Thank you. Your concession is accepted. It was a simple question and you answered it. See? This is all you need to do.Now, yes a homosexual can procreate
These statements are becoming tiresome. Just because you don't like the argument... as it invalidates yours, does not dismiss it. Either prove that your position has value, or stand down.These kinds of statements are becoming tiresome. SHOW ME THE MONEY sugar.
Either prove that your position has value, or stand down.SHOW me the money! LOL
Awww... more of a demonstration of your inability to debate. You cite evidence and that state that you do not want to accept it, Dude... you are so caught up in your agenda, that you refuse to accept facts... you even ADMIT that you will not accept them. Imagine that. "Yes, your honor... a know that's what is an accepted fact, but I reject it."Nope, eeeeerrrr. I reject information that doesn't conform to a measure of validity!
Errr... I am correct again. You can't defend, so you reject. Weak. Very weak.Eeeerrrr, wrong again.. Got anything else? LOL
You've got nothing. You came in here and though you could use your weak debating skills and folks would fall for it. Instead, you've been exposed and a poser who doesn't understand basic concepts. I don't waste my "A" game on people like you who do not understand basic concepts of sexuality. When you learn them, let me know and THEN we may have something to discuss. Until then, and until you demonstrate any knowledge of the concepts I have outlined, repeatedly, you are still nothing but a learner, and not worthy of anything else.SHOW me the money, or go away. How many times do I need to ask you to answer the challenge? You're a lightweight that underestimate an opponent. It's ok, I've done it before, but when I was really, really young and stupid.
So, show some knowledge of those concepts. I challenge you.
Allowed me to destroy you... someone who claimed superior knowledge, but was proven to have NO knowledge. And I didn't even break a sweat.Yes, and this superior intuitive knowledge got you where you are in this thread. Being embarrassed by a newbie.. LOL
Only in believing that you might actually understand the basic concepts I outlined. I gave you a chance, but you have proven to be unworthy.Yep, you were clearly ignorant!
I think that smile is just gas. It's all you've shown in this thread. Hot air. No substance.No, no, no my good man, not that easy. LOL Gawd if only you knew the big huge smile on my face right now, after realizing that I'm dealing with someone like you.
So... still can't grasp those basic concepts.
Since it was proven to be faulty, it was neither. Sheesh!You're confusing evidence as fact. OJ's glove didn't fit his hand. Was it fact, or was it evidence? Sheesh!
The disease or the behavior. Two different things. See, why you don't get it? Linear thinking. Nothing complex.But you're not explaining it.. You're making statements, without any proof. How does one measure an addiction? Start with that investigative question.
Oh, I see... Ok, so now, you claimed earlier that reparative therapy was debunked. Wait, no that can't be right. Are you suggesting that the measure for what constitutes a sexual orientation is based entirely on one's word? Wow! Thanks for proving me right about that whole argument! See, sunshine, I play chess, and I'm very patient! You said earlier that reparative therapy has been debunked? Well (ok here's another challenge, pay attention now) how is it that there exists no biological, or physiological test for homosexuality, other than ones word, and or actions as a measure; yet, when the exact same measure is used for ex-gays it somehow changes? Have fun with that one.. LOL[/quote]
HAHAHAHAHA!!! You are completely unable to debate. I've gotten you so screwed up, and so cornered, and pwned you so badly, you don't even know WHO you are debating. I never discussed reparative therapy. REDRESS did. So... now as a conservative who admits they are wrong, please admit that you made an error.
The same conclusions that Stacy and Biblarz did. The children of same-sex parents have equal outcomes to those of opposite-sex parents.Ok, but only because I want to know. So what conclusions did you draw from the study?
I have, only you think I haven't.No you haven't, you only think you have!
I already pointed them out when they occurred. You believe they are incorrect. Go back and dispute them. You didn't when they occurred. Go ahead. Dispute them. If you can.Oops, did you make a boo boo? What demonstrations of my logical fallacies do you refer? THAT is kinda the whole point of me pressing you silly. SHOW ME THE MONEY!
You disagree with it. DISPUTE IT. Is this the extent of your debate tactics? "It isn't valid". Show some evidence that it isn't valid, or take your dog and pony show elsewhere. All you are doing is trying to showboat... and it's doing nothing but showing how inadequate a debater you are. You don't agree with the Hooker study? DISPUTE IT... with evidence.I said -
To which you reply....
Is this how you've gotten to 40K posts? LOL SHOW ME THE MONEY, or shut the hell up!
And I''l destroy your weak debate tactics later on. I assure you.Ok, it'll come into play later on, I assure you.
I'm certain you have never met anyone like me before. Someone who called you on your bs, didn't let you get away with half-assed comments, challenged you to show evidence of your weak positions, and completely exposed you for knowing nothing of this topic. You don't understand the basic concepts that one needs to when debating this issue. And you thought you'd get away with the crap that you spewed. You're in a new world, here... one that you seem ill-prepared for. I know I was real hard on you, and showed the entire forum how inadequate you are. Perhaps in time you will be able to restore some of your destroyed reputation. You'd have to be willing to learn, first.SHOW ME THE MONEY.. ROTFLMAO..
Dude I like you... Hell dude, I could make up anything and your standard reply would be you're wrong, you're illogical, you need to read your definitions, just because... Well let me break it to you. Perhaps you've really never met anyone like me before, but I ain't gunna let you get away with it, I promise you. And if it keeps up, I'll really embarrass you! I'll do the illustration for you. I can maybe count on one hand how many times I've made a "real" logical mistake. I've made zero in this thread, and don't count on any in the future either big boy.
And with all of your writing, not one salient point. I was hoping, but since no anti-GMer of your meager skills could hope to compete with me, I should have known you would be similar. Perhaps next time, after the way you were executed here, you will do some research and learning before you DARE encounter me again. I understand that you must bow out, as further humiliation might send you off into some sort of emotional meltdown. It's OK. I'll just notch it as you being yet another wannabe that I dispatched.Until then!
Oh, that one note. I was really hoping you'd come to the plate on my challenge. I really did! Perhaps, you've learned your lesson and you'll be different the next time we meet? Other than that, if you have nothing else to offer, I'll bow out!