Prince's Trust Survey & The Voices of the Voteless (Children) in Gay Marriage Debate

[Ravi]

I did exactly that which is why I knew you were taking things out of context and talking with your ass.

Good, then you will be encouraging many more people to read the links from the OP, rights?

No harm in doing that, right?

No harm at all. It appears that everyone that read your links determined that your inferences were faulty. Not to flatter you or anything, but you are almost as good as PoliticalChic at taking things out of context and talking out of your ass.

 

[Silhouette]

No harm at all. It appears that everyone that read your links determined that your inferences were faulty. Not to flatter you or anything, but you are almost as good as PoliticalChic at taking things out of context and talking out of your ass.

So will you be sending a link of the OP and all it's "misleading information" out to as many on-the-fencers as you can to advertise "just how wrong Silhouette is"?

Just curious.. Post a list of the places you've linked my thread to. Please. Feel free to post a link to as many places as you like and cross link them here OK?

 

[bendog]

I find the term "prince's trust" oddly gay. (-:

 

[Ravi]

No harm at all. It appears that everyone that read your links determined that your inferences were faulty. Not to flatter you or anything, but you are almost as good as PoliticalChic at taking things out of context and talking out of your ass.

So will you be sending a link of the OP and all it's "misleading information" out to as many on-the-fencers as you can to advertise "just how wrong Silhouette is"?

Just curious.. Post a list of the places you've linked my thread to. Please. Feel free to post a link to as many places as you like and cross link them here OK?

Why would I do that? You do a fine job of looking the fool all by yourself.

 

[Silhouette]

So will you be sending a link of the OP and all it's "misleading information" out to as many on-the-fencers as you can to advertise "just how wrong Silhouette is"?

Just curious.. Post a list of the places you've linked my thread to. Please. Feel free to post a link to as many places as you like and cross link them here OK?

Why would I do that?...

Very telling..

 

[Ravi]

If you say so!

 

[Syriusly]

No harm at all. It appears that everyone that read your links determined that your inferences were faulty. Not to flatter you or anything, but you are almost as good as PoliticalChic at taking things out of context and talking out of your ass.

So will you be sending a link of the OP and all it's "misleading information" out to as many on-the-fencers as you can to advertise "just how wrong Silhouette is"?

Why do you think that anyone is going to do your work for you?

I gave you the address for the Supreme Court- go ahead and send them what you think will further your anti-homosexual agenda.

 

[Silhouette]

Why do you think that anyone is going to do your work for you?

I gave you the address for the Supreme Court- go ahead and send them what you think will further your anti-homosexual agenda.

Wait...if the OP and my conclusions in it are so obviously wrong, so obviously skewed, wouldn't it be a benefit for you to post a link to the OP to as many sites as you can to bolster pro-gay sentiments?

Either you believe what you're saying or you are engaging in abuse and hoping to God that nobody else sees the OP. Which is it?

 

[Syriusly]

Why do you think that anyone is going to do your work for you?

I gave you the address for the Supreme Court- go ahead and send them what you think will further your anti-homosexual agenda.

Wait...if the OP and my conclusions in it are so obviously wrong, so obviously skewed, wouldn't it be a benefit for you to post a link to the OP to as many sites as you can to bolster pro-gay sentiments?

I don't post links to Holocaust deniers websites
I don't post links to Stormfront
I don't even post links to the California Academy of Science- when it isn't relevant.

The Prince's Trust Study is relevant to a conversation- just not your conversation.

 

[Ravi]

Why do you think that anyone is going to do your work for you?

I gave you the address for the Supreme Court- go ahead and send them what you think will further your anti-homosexual agenda.

Wait...if the OP and my conclusions in it are so obviously wrong, so obviously skewed, wouldn't it be a benefit for you to post a link to the OP to as many sites as you can to bolster pro-gay sentiments?

Either you believe what you're saying or you are engaging in abuse and hoping to God that nobody else sees the OP. Which is it?

hahahahahahahahahaha

You are quite delusional.

 

[bendog]

Why do you think that anyone is going to do your work for you?

I gave you the address for the Supreme Court- go ahead and send them what you think will further your anti-homosexual agenda.

Wait...if the OP and my conclusions in it are so obviously wrong, so obviously skewed, wouldn't it be a benefit for you to post a link to the OP to as many sites as you can to bolster pro-gay sentiments?

I don't post links to Holocaust deniers websites
I don't post links to Stormfront
I don't even post links to the California Academy of Science- when it isn't relevant.

The Prince's Trust Study is relevant to a conversation- just not your conversation.

Why is a conversation about British youths who are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds relevant? (-:

 

[Ravi]

Why do you think that anyone is going to do your work for you?

I gave you the address for the Supreme Court- go ahead and send them what you think will further your anti-homosexual agenda.

Wait...if the OP and my conclusions in it are so obviously wrong, so obviously skewed, wouldn't it be a benefit for you to post a link to the OP to as many sites as you can to bolster pro-gay sentiments?

I don't post links to Holocaust deniers websites
I don't post links to Stormfront
I don't even post links to the California Academy of Science- when it isn't relevant.

The Prince's Trust Study is relevant to a conversation- just not your conversation.

It sounds like a great organization. Apparently they help young people better their lives. They help those "in care" (which I take to mean foster care), those that get in trouble with the law, homeless youth, and those that have low self-esteem, among others. Sounds like a fine liberal organization. I'd bet they'd even help gay youth if a gay youth was having trouble because of intolerant RWNJs. I'll have to research it a bit more.

 

[Silhouette]

Why is a conversation about British youths who are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds relevant?

Most kids these days are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. Certainly the vast majority are. The study in this instance (the organization has been around doing all manner of youth outreach since the 1970s) was about the negative effects of children who are deprived of their gender as an adult role model.

That includes 50% of all children caught up on gay lifestyles. Whereas with even single mothers (or fathers/daughters), they at least are still reaching out to the opposite gender "as mattering" when they date the opposite gender. In a gay home, that "mattering" has been completely shattered. In fact, that unhappy 50% child lives in a constant stew of their own gender as "institutionally not-mattering"....and that would send the most powerful psychological message of all.

 

[Ravi]

Why is a conversation about British youths who are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds relevant?

Most kids these days are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. Certainly the vast majority are. The study in this instance (the organization has been around doing all manner of youth outreach since the 1970s) was about the negative effects of children who are deprived of their gender as an adult role model.

^still misrepresenting what it said. It was in part about youths that have no positive gender role model. I am almost positive you would not qualify as a role model. Most blatantly bigoted people would not.

 

[Ravi]

There's something really ******* weird about a kid thinking their parent going on dates makes the kid matter.

 

[Silhouette]

There's something really ******* weird about a kid thinking their parent going on dates makes the kid matter.

A child sees the world and himself in it through the eyes of his parent(s). That's how child developmental psychology works. You think child development standards are weird?

Odd.. Let me guess, now the APA will be redacting all longstanding tomes of knowledge we have about child developmental psychology too, in order to make "not having a reflective mirror in a parent not matter"? That will require QUITE the overhaul. Their little fingers will fall off from fatigue rewriting the books on that one.. Child developmental psychology, without exaggerating at all, is the bedrock, the foundation of all forms of adult therapy.

 

[Ravi]

There's something really ******* weird about a kid thinking their parent going on dates makes the kid matter.

A child sees the world and himself in it through the eyes of his parent(s). That's how child developmental psychology works. You think child development standards are weird?

Odd..

Link us to some evidence that a parent dating is helpful to a child's mental health. Something rational and thoughtful, if possible.

 

[Skylar]

Why is a conversation about British youths who are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds relevant?

Most kids these days are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. Certainly the vast majority are. The study in this instance (the organization has been around doing all manner of youth outreach since the 1970s) was about the negative effects of children who are deprived of their gender as an adult role model.

It speaks of good gender role models. Not simply 'gender role models'. It doesn't say a thing about where these good gender role models come from. Nor does it measure any type of parenting. Or even mention same sex parents.

You made all that up.

That includes 50% of all children caught up on gay lifestyles.

The Prince Study never says this. You're citing yourself.

In a gay home, that "mattering" has been completely shattered. In fact, that unhappy 50% child lives in a constant stew of their own gender as "institutionally not-mattering"....and that would send the most powerful psychological message of all.

Says who? The only one making this claim is yourself. And you're nobody.

 

[bendog]

Why is a conversation about British youths who are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds relevant?

Most kids these days are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. Certainly the vast majority are. The study in this instance (the organization has been around doing all manner of youth outreach since the 1970s) was about the negative effects of children who are deprived of their gender as an adult role model.

That includes 50% of all children caught up on gay lifestyles. Whereas with even single mothers (or fathers/daughters), they at least are still reaching out to the opposite gender "as mattering" when they date the opposite gender. In a gay home, that "mattering" has been completely shattered. In fact, that unhappy 50% child lives in a constant stew of their own gender as "institutionally not-mattering"....and that would send the most powerful psychological message of all.

The "vast majority" of kids come from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds and 50% of "all children" are caught up "on" gay lifestyles.

This is parody, right? Please tell me it's parody.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

Parents don't think about their children's needs anymore, at least not the greater amount of parents, this is after all, the "me' Generation.

Let the schools and daycares raise the children, parents have better things to do, like getting drunk, and getting laid.

It's sad really, and it's no wonder so many young people are committing horrible crimes, like that 19 year old road rage killer in Vegas. I'll bet you his parents didn't raise him, his video games, and schools did the job.