is mind-boggling.

My concern with entire issue, and what it allegedly stemmed from -- not being able to call one's butt-buddy a beneficiary -- is that I disagree with these corporations telling anyone who they can and cannot leave their worldly crap to, or act as power of attorney.

Solve that unconstitutional little problem and you destroy the so-called basis of the gay marriage argument.

Now, I'm not so naive as to believe it will do anything of the kind. I just want to take away their facades.

That is just it. The so called issue is entirely self made. If you want to leave your worldy crap to someone, make a will. Corporations have nothing to do with wills. If you want someone to act as power of Attorney, then you can legally give them that power. If you don't then its your own fault and not some corporations fault.

The only think corporations might be involved with is health benefits. And why on earth would any health insurance company want to give homosexual couples the same benefits that married couples get? It would be financially unfeasible. Homosexuals have a higher risk for lots of diseases. If they extend the same benefits the costs would make everyones health insurance go up exponentially and its bad enough as it is.

But none of these so called issues need to be or should be used as an excuse for more a minority of people to use government to force their views on the rest of us. That is the issue. a few americans want to force 90%+ Americans accept them as somehow priveleged and want us to accept that they are some how glorified for practicing the debauchary they practice.

The fact is they have the same rights as any other American and have no right to force their views on the people even if they didnt. If they are so right in their views then educate the people go through the Democratic means like we did when we allowed women to vote.

 

[Powerman]

Thanks, that explains everything.

Maybe I used the wrong term. I meant an orphanage. I think that I would rather have a child have 2 loving gay parents than them live in a home with a bunch of orphans. At least they would feel wanted.

 

[archangel]

Maybe I used the wrong term. I meant an orphanage. I think that I would rather have a child have 2 loving gay parents than them live in a home with a bunch of orphans. At least they would feel wanted.

just remember a "picture is worth a thousand words"..gay parents do not have to say a single word...children observe and learn from the parents actions...enough said!

 

[mattskramer]

just remember a "picture is worth a thousand words"..gay parents do not have to say a single word...children observe and learn from the parents actions...enough said!

I wonder what things the orphans had observed from their heterosexual parents. What did the orphans learn, consciously or subconsciously, from their heterosexual / biological parents - the parents that gave them away to orphanages? :huh:

 

[archangel]

I wonder what things the orphans had observed from their heterosexual parents. What did the orphans learn, consciously or subconsciously, from their heterosexual / biological parents - the parents that gave them away to orphanages? :huh:

a right...I personally do not know the facts of this case...maybe a accident? or immature pre marriage sex!

 

[mattskramer]

a right...I personally do not know the facts of this case...maybe a accident? or immature pre marriage sex!

This would make for an interesting longitudinal study. Compare the health of adults who, as children, lived a large portion of their lives in an orphanage with those adults who, as children, lived a small portion of their lives in an orphanage and a large portion of their lives with a homosexual couple.

Basically, I think that orphanages and adoption centers should not discriminate against gay applicants. All other variables being the same, a homosexual couple or individual should have just as much of a chance of adopting a child as a heterosexual couple or individual has. What is best for the child? If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple?

 

[archangel]

This would make for an interesting longitudinal study. Compare the health of adults who, as children, lived a large portion of their lives in an orphanage with those adults who, as children, lived a small portion of their lives in an orphanage and a large portion of their lives with a homosexual couple.

Basically, I think that orphanages and adoption centers should not discriminate against gay applicants. All other variables being the same, a homosexual couple or individual should have just as much of a chance of adopting a child as a heterosexual couple or individual has. What is best for the child? If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple?

you are way out there with this diatribe...take another vacation and come back with a little more sense!

 

[mattskramer]

you are way out there with this diatribe...take another vacation and come back with a little more sense!

LOL. You have not changed. My post is not senseless. How about a straight answer to my question: If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple? It is not that difficult. Type "YES" or type "NO". Oh, never mind. Getting a straight answer from you is like trying to squeeze blood from a turnip.

 

[archangel]

LOL. You have not changed. My post is not senseless. How about a straight answer to my question: If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple? It is not that difficult. Type "YES" or type "NO". Oh, never mind. Getting a straight answer from you is like trying to squeeze blood from a turnip.

because I am what is called consistent in my answers...ya need a little more work in this area!
And please tell me what is so wrong with a orphanage if this is the only answer...there have been plenty that produced well adjusted persons!
And some were not what one would consider acceptable....so the argument you put forward is a moot point!

 

[mattskramer]

because I am what is called consistent in my answers...ya need a little more work in this area!

I did not say that you were inconsistent. I am still waiting for an answer. You allege that I am inconsistent. Please give an example.

And please tell me what is so wrong with a orphanage if this is the only answer...there have been plenty that produced well adjusted persons!

And some were not what one would consider acceptable....so the argument you put forward is a moot point!

Please clarify your question and end it with a question mark. I think that orphanages have raised many well adjusted persons. I also think that homosexuals have raised many well adjusted persons. My opinion and question still stand. If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple? How about a straight answer? What is holding you back?

 

[mattskramer]

I did not say that you were inconsistent. I am still waiting for an answer. You allege that I am inconsistent. Please give an example.



Please clarify your question and end it with a question mark. I think that orphanages have raised many well adjusted persons. I also think that homosexuals have raised many well adjusted persons. My opinion and question still stand. If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple? How about a straight answer? What is holding you back?

Oh, heck. Here. Let me help you. "Hell No. We should not allow any homosexual couple, no matter how great they would be at rasing a child, to adopt. Even though there are overcrowded orphanages and willing homosexual parents, we must not allow gays to adopt under any circumstances." Well, Isn't that your position? Was that so hard? Damn you are a coward where it comes right down to it.

 

[Gunny]

Oh, heck. Here. Let me help you. "Hell No. We should not allow any homosexual couple, no matter how great they would be at rasing a child, to adopt. Even though there are overcrowded orphanages and willing homosexual parents, we must not allow gays to adopt under any circumstances." Well, Isn't that your position? Was that so hard? Damn you are a coward where it comes right down to it.

Finally said something I agree with. But of course your fag-loving ass would stick some poor, unwitting child into a homosexual household and screw his mind up for the rest of his life and force him to live every day of his childhood with his peers pointing out the fact he has two dads and no mom (or vice versa), not in a nice way. When do people like you THINK?

Fags don't deserve anything special for their aberrant behavior. No special laws, and they sure as Hell shouldn't be handed trainees by the state. That's just BS.

 

[OCA]

LOL. You have not changed. My post is not senseless. How about a straight answer to my question: If no heterosexual couple wants to raise it, should it be left at the orphanage or be raised by a homosexual couple? It is not that difficult. Type "YES" or type "NO". Oh, never mind. Getting a straight answer from you is like trying to squeeze blood from a turnip.

I would rather see a child raised by a pack of wolves or a child stay in the orphanage until adulthood rather than be raised by mentally unstable queers. What's next? We allow adoption for pedophiles?