- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 156,720
- Reaction score
- 53,497
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
They should evolve to reproduce like the rest of us.
So you are against adoption in all forms? Gotcha.
They should evolve to reproduce like the rest of us.
So you are against adoption in all forms? Gotcha.
:spin:
Here - let me clue you in. People generally adopt because either a) they are capable of producing children but would rather adopt instead of adding to the population, or b) they cannot produce children because of a physical irregularity.
Gay couples want to adopt because it is physically impossible for them to produce children.
Straight forward, no spin.
If they can't have kids, does the reason really matter?
Gay couples is perversion.
If they can't have kids, does the reason really matter?
I'm not stating that my opinion is that gay couples shouldn't adopt - I'm really pretty neither here nor there on issues involving gay people, specifically marriage and adoption.
I just don't care, but I tend to look at the subject from an evolutionary standpoint such that homosexuality is irregular in a sense that it's non-childbearing and otherwise unnatural.
Yeah, I know - here come the "some toads are asexual" or some other animal shows some bizarre tendency, but fact is - essentially all species would cease to exist under homosexual practice.
Having said all of that, and I'm leaving adoption and marriage out of this statement because I'm really nondescript on these issues, I really don't care what gays do in their own privacy. Their business, not mine - and as long as it doesn't involve minors, animals, the mentally deficient or anyone against their will - then have at it. It does piss me off that I have to see them crashing St. Patrick's Day parades with all that "we're here, we're queer" crap.
Air conditioning is unnatural. No one is saying that everyone should be gay. Our species will survive in spite of a few homosexuals.
The "We're here, we're queer" chants will stop when they have the same rights/benefits as heterosexuals.
So is your use of the English language. :roll:
Air conditioning is unnatural. No one is saying that everyone should be gay. Our species will survive in spite of a few homosexuals.
The "We're here, we're queer" chants will stop when they have the same rights/benefits as heterosexuals.
Yay - more spin.
And the general dislike of gays will continue as long as people have this crap shoved in their faces when they take their kids to parades.
It's like PETA - there's a way to promote your point and a way to turn public opinion against you.
I knew you'd come around to my view.
You have every right I have.
Gay couples is perversion.
:spin:
Here - let me clue you in. People generally adopt because either a) they are capable of producing children but would rather adopt instead of adding to the population, or b) they cannot produce children because of a physical irregularity.
Gay couples want to adopt because it is physically impossible for them to produce children.
Straight forward, no spin.
Gay couples is perversion.
Moderator's Warning: |
Knock off the trolling. |
b) is your own spin. If a couple cannot produce children, they cannot produce children. Your changing the words around to fit your agenda doesn't change that fact.
And let me clue you in. Gays can produce children, just not with each other. I suppose you are against artificial insemination, right?
Gay couples want to adopt because it is physically impossible for them to produce children.
I'm not stating that my opinion is that gay couples shouldn't adopt - I'm really pretty neither here nor there on issues involving gay people, specifically marriage and adoption.
I just don't care, but I tend to look at the subject from an evolutionary standpoint such that homosexuality is irregular in a sense that it's non-childbearing and otherwise unnatural.
Yeah, I know - here come the "some toads are asexual" or some other animal shows some bizarre tendency, but fact is - essentially all species would cease to exist under homosexual practice.
Having said all of that, and I'm leaving adoption and marriage out of this statement because I'm really nondescript on these issues, I really don't care what gays do in their own privacy. Their business, not mine - and as long as it doesn't involve minors, animals, the mentally deficient or anyone against their will - then have at it. It does piss me off that I have to see them crashing St. Patrick's Day parades with all that "we're here, we're queer" crap.
Really now?
Are scientists witches too? Ooh, let's go further back! Does fire scare you?
The definition of perversion is "not the norm". Gay parents are certainly not the norm.
The definition of perversion is "not the norm". Gay parents are certainly not the norm.
Gay couples cannot produce children.