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

[Timshel]

Many don't care yet still wait.

Adopting one of the hard cases takes months. There is no real waiting list for them.

I know a lesbian couple that just adopted two kids, both less than three years old, perfect health, blond hair and blue eyes, both beautiful kids. What normal couple didn't want them?

Again, there is no reason to believe homosexuals are less capable as parents.

I thought your view was the status-quo. Well, at least, not in your state. I was ashamed to find out my state is one of the most hostile to homosexual adoption. But there is relief on the way.

 

[WinterBorn]

"Appeal to Ridicule" means that you are losing the debate.

If that is true, look back over this thread and see how many times you have lost the debate.

What is actually happening is, like always, when you start to lose to start avoiding the topic and sidestepping.

 

[Timshel]

"Appeal to Ridicule" means that you are losing the debate.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... You know, you make yourself look pathetic with your weak attempts to claim some small victory. If it soothes your ego, go ahead and take your bow Timmy. But really, the behavior is childish and unbecoming of an adult.

 

[DamnYankee]

Adopting one of the hard cases takes months. There is no real waiting list for them.



Again, there is no reason to believe homosexuals are less capable as parents.

I thought your view was the status-quo. Well, at least, not in your state. I was ashamed to find out my state is one of the most hostile to homosexual adoption. But there is relief on the way.

Then let the queers adopt the hard cases. But why put them on par with normal parents?

Its common sense that a traditional married couple is the best arrangement for raising children. As Ice Dancer pointed out, hundreds of studies have shown that queer parents may be as good, yet these studies were shown to be scientifically flawed. Its obvious that the queer lobby has an agenda and is using pseudo-science to justify adoption, in order to manufacture more queers for the next generation.

 

[DamnYankee]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... You know, you make yourself look pathetic with your weak attempts to claim some small victory. If it soothes your ego, go ahead and take your bow Timmy. But really, the behavior is childish and unbecoming of an adult.

Pointing out your logical fallacy in no way makes me a victim, and in this case shows your childish behavior. Please keep the debate civil and above-board.

 

[DamnYankee]

And a large portion of the straight population enjoys sodomy.

Do you?

 

[Timshel]

Pointing out your logical fallacy in no way makes me a victim, and in this case shows your childish behavior. Please keep the debate civil and above-board.

There was nothing uncivil about my comments or "below board." Quit being a crybaby. Debate involves criticism of others' ideas. Yours are small minded and headed towards extinction. They are an intellectual dead end.

The shame is that many current and future members of the so called right will wear the shame of your legacy for years. Many will choose to judge them as a group just as you do with homosexuals.

 

[WinterBorn]

Then let the queers adopt the hard cases. But why put them on par with normal parents?

Its common sense that a traditional married couple is the best arrangement for raising children. As Ice Dancer pointed out, hundreds of studies have shown that queer parents may be as good, yet these studies were shown to be scientifically flawed. Its obvious that the queer lobby has an agenda and is using pseudo-science to justify adoption, in order to manufacture more queers for the next generation.

And yet, there are no studies showing homosexual parents as being anything less than equal to straight parents.

The flaws in the studies are minor at best in many of the studies.

As was stated in the link ID posted, finances are a much bigger factor. And yet, you want to focus on the sexual orientation, which is not shown to be a factor.

 

[WinterBorn]

Then let the queers adopt the hard cases. But why put them on par with normal parents?

Because there is no study showing that they are, in any way, less than the straight parents.

Your "common sense" is just another way of trying to justify bigotry.

 

[WinterBorn]

There was nothing uncivil about my comments or "below board." Quit being a crybaby. Debate involves criticism of others' ideas. Yours are small minded and headed towards extinction. They are an intellectual dead end.

The shame is that many current and future members of the so called right will wear the shame of your legacy for years. Many will choose to judge them as a group just as you do with homosexuals.

RStringfield, its funny that he can insult anyone he wants but doesn't like it when the reverse happens.

And SM finds ways to divert the topic when he find himself losing.

 

[DamnYankee]

There was nothing uncivil about my comments or "below board." Quit being a crybaby. Debate involves criticism of others' ideas. Yours are small minded and headed towards extinction. They are an intellectual dead end.

The shame is that many current and future members of the so called right will wear the shame of your legacy for years. Many will choose to judge them as a group just as you do with homosexuals.

Part of being an adult is admitting responsibility. But then again, lib-tards can hardly be considered adults...

 

[Timshel]

Then let the queers adopt the hard cases. But why put them on par with normal parents?

Because there is no reason not to. Like sexuality, I don't see any reason to believe that "normalcy" has a thing to do with parenting.

Its common sense that a traditional married couple is the best arrangement for raising children. As Ice Dancer pointed out, hundreds of studies have shown that queer parents may be as good, yet these studies were shown to be scientifically flawed. Its obvious that the queer lobby has an agenda and is using pseudo-science to justify adoption, in order to manufacture more queers for the next generation.

Manufacture?

Your entire argument is pseudo-science. You have a strange hypothesis, one that is not based on any reasonable assumptions. Why would homosexuality make one less capable of being a parent?

Again, I do not care if studies show that hetero couples may be better than equally situated homo couples. If homo couples are shown to be preferable I would not argue for a ban on hetero adoption. That would be just as stupid as the reverse.

You must show that homosexuals are inherently less capable of parenting. There is absolutely no reason to believe that.

 

[DamnYankee]

Because there is no study showing that they are, in any way, less than the straight parents.

None at all?

During a presentation on research conducted by George A. Rekers, Professor of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science at the University of South Carolina, the presenters noted that “boys and girls adopted by lesbian and homosexual couples show a greater level of stress than that which is already generated by their status as orphans or children abandoned by their biological parents.” They added that this situation “produces diverse trauma and behavioral disorders that can even lead to suicidal tendencies or attempts.”

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/n...e-sex_parents_prone_to_suicide_study_reveals/

 

[Timshel]

Part of being an adult is admitting responsibility. But then again, lib-tards can hardly be considered adults...

I accept full credit for my barb and criticizing your ideas as small minded and headed towards extinction.

I already told you, feel free to claim I should be DQd for being too rough with you. Even if that is correct, it's a shallow victory for you. But, go ahead, take your victory lap and head off to Disney World if it makes you feel good about yourself.

 

[DamnYankee]

Libtards celebrate that queer marriages increase infidelity.

A study to be released next month is offering a rare glimpse inside gay relationships and reveals that monogamy is not a central feature for many. Some gay men and lesbians argue that, as a result, they have stronger, longer-lasting and more honest relationships. And while that may sound counterintuitive, some experts say boundary-challenging gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage — one that might point the way for the survival of the institution.

New research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area. The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

That consent is key. “With straight people, it’s called affairs or cheating,” said Colleen Hoff, the study’s principal investigator, “but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

 

[DamnYankee]

I accept full credit for my barb and criticizing your ideas as small minded and headed towards extinction.

I already told you, feel free to claim I should be DQd for being too rough with you. Even if that is correct, it's a shallow victory for you. But, go ahead, take your victory lap and head off to Disney World if it makes you feel good about yourself.

Thanks, but Disney World, no.

 

[WinterBorn]

None at all?



http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/n...e-sex_parents_prone_to_suicide_study_reveals/

I searched and searched, but I cannot find any links to the methods or even the data from the study for the paper presented.

I did, however, find some interesting data about Dr, George A. Rekers. He is a member of NARTH (National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality). This organization believes it can "cure" homosexuality.

Dr Rekers has also testified in court that "he believes the Bible is the infallible word of God, and that homosexuality is a sin".

Without solid evidence for his study (which I have not found), he is hardly a credible witness. The APA and the Royal College of Psychiatrists have stated that NARTH's positions are not supported by science.

 

[WinterBorn]

Do you?

Does it really matter? Why are you so concerned with people's sex lives? Is something missing in yours?

 

[DamnYankee]

Does it really matter? Why are you so concerned with people's sex lives? Is something missing in yours?

The only thing missing in mine is sin.

 

[Timshel]

RStringfield, its funny that he can insult anyone he wants but doesn't like it when the reverse happens.

And SM finds ways to divert the topic when he find himself losing.

Yeah, I have seen him pull this plenty of times. I honestly think it is a sign of low self esteem. No matter the root, it's pretty pathetic and sad to the point that I consider humoring him.