Why don't you Libtard/ Progressives/ Democrats just say it?

[USFREEDOM911]

My statement is in response to yours.

And my statement was in response to yours.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.10]

My statement is in response to yours.

Translation: I wrote a check with my mouth that my ass can't cover.

 

[DamnYankee]

And my statement was in response to yours.

Then ax who I responded to.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.10]

Then ax who I responded to.

I be axin' you.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Then ax who I responded to.

But I'm axing you; because of your statement that you posted as fact.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.10]

You must be on of those "It Takes a Village" people. Here's the reality: it takes two parents, one man and one woman.

Sure, lots of kids grow up with singe parents, a dead bead dad, or queer parents and come out OK. But their chances are much better in a traditional home.

Evidence?

 

[DamnYankee]

But I'm axing you; because of your statement that you posted as fact.

My assertions are based on common sense and years of tradition. I responded to another post that asserted facts, so ax him.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.10]

My assertions are based on common sense and years of tradition. I responded to another post that asserted facts, so ax him.

I love how SM sidesteps the issue. BTW, since you are so eager to call homosexuals names, why did you turn down my invitation to come to a gay bar and do it there?

 

[DamnYankee]

I don't respond to Topspin trolls; I simply neg rep them. If you want to come up and visit Topspin, you know how to do it.

 

[Timshel]

Since this is the status quo, it is up to you to prove that queer parents do no harm before you fuck up children that would be adopted by them.

You have no right to restrain people based on some ignorant assumption. Again, there is absolutely no reason to believe sexual preference has any affect on parenting. Why would it?

You are not only denying homosexuals. You are denying children, many who go unadopted, a home.

 

[Canceled2]

Children should not be the subjects of social experiments.

 

[Socrtease]

Since this is the status quo, it is up to you to prove that queer parents do no harm before you fuck up children that would be adopted by them.

No, the status quo is that one half of all married couples split, second and subsequent marriages are even worse. So it is up to you to prove that of those that stay together and have kids their kids grow up better, more stable, more successful, than all the others. YOU CAN'T DO IT.

 

[WinterBorn]

You must be on of those "It Takes a Village" people. Here's the reality: it takes two parents, one man and one woman.

Sure, lots of kids grow up with singe parents, a dead bead dad, or queer parents and come out OK. But their chances are much better in a traditional home.

Is it the govt job to decide all of this? You dislike the "It takes a Village" mentality, and you you want to force everyone who isn't in a happy, traditional marriage into a subset that you label as "less than ideal".

There are plenty of gay couples and single parent homes who raise children that come out more than ok. And plenty of intact, married parents who screw up their children royally.


As a matter of fact, financial resources for the family play a bigger part than the gender of the parents. But you don't seem thrilled about the prospect of the gov't giving money to poor families.

So I guess your concern is only about sexual orientation? And the concern vanishes when it comes to you paying more taxes?

 

[WinterBorn]

Since this is the status quo, it is up to you to prove that queer parents do no harm before you fuck up children that would be adopted by them.

No, it is up to you to prove there is imminent harm awaiting children of gay parents.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

No, the status quo is that one half of all married couples split, second and subsequent marriages are even worse. So it is up to you to prove that of those that stay together and have kids their kids grow up better, more stable, more successful, than all the others. YOU CAN'T DO IT.

That's why he's dancing away from this.
This comes up, about every two months or so, and there's been nothing new to support the stopping of gays from marrying.
He just doesn't like the icky part.

 

[Socrtease]

That's why he's dancing away from this.
This comes up, about every two months or so, and there's been nothing new to support the stopping of gays from marrying.
He just doesn't like the icky part.

THIS!

 

[USFREEDOM911]

THIS!

Well, I was trying to address one problem at a time.

 

[WinterBorn]

That's why he's dancing away from this.
This comes up, about every two months or so, and there's been nothing new to support the stopping of gays from marrying.
He just doesn't like the icky part.

Actually, I don't like the icky part either. But then, watching fat people fuck or two old people do it would be just as icky.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Actually, I don't like the icky part either. But then, watching fat people fuck or two old people do it would be just as icky.

I really don't care what two adults do in the privacy of their homes; whether it be two gay's, two fat people, or two old people.

You shouldn't either, unless you're the kind that likes to peek in windows. LOL

Add in the fact that gays do things that some straight couples do also.

 

[WinterBorn]

I really don't care what two adults do in the privacy of their homes; whether it be two gay's, two fat people, or two old people.

You shouldn't either, unless you're the kind that likes to peek in windows. LOL

Add in the fact that gays do things that some straight couples do also.

I agree. The only reason I mentioned the other "icky" things is to make the point that I don't want to watch other people having sex. But that doesn't mean I am bothered by knowing it happens.

Besides, none of this is really about sex acts. Because the sex acts are happening anyway.