Homosexual families

[Kadayi]

Besides, in my opinion, a heterosexual child having homosexual parents won't have any more "damage" than a homosexual child having heterosexual parents.

In which case you should be rejecting both states, as neither is ideal.

 

[DaMaN]

In which case you should be rejecting both states, as neither is ideal.

Not at all, I embrace both states because since one has a good chance of success, there's a decent probability that the other will have a good chance of success.

Besides, I don't think it would be practical or moral to seperate everything out: homosexuals with homosexual families, heterosexuals with heterosexual families - it would probably cause a lot more discrimination.

 

[Kadayi]

Besides, I don't think it would be practical or moral to seperate everything out: homosexuals with homosexual families, heterosexuals with heterosexual families - it would probably cause a lot more discrimination.

Did I actually advocate that? Please feel free to highlight where. I'm more for a broader social upbringing.

 

[DaMaN]

Did I actually advocate that? Please feel free to highlight where.

I appologise, I didn't mean to insinuate that's what you were advocating.

I was stating that if one were to go with what was 100% ideal, then a solution such as I had outlined would be impractical and immoral.


Things can't always be ideal, and usually if you try to make them ideal they become very much the opposite.

In my comments I was attempting to outline how preposterous it was to suggest that a heterosexual child having homosexual parents could be damaged any more than a homosexual child having heterosexual parents. And thusly, the suitability of adopting parents should have nothing to do with whether the parents are homosexual or heterosexual, until there is direct substantiated evidence that having homosexual parents will do serious damage to a child. (In my opinion, such evidence will not surface).

 

[Kadayi]

Things can't always be ideal, and usually if you try to make them ideal they become very much the opposite.

See the thing is, the 2 person family is an ideal as well. We've ploughed the course of the nuclear family in the west for some time now, and the alternative has become the single parent. In other less developed countries the extended family/tribe/community still exists and the larger social structure makes it easier for people to manage their time and their children through mutual support, even in the event of there being a breakdown of relationships between the parents (or absence of one).

 

[DaMaN]

See the thing is, the 2 person family is an ideal as well. We've ploughed the course of the nuclear family in the west for some time now, and the alternative has become the single parent. In other less developed countries the extended family/tribe/community still exists and the larger social structure makes it easier for people to manage their time and their children through mutual support, even in the event of there being a breakdown of relationships between the parents (or absence of one).

Agreed! The two-parent male-female family is just as much an ideal as a two-parent male-male or female-female family. It's quite possible that an extended family/tribe/community would be easier to support children.

The initial issue was whether or not in our two-person nuclear family society a homosexual two-person family will cause a child to "turn" to being homosexual. Since most scientific evidence seems to indicate that sexuality is determined at birth, this issue is rendered null. The other issue that was brought up is whether or not in our two-person nuclear family society a homosexual two-person family will do unspecified emotional damage to a child. As far as I can tell, no it won't.

I agree that an extended family/tribe/community would be easier to support children. Unfortunately, there's no legislature in place for them (that I'm aware of.) Perhaps there should be!

 

[Absinthe]

And you base this on research or opinion?

Burden of proof is on you, jack.

The issue of children raised by homosexual couples being teased in school is an issue with society, not with gay parents.

The only way the parents' sexual orientation could affect the child negatively is if it's brainwashed into them. In such a case, the problem isn't with same-sex legal guardians. The problem is with the couple being crazy and undeserving of parenthood.

 

[Beerdude26]

So it's settled then: Buttsechs does not interfere with a child's sexual preference. (I'm sorry, I just had to post that.)

 

[Thread]

Burden of proof is on you, jack.

The issue of children raised by homosexual couples being teased in school is an issue with society, not with gay parents.

The only way the parents' sexual orientation could affect the child negatively is if it's brainwashed into them. In such a case, the problem isn't with same-sex legal guardians. The problem is with the couple being crazy and undeserving of parenthood.

yeah, i kinda realized that around page two-ish just to make things clear i agree with daman's/darkside's point of view. all i wanted to prove or bring into light, is if in fact any "damage" was done to the child, which has scientifically proven that there is none. And everything else.

gay parents = as much right as any parents, unless you mention the very problem you state, as i believe i mentioned earlier sometime during this thread.

So it's settled then: Buttsechs does not interfere with a child's sexual preference. (I'm sorry, I just had to post that.)

b - holy shit. XD

 

[Mechagodzilla]

It really bugs me that there exists that initial assumption that the gays are trying not only to corrupt the heterosexual world, but specifically hetereosexual children.
I mean, what the hell? Why would anyone take that as the default position?
Why is the inherent assumption that there's something wrong or unclean?

THREAD TOPIC: does the black man's devil music cause white children to dirty our aryan genetic stock with lascivious dancing? Prove this statement wrong!

Answer: uh, that's retarded.

Oh, so unfounded prejudices are retarded after all!

/end thread

 

[Thread]

Meh, I expected you'd do this.

My initial assumption, was a very ignorant one. why else would you think I would make such a thread? do you think i want to be an ignorant forever?

sometimes, you have to look through people's opinions where facts are presented (actually just facts, not opinions) to be able to make up your own mind. the horrible average mind makes many mistakes, like the one i initially presented. now it's gone. i wouldnt have trusted wikipedia for a moral issue.

now try explaining this to a massive hoard of 17 year olds who think homosexuality is 'gay'. and teachers who don't make sense.

 

[Neutrino]

I know several kids who grew up with gay parents. They all turned out fine and none were themselves homosexual.

 

[15357]

Just try to imagine the poor kids who would suffer through years of "Your parents are fags lol". They might turn emo for christ's sake.

 

[Ome_Vince]

@Mecha, perhaps because like all other species humans are group-animals who reject something that is "different/new/we can't understand" etc, and fills this up with fear/assumptions/rejection.

 

[CptStern]

yes but if we listened to every group who rejected anything new or different we'd still be living in caves trying to decide, by commitee I might add, whether fire is a natural element or a tool of the devil

 

[Qonfused]

It really bugs me that there exists that initial assumption that the gays are trying not only to corrupt the heterosexual world, but specifically hetereosexual children.
I mean, what the hell? Why would anyone take that as the default position?
Why is the inherent assumption that there's something wrong or unclean?

THREAD TOPIC: does the black man's devil music cause white children to dirty our aryan genetic stock with lascivious dancing? Prove this statement wrong!

Answer: uh, that's retarded.

Oh, so unfounded prejudices are retarded after all!

/end thread

I'm astounded by that generalization as well. They're humans too that participate in normal life. It's not like they're ****ing aliens trying to corrupt America's youth into being; gasp; gay.

 

[Thread]

Let me put it in a different way.

As of now I'm only living with my mother, for about a year. She is a devout Catholic. I go to a Catholic school (that was founded by a pedophile but that's besides the point), where homosexuality is absolutely NOT tolerated by ANY student. Not at least my class of 17/18 year old seniors that if asked about his stance on homosexuality they'll go "ew buttsechs. Dude they have like dicks. What the hell's wrong with them." Seriously, I thought I was only being a little open-minded in believing that they have the same rights as just any other person, because my friends DO NOT take the same stance and I've got few actual credible sources of the truth concerning ethical/moral issues of this sort and believe me, I'm sorry if I had this ignorant thought that sexual orientation would be determined by the relationships in early childhood and other psychological non-existant consequences of being raised with gay parenst. That's why I made this thread - to clarify - with legitimate facts and not opinions.

Qonfused, if you would've read my initial post, I clearly stated that I couldn't care less about America 'turning gay'. I dunno if it's because of my English or whathaveyou but that's twice you've misinterpreted me. Do I need to spell out anything else for you, or anyone, for that matter?

 

[Qonfused]

My post wasn't directed towards you. It was to the people who actually believe that being gay is a horrible, horrible thing.

 

[kirovman]

People who are scared about being "corrupted" by gays must have some deep insecurities.

 

[pomegranate]

I don't know if it's a crime to dislike homosexuals in a modern world, but i do. One of the main reasons is because some just become homosexuals because of a "little desire of that" in them, they have nothing wrong in their psyhics to be such. That's the most worst kind of a homosexual, really.
But otherwise, why does a man becomes homosexual? If he feels like he's attracted to men, then make a surgery and become a woman, don't try being a man and a woman in one, that's not right.

Funniest thing I've read on HL2.net this week. You're loopy. EDIT: but opened minded and inquisitive, so fair play to you.

Disk Cheney.

Lollerskates indeed, that reminded me of this:

[YOUTUBE]<object ><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/k1Cm5NbXGzE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/k1Cm5NbXGzE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" ></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

EDIT: Right, how do I embed videos?

Up until Victorian times it was pretty much the community that raised children (especially the elderly) whilst the able bodied adults worked the fields etc, the nuclear family ideal is something that has arrived out of consumerism and advertising (buy your own home, live your own life), but isn't particularly favourable in terms of genuine child development as there is a strong tendency for the parents psychological traits (good and bad) to carry across, disfunctional parents breed disfunctional children, and keep Psychologists busy. Any form of closed family unit is a bad idea.

Very interesting...

 

[kirovman]

EDIT: Right, how do I embed videos?

All the image tags, youttube tags etc are disabled on the Politics forum.

 

[el Chi]

A child needs a male and a female role model.

Which is why every child from a single-parent family grows up to be a degenerate wreck of person.
I'm sure that having two parents of the same sex to rely on would be a great impediment on any child's development.

When I was a kid a friend of mine's mum was gay and in a long-term relationship. No-one teased her or her sister for it and at the time it didn't seem that weird. I just figured she had two mums and that was that. I know that mutual friends of ours just figured the same thing and it was no big deal.
Without the influence of parents' prejudices, children are pretty open-minded and society can't overcome prejudice by pandering to bigots.

 

[pomegranate]

All the image tags, youttube tags etc are disabled on the Politics forum.

fuxors. thanks.

 

[FieryGoose]

I guess what it really comes down to in my opinion is, will homosexuals raising children benefit society. So far as i know there's no evidence to support either direction. What needs to be looked upon now is not the issues with the minorities but the issue with the majority i.e. single parent homes/divorce rates, we truly are a wounded society. Isn't anyone getting tired of all these damn homosexual threads, i mean seriously? Also i think you guys are trying to make this way too "cut and dry" it really isn't that simple; children are very impressionable, if they see someone do something they will try and mimic it, they want to be just like their parents it's undeniable. I'm a strong believer that homosexuality can be instilled into children. Don't any of you think that being around homosexuals your whole life might make you think that it's the norm, or what your "supposed" to be. Are you guys saying that a male child having 2 mommy's isn't going to make that child feminine and possibly come off (or actually be)gay, there's no question of whether a male child needs a father figure or whether a female child need a mother figures, isn't it obvious? I mean regardless of what scientist think, i think the matter to influence is blatantly obvious. But whatever, who cares right, my opinion is just the same as a bigots since i'm not going to throw down my values for a minority.

Obviously next to none of what i said is based off of scientific evidence, but how boring would life be if everyone let scientist think for them?

 

[Stigmata]

I guess what it really comes down to in my opinion is, will homosexuals raising children benefit society. So far as i know there's no evidence to support either direction. What needs to be looked upon now is not the issues with the minorities but the issue with the majority i.e. single parent homes/divorce rates, we truly are a wounded society. Isn't anyone getting tired of all these damn homosexual threads, i mean seriously? Also i think you guys are trying to make this way too "cut and dry" it really isn't that simple; children are very impressionable, if they see someone do something they will try and mimic it, they want to be just like their parents it's undeniable. I'm a strong believer that homosexuality can be instilled into children. Don't any of you think that being around homosexuals your whole life might make you think that it's the norm, or what your "supposed" to be. Are you guys saying that a male child having 2 mommy's isn't going to make that child feminine and possibly come off (or actually be)gay, there's no question of whether a male child needs a father figure or whether a female child need a mother figures, isn't it obvious? I mean regardless of what scientist think, i think the matter to influence is blatantly obvious. But whatever, who cares right, my opinion is just the same as a bigots since i'm not going to throw down my values for a minority.

Obviously next to none of what i said is based off of scientific evidence, but how boring would life be if everyone let scientist think for them?

In this case, science has all but 100% conclusively shown that homosexuality is a purely biological trait and is most likely genetic, meaning that it cannot be "learned" through parental behavior. Which in turn means there is no measurably negative effect homosexual parents will have on a child, which in turn (again) means that there is no good reason to prevent homosexual couples from adopting or otherwise having children.

And homosexuality is completely normal. If it weren't normal, it would be far less prominent. There's no reason why we can't change marriage/child-rearing rules and preconceptions to accomodate new points of view - we all know that decisions and rules made hundreds or even thousands of years ago can often be wrong or downright harmful in some way.

 

[Qonfused]

People are just frightened because it's not a standby. This stigma (lol) has been proven over and over through modern society. Music, video games, and certain activities have been prosecuted, because it's something different.

 

[DaMaN]

I guess what it really comes down to in my opinion is, will homosexuals raising children benefit society. So far as i know there's no evidence to support either direction. What needs to be looked upon now is not the issues with the minorities but the issue with the majority i.e. single parent homes/divorce rates, we truly are a wounded society. Isn't anyone getting tired of all these damn homosexual threads, i mean seriously? Also i think you guys are trying to make this way too "cut and dry" it really isn't that simple; children are very impressionable, if they see someone do something they will try and mimic it, they want to be just like their parents it's undeniable. I'm a strong believer that homosexuality can be instilled into children. Don't any of you think that being around homosexuals your whole life might make you think that it's the norm, or what your "supposed" to be. Are you guys saying that a male child having 2 mommy's isn't going to make that child feminine and possibly come off (or actually be)gay, there's no question of whether a male child needs a father figure or whether a female child need a mother figures, isn't it obvious? I mean regardless of what scientist think, i think the matter to influence is blatantly obvious.

Good for you. Way to ignore science.

If you believe that homosexuality can be instilled into children by a "do what your parents do", why aren't boys-raised-by-single-mothers made feminine or turned gay? Or same question, genders reversed?

Why don't children with blue eyes gouge them out if their parents have brown eyes?

My point being that extremely few children try to become genetically identical to their parents. Especially not in adolecent years.

But whatever, who cares right, my opinion is just the same as a bigots since i'm not going to throw down my values for a minority.

Sorry, but what exactly are your values? Do you value having the same rights as other people? Do you value not being arbitrarially deprived of those rights? Do you value HAVING values? Do you value being able to raise children?

If you aren't willing to give those values to other people (minorities included), why do you deserve to have them?

Obviously next to none of what i said is based off of scientific evidence, but how boring would life be if everyone let scientist think for them?

Sure, let's just fly in the face of what science says. I mean, who needs "systems of "objective" knowledge". We can totally judge everything based on the "social norm". Who cares if science says a brick will likely hit the ground if dropped? We can just believe that it won't!![/sarcasm]

Science isn't just for scientists. It's a method of acquiring knowledge based on models and depictions that can be used to make predictions that can be tested by experiment or observation. Anybody can do that.

---

Say it Stiggy!

And homosexuality is completely normal. If it weren't normal, it would be far less prominent. There's no reason why we can't change marriage/child-rearing rules and preconceptions to accomodate new points of view - we all know that decisions and rules made hundreds or even thousands of years ago can often be wrong or downright harmful in some way.

 

[PvtRyan]

Homosexual parents will be better parents than the avarage straight couple. It's logical: a kid that grows up with a gay couple is ALWAYS a wanted child. It's also more likely that the couple is actually capable of providing the kid with everything it needs, because they get scanned for that when they adopt.

The only point that could be made against adoption by gays (outside of religious bullshit) is that their environment might pick on the kids. Well, that's even more retarded than the religious reasons: you're not gonna limit the freedom of people because OTHER people are idiots. If you're gonna do that, you shouldn't allow ugly people to procreate because there's a good chance their kid will turn out ugly and will get picked on. Eugenics much?

 

[Core407]

Homosexual parents will be better parents than the avarage straight couple. It's logical: a kid that grows up with a gay couple is ALWAYS a wanted child. It's also more likely that the couple is actually capable of providing the kid with everything it needs, because they get scanned for that when they adopt.

The only point that could be made against adoption by gays (outside of religious bullshit) is that their environment might pick on the kids. Well, that's even more retarded than the religious reasons: you're not gonna limit the freedom of people because OTHER people are idiots. If you're gonna do that, you shouldn't allow ugly people to procreate because there's a good chance their kid will turn out ugly and will get picked on. Eugenics much?

I personally would prefer that more Gays adopted as I think they're probably one of the better candidates for parents. I would say any kid adopted by any family - be it gay or straight - are going to want the child. The only issue I could find is with the fact that theres no mother or father in the kids life, which will definitely create issues that the couples will have to work out.

Adoption FTMFW

 

[Absinthe]

Also i think you guys are trying to make this way too "cut and dry" it really isn't that simple; children are very impressionable, if they see someone do something they will try and mimic it, they want to be just like their parents it's undeniable.

Don't assume such things. I certainly held no such aspirations.

I'm a strong believer that homosexuality can be instilled into children. Don't any of you think that being around homosexuals your whole life might make you think that it's the norm, or what your "supposed" to be.

Not only is your belief based on **** all, but it relies on the assumption that the grand majority of everybody the kid meets throughout his childhood will be homosexual. Trust me when I say that the kid will figure out what being straight is quite early on and quite easily. If not through appropriate discourse and experience, then at the very least through mockery.

The only way the child could come off thinking he's supposed to be homosexual is if he's indoctrinated, in which case (as I stated before) the problem is not with the parents' sexual orientation, but with their failures at parenthood.

Are you guys saying that a male child having 2 mommy's isn't going to make that child feminine and possibly come off (or actually be)gay, there's no question of whether a male child needs a father figure or whether a female child need a mother figures, isn't it obvious?

If it's so obvious, post some evidence. It should be dreadfully easy.

I mean regardless of what scientist think, i think the matter to influence is blatantly obvious.

Yeah, man. **** science. Those assholes can't see anything two feet in front of them. I mean, who gets off talking about theories, evidence, "burden of proof", and all that shit? Secular progressive assholes, that's who.

Obviously next to none of what i said is based off of scientific evidence, but how boring would life be if everyone let scientist think for them?

You're not being told to let scientists think for you.

You're being told to think critically.

 

[Darkside55]

I guess what it really comes down to in my opinion is, will homosexuals raising children benefit society.

This is a really flawed question/argument because basically I can say, "Will heterosexuals raising kids benefit society?" and the answer is of course, "No, not really." You see it all depends on the parents, not their sexual orientation. Gay parents aren't going to be raising their kids any differently than straight parents. I mean how're you expecting gay parents to raise their kids? As some people've already posted the only difference is they'll probably more tolerant of other people, which unless you're all for prejudices you'd find it a good thing.

What needs to be looked upon now is not the issues with the minorities but the issue with the majority i.e. single parent homes/divorce rates, we truly are a wounded society.

Divorce rates do need to be addressed. Blame today's society. But what does that have to do with "the gay minority?" The divorce statistic has nothing to do with them. And are you saying we can't look at two issues at once? So basically that's like..."Let's focus on divorced couples and single parents and forget about homosexuals." Yeah that's really going to do something--when you don't want to talk or think about something, just ignore the issue entirely and put your mind on something else.

Also there's nothing wrong with a single parent household. I was raised in a single-parent household until I was seven, not quite past my formative years but long enough. From not only personal experience, but also from stories I've heard from other people who've been raised in single-parent households, they can still raise us right and we turn out great. I don't see how single parents are contributing to a "wounded society." If anything they work harder than two parents combined for their children.

Isn't anyone getting tired of all these damn homosexual threads, i mean seriously?

Heaven forbid we talk about those damn homosexuals. I mean seriously guys. Seriously.

Homosexuals.

Seriously.

Seriously.

Also i think you guys are trying to make this way too "cut and dry" it really isn't that simple; children are very impressionable, if they see someone do something they will try and mimic it, they want to be just like their parents it's undeniable. I'm a strong believer that homosexuality can be instilled into children. Don't any of you think that being around homosexuals your whole life might make you think that it's the norm, or what your "supposed" to be. Are you guys saying that a male child having 2 mommy's isn't going to make that child feminine and possibly come off (or actually be)gay, there's no question of whether a male child needs a father figure or whether a female child need a mother figures, isn't it obvious? I mean regardless of what scientist think, i think the matter to influence is blatantly obvious. But whatever, who cares right, my opinion is just the same as a bigots since i'm not going to throw down my values for a minority.

First of all, again, biology. You can't instill homosexuality into people. It's biological. Even if you don't want to listen to those kerazy scientists, look at animals. Gay animals. What's it gonna be then? It's biology and you're either wired to be gay or you aren't.

Secondly, no, you would not believe that homosexuals are the norm because you wouldn't be locked in your house with two mothers or two fathers. You'd go outside and experience society. Society, where there are people from all walks of life in all different relationships. Even when you're not outside you have television and the internet. You see other social dynamics other than your own household. In an environment like that you come to realize that there are people from all different walks of life. That's how you come to understand diversity.

Also, about the example of a kid with two mothers coming out feminine, all I have to say is: butch.

Obviously next to none of what i said is based off of scientific evidence, but how boring would life be if everyone let scientist think for them?

Because what do scientists know? They don't know about homosexuals, man. And that's serious.

 

[FieryGoose]

Ok, first off i don't think you guys got it that my post was entirely opinionated and undoubtedly at fault when looked at under the scientific method. Maybe I just have yet to understand the concept of tearing apart someones opinion like it makes a difference. Anywayzzzz... I just want to clarify something so you all don't think I'm a homo-basher, it's not that I don't have faith in the people themselves to raise children, I'm just afraid that due to this more homosexual oriented people are going to start coming out of this increased number of homosexual parenting... for instance if you look at the ratio of straights to gays and homosexuality starts to become more prevalent, what is this due to? Are people simply starting to get more chemical imbalances or what? I just have a slight suspicion that something fishy is going on behind the scenes. I may just have an irrational feeling or whatever but thats just me. Should i be shot for being an idiot. Also what exactly defines an idiot, I've seen it being used alot on this thread, is there a contest going on where whoever can say idiot in their posts the most wins, 'cause i want to get in on this?:naughty:

So if anyone has any info on why homosexuality is becoming more prevalent that would be great.

edit: I forgot to restate what divorce and single parent homes had to do with the whole thing. Basically what I'm saying is that we're spending all of our energy into the issues surrounding homosexuality when more people are being negatively affected by the results of divorce. Now I'm not saying that everyone is negatively affected. all I'm saying that divorce in general is bad, and that issue needs to be addressed with equal might.

"Let's focus on divorced couples and single parents and forget about homosexuals."

It seems as though as though people are completely sidestepping the issue of divorce, and using homosexual equality as an excuse, the complete opposite of what darkside said i was doing. I was in no way saying that everyone who is raised in single parent families have any mental damage. So yea, someone said something about how homosexual parenting is more successful than single parent parenting, but as darkside stated as an example:

From not only personal experience, but also from stories I've heard from other people who've been raised in single-parent households, they can still raise us right and we turn out great.

So i guess the children raised under the authority of homosexuals must turn out being "super-children", ever seen that movie..."Baby Guinness" I think it was called. hehe

 

[Stigmata]

for instance if you look at the ratio of straights to gays and homosexuality starts to become more prevalent, what is this due to? Are people simply starting to get more chemical imbalances or what? I just have a slight suspicion that something fishy is going on behind the scenes.

All that is is the self-selection bias rearing its head. As homosexuality becomes more and more accepted, more and more people are finding it safe to publicly admit to their homosexuality. The actual percentile measurement of homosexuality isn't changing - the number of people who are admitting to their homosexuality is.

 

[Qonfused]

So if anyone has any info on why homosexuality is becoming more prevalent that would be great.

If you were gay, you were a social outcast. I think now that people have some ****ing common sense, being gay isn't that socially "bad" anymore. Finally.

Stigmata and I said the same thing, so yeah.

 

[Absinthe]

Ok, first off i don't think you guys got it that my post was entirely opinionated and undoubtedly at fault when looked at under the scientific method. Maybe I just have yet to understand the concept of tearing apart someones opinion like it makes a difference. Anywayzzzz... I just want to clarify something so you all don't think I'm a homo-basher, it's not that I don't have faith in the people themselves to raise children, I'm just afraid that due to this more homosexual oriented people are going to start coming out of this increased number of homosexual parenting... for instance if you look at the ratio of straights to gays and homosexuality starts to become more prevalent, what is this due to? Are people simply starting to get more chemical imbalances or what? I just have a slight suspicion that something fishy is going on behind the scenes. I may just have an irrational feeling or whatever but thats just me.

You admit to not approaching the matter with a "scientific" (read: critical) mind and go off of your mere gut feelings, but then imply that your opinion is still somewhat valid. You can't have it both ways, and you will be rightly "torn apart" for it.

Even if homosexuality is learned from gay parents (it isn't), so what? What's the big deal, honestly? Straight people still vastly outnumber gays, so it's not like the human species is in danger of extinction. At least not because of their procreational tendencies.

So if anyone has any info on why homosexuality is becoming more prevalent that would be great.

We aren't hanging people in civilized societies when they come out in the open. It's considerably safer to come out of the closet today.

 

[Walter]

you're an authority on child rearing? how many children do you have of your own?

None, why does that matter. I just know how important it is to have a father and a mother, not a fancy-mancy lady boy that thinks he's playing a role of both parents.

did you choose to be heterosexual? if so when, where and under what circumstances ...I look forward to your response

That's the worst kind of a man - the one that CHOOSES. He is born either straight or not. Males that feel they're attracted to other men aren't choosing anything, but they should consult a doctor about changing their gender, there's nothing bad in it.
But a guy that is able to be straight and suddenly "decides" that he's gay is a worst kind of a man, like i've said before.

I'm all for free speech but some people should never open their mouths

Yeah, like you.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Bigot.

 

[Walter]

I respect the freedom of speech, but the freedom of instincts is a bane to every human society that allows it.

 

[gick]

I respect the freedom of speech, but the freedom of instincts is a bane to every human society that allows it.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

You should have the freedom to do whatever the **** you like so long as it does not harm the rights and freedoms of others.

 

[Absinthe]

None, why does that matter. I just know how important it is to have a father and a mother, not a fancy-mancy lady boy that thinks he's playing a role of both parents.

Piss off, twerp.