|
On June 27 2013 09:26 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:13 Zephirdd wrote:On June 27 2013 09:07 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 08:58 Jormundr wrote:On June 27 2013 08:52 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 08:46 Maxd11 wrote:On June 27 2013 08:35 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 07:55 Jormundr wrote:On June 27 2013 07:33 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 26 2013 18:19 marvellosity wrote:[quote] Still not seeing the problem with everyone being treated equally though. Your argument that straight married couples receive special treatment and gays do not still boils down to one group not being treated the same as the other  I do not think the two groups should be treated as equal. I think the legal protections given to straight marriage exist for a reason. Marriage and its natural extension, the family, are fundamental to a society's moral fabric. I, for one, do not believe gay marriage carries the same benefits for society as straight marriage does. For me, the argument boils down to children, who are a nonfactor in debates about equality. Children are the natural product of a mother and a father, and it is in this context that they deserve to be raised. Since marriage and family are closely intertwined, and as a member of a democratic society which decides what constitutes the legal institution of marriage, I cannot support gay marriage. Let me point out your fallacies 1. Family is not a natural extension of marriage. The very idea is stupid, considering marriage is a manmade contract, and therefore not natural at all. 2. Marriage and family are vital to society's moral fabric? Whose ass did you pull this out of? Single people without family are immoral now? 3. Children 4. In mammals, children are produced by live birth between two mammals of the opposite gender. 5. Because of 4, children should be raised by a mother and father, nobody else, like gay people. Except for single parents, children with dead parents, children who are in foster care. But those exceptions are fine. Gay parents are bad (despite the lack of evidence). 6. Since marriage and family are intertwined - Ok let's go with this one: Gay people don't deserve family. Aww that's so sweet of you. Now let's break down exactly why what you said is dumb: Your basic premise is that gay people shouldn't marry because then they will have children and the children will be bad. Well the reality is that gay people already have children *gasp* and they're not doing too bad. Maybe we should ignore the argument that has no grounding in reality! Or maybe you're suggesting that following their ability to marry they will start adopting children like they're phone apps. That would be a cool argument but I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that. 1. Actually, marriage and family are closely intertwined. I am not sure why you consider this idea to be stupid. Marriage may be a manmade contract, but the concept of family flows "naturally" from it, as in children are a natural product of a marriage. 2. Marriage and family are an incubator for society's morals. This does imply "single people without family are immoral." 3, 4, 5. We live in a society where not every child is privileged to grow up in a loving family. However, I feel every child has the right to be raised by a mom and a dad. Feel free to cite the evidence you mention. 6. It is not that gay people do not deserve a family. Rather, children deserve both a mom and a dad. For this reason, I do not support gay adoptions or artificial insemination by gay couples either. Why can't homosexual couples instil the same values that heterosexual couples can? Plenty of people grow up without a parent of one gender. Also children frequently look to adults besides their biological parents as role-models. I don't think anyone should bother trying to change your mind since it's obviously a waste of time but a person as intelligent as yourself should be able to see the obvious problems with your logic. Even if they can't admit it. Telling some one they have a problem in their logic is not a real argument. Even "someone as intelligent as yourself" should be able to see that. Maybe homosexual couples can instill the same values that heterosexual couples can. However, children are not asked why kind of parents they would like when they are born or adopted. Since children are the natural product of a father and a mother, I believe that is the best place for them. And Homo Sapiens are the natural product of Africa, so that is the best place for them. No, that's not a fucking argument. We as humans have bent every bit of nature in the world. You know this thing you're using called a computer? It ain't natural. Language? Not natural. Homosexuality? Natural, because it happens in nature. You sound pretty angry there. Does your need to describe my argument as "fucking" come from your love for others? Is this how you promote equality? Anyway, homosexuality may be natural, but tell me why that implies children born of a father (sperm) and mother (egg) deserve to be raised by homosexual couples. I'll tell you why. Because several fathers and mothers do a shit job raising children. This is something anyone should know by now. Some of them abandon their children, and some of them just don't give a fuck. I'd rather see a kid being adopted by a homossexual couple and being raised like a normal human with love and care than having him/her have a shitty parents and be raised on the worst possible conditions because of these shitty parents. Between two well-educated mature males and a 16 yo male/female couple, do you think the kid would be a better person in life being raised by the teens? This is just one single example, there are million others. I understand your frustration with the problems straight parents display. As a child of divorced parents, as many of us are, problems in my parents defined me from an early age. As a society, we have a huge problem with marriage and family. Gay marriage is not the solution.
So basically, to prevent divorce and broken families we need to prevent them in the first place? Not sure I follow the logic of how gay marriage would have any effect on hetero ones or be a solution(?) anyway lol. One would think that recognizing and encouraging these bonds would only serve to strengthen marriages and family in general. Placing more stress on gay couples is also not the solution to "traditional" marriage or family either.
|
United States200 Posts
On June 27 2013 09:37 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? And who the fuck are you ? You literally have no proof that heterosexual parent are better. Only your opinion.
My last reply to you also, since you have to curse me out (in the name of tolerance, I suppose?). I do not need to prove anything. Gay marriage is a political question, and scientific arguments are not the only arguments admissible in political discussion. Since children are the natural product of a father and a mother, they deserve to be raised within that framework.
|
On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context?
You're right that gay marriage isn't the solution to society's adoption woes. However, I believe it's a net positive in the grand scheme of things. The studies shown above are just the tip of what is coming, as there are still ongoing studies on this matter. Generally, any couple undertaking adoption have an advantage over natural birthing couples because there is that element of choice in when and where to have the child. They are also vetted by adoption agencies to see if their current lifestyle is suitable for children.
Now I don't believe that no study or metric can assess the well-being of children raised by homosexual couples vs straight couples. Studies are already out there.
|
On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context?
Science implies that children come from sperm and eggs (I see you completed 6th grade biology. Very impressive), but you believe that that means they are better off being raised by a man and a woman.
Also, who are you to say that children shouldn't be raised by two men? Or two women? You provide no evidence whatsoever. All you do is say "they come from sperm and eggs, therefore they should be raised by a man and a woman". And you say it over and over again.
|
On June 27 2013 09:42 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:37 Shodaa wrote:On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? And who the fuck are you ? You literally have no proof that heterosexual parent are better. Only your opinion. My last reply to you also, since you have to curse me out (in the name of tolerance, I suppose?). I do not need to prove anything. Gay marriage is a political question, and scientific arguments are not the only arguments admissible in political discussion. Since children are the natural product of a father and a mother, they deserve to be raised within that framework.
So you don't need to prove anything ? Alright, I think everybody can understand what kind of person you are. I'm done with you.
I'm just going to repeat what you said and direct it at you:
Who are you to say children should not be raised in that context?
|
On June 27 2013 09:42 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:37 Shodaa wrote:On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? And who the fuck are you ? You literally have no proof that heterosexual parent are better. Only your opinion. My last reply to you also, since you have to curse me out (in the name of tolerance, I suppose?). I do not need to prove anything. Gay marriage is a political question, and scientific arguments are not the only arguments admissible in political discussion. Since children are the natural product of a father and a mother, they deserve to be raised within that framework.
"To make a baby requires sperm from a man and eggs from a woman. Therefore parenting and raising a baby requires a man and a woman"
Extremely rational thinking right there
|
On June 27 2013 09:43 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? Science implies that children come from sperm and eggs (I see you completed 6th grade biology. Very impressive), but you believe that that means they are better off being raised by a man and a woman. Also, who are you to say that children shouldn't be raised by two men? Or two women? You provide no evidence whatsoever. All you do is say "they come from sperm and eggs, therefore they should be raised by a man and a woman". And you say it over and over again.
playing the devil's advocate here, you sound like someone defending the church or something lol.
We can raise animals, can we not? Don't we see stories of dogs that love their owners all the time? I've had a female dog which me(and my family) took care of from her 3 months until she passed away in 2010, almost 10 years old.
Why can't a homo couple raise a kid and that kid be perfectly normal and happy? because it's not natural?! Bullshit. First because a homo couple understands better than anyone how to accept a child(consider they experienced a lot of shit on their lifes), secondly because a homo couple will take good care of a child that they WANTED(unlike it would occur to an unwanted natural-born child, ie. those abandoned children).
|
On June 27 2013 09:50 Zephirdd wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:43 codonbyte wrote:On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? Science implies that children come from sperm and eggs (I see you completed 6th grade biology. Very impressive), but you believe that that means they are better off being raised by a man and a woman. Also, who are you to say that children shouldn't be raised by two men? Or two women? You provide no evidence whatsoever. All you do is say "they come from sperm and eggs, therefore they should be raised by a man and a woman". And you say it over and over again. playing the devil's advocate here, you sound like someone defending the church or something lol. We can raise animals, can we not? Don't we see stories of dogs that love their owners all the time? I've had a female dog which me(and my family) took care of from her 3 months until she passed away in 2010, almost 10 years old. Why can't a homo couple raise a kid and that kid be perfectly normal and happy? because it's not natural?! Bullshit. First because a homo couple understands better than anyone how to accept a child(consider they experienced a lot of shit on their lifes), secondly because a homo couple will take good care of a child that they WANTED(unlike it would occur to an unwanted natural-born child, ie. those abandoned children).
Ah, I was going to say the same thing  , My cat was born from a female and male cat, but was raised by human. I guess that's immoral too.
Also, that's not even taking into consideration other culture where family are not nuclear. Some culture don't even recognize paternity (matriarchal society) and some kids have more than 3 mothers. And they do just fine.
|
On June 27 2013 09:54 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:50 Zephirdd wrote:On June 27 2013 09:43 codonbyte wrote:On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? Science implies that children come from sperm and eggs (I see you completed 6th grade biology. Very impressive), but you believe that that means they are better off being raised by a man and a woman. Also, who are you to say that children shouldn't be raised by two men? Or two women? You provide no evidence whatsoever. All you do is say "they come from sperm and eggs, therefore they should be raised by a man and a woman". And you say it over and over again. playing the devil's advocate here, you sound like someone defending the church or something lol. We can raise animals, can we not? Don't we see stories of dogs that love their owners all the time? I've had a female dog which me(and my family) took care of from her 3 months until she passed away in 2010, almost 10 years old. Why can't a homo couple raise a kid and that kid be perfectly normal and happy? because it's not natural?! Bullshit. First because a homo couple understands better than anyone how to accept a child(consider they experienced a lot of shit on their lifes), secondly because a homo couple will take good care of a child that they WANTED(unlike it would occur to an unwanted natural-born child, ie. those abandoned children). Ah, I was going to say the same thing , My cat was born from a female and male cat, but was raised by human. I guess that's immoral too. Also, that's not even taking into consideration other culture where family are not nuclear. Some culture don't even recognize paternity (matriarchal society) and some kids have more than 3 mothers. And they do just fine.
I think Gen.Rolly is just a butthurt homophobic bigot who takes pleasure in shitting on the LGBT community because it makes him feel good about himself if he's able to tell himself that he's "carrying out god's word" or some bullshit. I just wish that people like that would  so that the rest of us can be rid of their appallingly disgusting bigotry.
|
I like this logo.
I find it pleasing to the eye.
That is all.
|
United States200 Posts
On June 27 2013 09:43 TOloseGT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? You're right that gay marriage isn't the solution to society's adoption woes. However, I believe it's a net positive in the grand scheme of things. The studies shown above are just the tip of what is coming, as there are still ongoing studies on this matter. Generally, any couple undertaking adoption have an advantage over natural birthing couples because there is that element of choice in when and where to have the child. They are also vetted by adoption agencies to see if their current lifestyle is suitable for children. Now I don't believe that no study or metric can assess the well-being of children raised by homosexual couples vs straight couples. Studies are already out there.
You raise good points, and I agree having couples interested in raising children is a good thing, and those are the people you want adopting kids. However, family dynamics are somewhat complex and there is more to family than just providing for your kids. There are certain things you can only learn from your mom, and certain things you can only learn from your dad. I know that sounds shadowy, but it is hard to put into words, just like it is hard to define feelings of love in a few sentences. Since a child's early family environment is so crucial to her development, I would rather see heterosexual parents raise a child rather than homosexuals couples. Children are, afterall, the natural product of the love between a man and woman.
|
On June 27 2013 09:59 Gen.Rolly wrote:
There are certain things you can only learn from your mom, and certain things you can only learn from your dad.
Interesting. Source?
|
From what I can gather about Gen.Rolly. My opinions are facts, and your facts are opinions. Just so you're aware, gay people aren't going to stop raising kids just because you don't allow them to marry. If your idea of a perfect utopia is that, no one really has anything left to say to you. I hope no one else reply's and that you to will just drop it.
|
The "who should be parents" arugumentation is such a complex problem.
There are so many lgbt couples that would make exelent parents, way better then the average "Normal" couple.
But somewhere I still think that every child deserves a mother and a father. I dont really think single people should be able to adopt. I have no facts to back up anything It is just a personal feeling. Men and women are so different and the genders raise their kids differently and I think thats good for a child. Maybe not 100%needed but good for raising.
|
United States200 Posts
On June 27 2013 10:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:59 Gen.Rolly wrote:
There are certain things you can only learn from your mom, and certain things you can only learn from your dad. Interesting. Source?
Certain truths cannot be garnered from any study.
|
On June 27 2013 09:59 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:43 TOloseGT wrote:On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? You're right that gay marriage isn't the solution to society's adoption woes. However, I believe it's a net positive in the grand scheme of things. The studies shown above are just the tip of what is coming, as there are still ongoing studies on this matter. Generally, any couple undertaking adoption have an advantage over natural birthing couples because there is that element of choice in when and where to have the child. They are also vetted by adoption agencies to see if their current lifestyle is suitable for children. Now I don't believe that no study or metric can assess the well-being of children raised by homosexual couples vs straight couples. Studies are already out there. You raise good points, and I agree having couples interested in raising children is a good thing, and those are the people you want adopting kids. However, family dynamics are somewhat complex and there is more to family than just providing for your kids. There are certain things you can only learn from your mom, and certain things you can only learn from your dad. I know that sounds shadowy, but it is hard to put into words, just like it is hard to define feelings of love in a few sentences. Since a child's early family environment is so crucial to her development, I would rather see heterosexual parents raise a child rather than homosexuals couples. Children are, afterall, the natural product of the love between a man and woman.
Oh wow, he's sexist too!! Who would have thunk it? I wonder what this clown's thoughts on racism are.
|
On June 27 2013 10:03 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 10:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:On June 27 2013 09:59 Gen.Rolly wrote:
There are certain things you can only learn from your mom, and certain things you can only learn from your dad. Interesting. Source? Certain truths cannot be garnered from any study.
Rofl
|
On June 27 2013 10:03 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 10:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:On June 27 2013 09:59 Gen.Rolly wrote:
There are certain things you can only learn from your mom, and certain things you can only learn from your dad. Interesting. Source? Certain truths cannot be garnered from any study.
... lol. I think that quote destroys any sense of a reasonable argument you may have been aiming for.
This "truth", then, is only your opinion, and your opinion (alone) should not shape policies that determine the lives of other individuals who have their own "truths" and opinions that differ from yours, but are backed up with, you know, social science.
|
On June 27 2013 09:58 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2013 09:54 Shodaa wrote:On June 27 2013 09:50 Zephirdd wrote:On June 27 2013 09:43 codonbyte wrote:On June 27 2013 09:34 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 27 2013 09:14 marvellosity wrote:
Why are people even arguing anymore, now it's become abundantly clear that "science" isn't a good enough reason, and obviously his own bigoted views that aren't supported by studies must actually be correct. Obviously this isn't someone you can rationalise with. A common tactic: when you disagree with someone, dismiss them as someone you cannot rationalize with. It is well documented that children come from sperm and eggs. I believe this implies children deserve to be raised by a mom and a dad. No study or metric can ever assess the countless dimensions of human psychology to suggest children raised by homosexual parents are as well off as children raised by straight couples, or that future generations of children will be. After all, every child is different. Who are you to say children (the natural product of a man and woman) should not be raised in that context? Science implies that children come from sperm and eggs (I see you completed 6th grade biology. Very impressive), but you believe that that means they are better off being raised by a man and a woman. Also, who are you to say that children shouldn't be raised by two men? Or two women? You provide no evidence whatsoever. All you do is say "they come from sperm and eggs, therefore they should be raised by a man and a woman". And you say it over and over again. playing the devil's advocate here, you sound like someone defending the church or something lol. We can raise animals, can we not? Don't we see stories of dogs that love their owners all the time? I've had a female dog which me(and my family) took care of from her 3 months until she passed away in 2010, almost 10 years old. Why can't a homo couple raise a kid and that kid be perfectly normal and happy? because it's not natural?! Bullshit. First because a homo couple understands better than anyone how to accept a child(consider they experienced a lot of shit on their lifes), secondly because a homo couple will take good care of a child that they WANTED(unlike it would occur to an unwanted natural-born child, ie. those abandoned children). Ah, I was going to say the same thing , My cat was born from a female and male cat, but was raised by human. I guess that's immoral too. Also, that's not even taking into consideration other culture where family are not nuclear. Some culture don't even recognize paternity (matriarchal society) and some kids have more than 3 mothers. And they do just fine. I think Gen.Rolly is just a butthurt homophobic bigot who takes pleasure in shitting on the LGBT community because it makes him feel good about himself if he's able to tell himself that he's "carrying out god's word" or some bullshit. I just wish that people like that would so that the rest of us can be rid of their appallingly disgusting bigotry.
No matter how righteous your cause it is an absolutely horrible thing to wish for other people to die. Have you learned nothing from history?
|
On June 27 2013 10:03 horvaa wrote:
The "who should be parents" arugumentation is such a complex problem.
There are so many lgbt couples that would make exelent parents, way better then the average "Normal" couple.
But somewhere I still think that every child deserves a mother and a father. I dont really think single people should be able to adopt. I have no facts to back up anything It is just a personal feeling. Men and women are so different and the genders raise their kids differently and I think thats good for a child. Maybe not 100%needed but good for raising.
A feminine and masculine figure can be important for a child, but it does not have to come directly from his parent. Uncle, aunt, grandparents, godfather/mother and other role model can easily provide this.
This argument would also goes against single parent and children who has one of his parent that is not permanently present (because of work and other commitment, etc.).
Certain truths cannot be garnered from any study.
LOL wat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
