Muslim threats force out disabled teacher with dog

[jillian]

and evolution will survive with gay ONLY marriage/adoption? don't you need them, what are they called, them, you know bigots, hmmm, hetros to get evolution done....

why is it i hear your beavis and butthead laugh with that one?

oh wait... I know, because it's really goofy.

 

[Yurt]

Why would there be gay-only marriages? Hetros far outweigh gays. If you are trying to take the argument to the nth degree, it fails miserably. For that to happen there would only be gays in the world. There aren't, so it is a non-argument from the start..

why is it i hear your beavis and butthead laugh with that one?

oh wait... I know, because it's really goofy.

we can see the level of intelligence in the replies... one refers to some butthead and beavis...n'uff said...

grump: the question is evolution... and lets take it to the "nth" degree as you call it. a species of homos, unable to reproduce...that fails? yes.

that is why i asked, if those that believe in evolution suppport homos, why, and how?

If you are trying to take the argument to the nth degree, it fails miserably. For that to happen there would only be gays in the world. There aren't, so it is a non-argument from the start

exactly. what if homosexuals outnumbered the hetros smart guy? and since you readily admit there are NOT, why? why? because evolution does not support homo sex. period. so how can you believe on evolution and homo sex?

 

[jillian]

we can see the level of intelligence in the replies... one refers to some butthead and beavis...n'uff said...

You snickered and then gave a very immature and silly response. You got all of the attention from me that you deserved.

and no one who calls gays 'homos' deserves any kind of response on the subject.

 

[Yurt]

You snickered and then gave a very immature and silly response. You got all of the attention from me that you deserved.

and no one who calls gays 'homos' deserves any kind of response on the subject.

um, you gave me a response... do you have something to actually debate or are you just trash talking? that was lame.....

 

[jillian]

um, you gave me a response... do you have something to actually debate or are you just trash talking? that was lame.....

I think I just pointed out that you sound ridiculous, but okay...

did you say something worth debating that I may have missed?

 

[Yurt]

I think I just pointed out that you sound ridiculous, but okay...

did you say something worth debating that I may have missed?

you did, how? by saying you make me sound stupid? that makes it so? LOL. if you can't remember and you resort to insults, forget it.....LOL.

 

[Dr Grump]

exactly. what if homosexuals outnumbered the hetros smart guy? and since you readily admit there are NOT, why? why? because evolution does not support homo sex. period. so how can you believe on evolution and homo sex?

What is the Theory or Evolution and how does it pertain to homosexuality? Take your time....

 

[jillian]

you did, how? by saying you make me sound stupid? that makes it so? LOL. if you can't remember and you resort to insults, forget it.....LOL.

unless every person is going to marry someone of the same sex in the event gay marriage is allowed, then there *isn't* any effect on evolution. if they legalize it, do you think people will run and be gay who aren't just to avail themselves of the new legal opportunity?

 

[Anguille]

grump: the question is evolution... and lets take it to the "nth" degree as you call it. a species of homos, unable to reproduce...that fails? yes.

that is why i asked, if those that believe in evolution suppport homos, why, and how?

News flash. Homos do reproduce.

 

[Shogun]

i said you do not support their right as vocally or passionately as you do gay rights.

your bias is clear by your last sentence, its all i needed to prove that you are simply biased and that is your right. but don't act like you champion others rights when you fact truly do not. what is it to you if that is their belief? nothing of course, it does not effect you, but you are biased against it for a silly reason.

MY bias?

yea, Im biased against child abuse. Way to keep your eye on the ball. If gays were out raping minors i'd be all about filtering those from the gays who are NOT preying on minors. Vocally? Has there been a polygamist purge this side of the year 1900 like there has been in the last 20 years of gay rights? I don't hold up a neon sign for flappers and whigs, either. Maybe you should figure out why before trying to predict another wrong answer.

No, you are looking for bias that simply isnt there. Again, if the poly's can keep their dick from using a 13 year old like a catholic uses crackers and wine then so be it. What is it to ME if their belief preys on prepubescent girls? Why don't you take your daughter for some ice cream and ask yourself that same question. Hell, if all you wanted to do was scream bias every other sentence then why did you even ask the question? SURELY, since you can read my mind, you could have just skipped the formalities.

 

[Shogun]

would love a poll on how many, who support gay marriage/adoption, believe in evolution....

was that some profound newsmax joke or something?


I'd like to see a poll on how many christians who oppose gay rights between consenting adults despite privacy find themselves having to defend lecherous old men trying to validate their child molestation key to heaven.... with the same privacy argument.

and MARRIAGE? Clearly, adult men should not be married to each other.. but, an adult MAN and a 13 year old? oh well, THATS just tradition.

 

[Shogun]

and evolution will survive with gay ONLY marriage/adoption? don't you need them, what are they called, them, you know bigots, hmmm, hetros to get evolution done....

uh, so gay bashing is the only thing that kills humans? WOW. Bob Jones University, right?


yup. Evolution stopped during the entire Greek "man for love, woman for babies" input into western civ, didn't it?


wow.

 

[Yurt]

News flash. Homos do reproduce.

how, by committing homosexual acts? homosexuality in humans necessarily means NO reproduction. homosexuality cannnot be natural and is not part of the evolution process, period. it is a deviant act. purely from a evolutionary stand point.

 

[Shogun]

you are wrong. History says otherwise. From Greco-roman culture to japanese gay samurai you are simply wrong. Human perpetuation is not hogtied because a variant sample of the population are not heterosexual any more than humanity is stunted by a minority of physical and mental retardation. Your grasp on evolution leaves much to be desired.

 

[Dr Grump]

Human perpetuation is not hogtied because a variant sample of the population are not heterosexual any more than humanity is stunted by a minority of physical and mental retardation.

Or by those who drink Miller Lite, or prefer roast potatos over mashed, or those who prefer driving a fiat bambina vs a ferrari...

What it does do is justify their bigotry in their mind....

 

[Larkinn]

THanks for making my point that you don't give a shit about kids and think it's a good idea to put them in dangerous situations, if it makes the parents feel good about themselves.

Sorry but having gay parents isn't a "dangerous" situation. Unpleasant at times, but not dangerous.

And the points about blacks has been made. Blacks having kids is the same thing as gays having kids, in that they could suffer unfortunate consequences because SOCIETY is flawed. But you don't blame blacks, while you do blame gays. Gee, what a surprise.

 

[Larkinn]

Yes, that post certainly was.
I don't recall ever saying the children of gay parents turned into monsters. I said the parents who choose to raise kids in a gay household are selfish, if they believe those kids will be subjected to all sorts of harassment throughout their lives. Are you hitting the crack pipe again?

Throughout their lives? Kids of gay parents don't have a sign on their forehead saying "MY PARENTS ARE GAY". Its only a problem when your younger. When your older if you meet someone like SE or Allie, you just don't mention it. Problem solved.

 

[Larkinn]

grump: the question is evolution... and lets take it to the "nth" degree as you call it. a species of homos, unable to reproduce...that fails? yes.

Hi. My biological parents are both gay (mother and father). Nice to meet you. They will be surprised to hear they can't reproduce.

that is why i asked, if those that believe in evolution suppport homos, why, and how?

You are confusing, rather absurdly, the difference between believing in a fact of life (evolution), and basing ones morals on the idea that everything they do should further the goal of said fact. If we were social darwinists on that scale, we would also desire your murder since your failure to grasp this obviously makes you an unfit specimen to reproduce.

exactly. what if homosexuals outnumbered the hetros smart guy? and since you readily admit there are NOT, why? why? because evolution does not support homo sex. period. so how can you believe on evolution and homo sex?

Know what happens when something is anti-evolutionary? That thing dies out. Its not happening with gays, so obviously its not anti-evolutionary.

 

[Yurt]

Hi. My biological parents are both gay (mother and father). Nice to meet you. They will be surprised to hear they can't reproduce.



You are confusing, rather absurdly, the difference between believing in a fact of life (evolution), and basing ones morals on the idea that everything they do should further the goal of said fact. If we were social darwinists on that scale, we would also desire your murder since your failure to grasp this obviously makes you an unfit specimen to reproduce.



Know what happens when something is anti-evolutionary? That thing dies out. Its not happening with gays, so obviously its not anti-evolutionary.

that is due to hetrosexuals genius NOT homosexuals

 

[jillian]

that is due to hetrosexuals genius NOT homosexuals

no. it's due to the fact that homosexuality is, at least in part, a genetic predisposition which appears in the general population at approximately the same rate as any other recessive gene.