Same-sex marriage in Sweden/Gays in military

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

This oposition to gay marriage is nothing more than feelbood BS because some people think it is icky and then try to find rationalisation for their biggotry.

Of course I think its icky, cause it's against the nature. And God gave bigger brains to human just to separate them from animals (if somebody wishes to find similiarities in same sex occurances in nature) What kind of twisted love can be in gay or lesbian couples and what example of it they will show to their adopted kids ? The one which they propagate - love to perverntess.

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by Contact

Of course I think its icky, cause it's against the nature. And God gave bigger brains to human just to separate them from animals (if somebody wishes to find similiarities in same sex occurances in nature) What kind of twisted love can be in gay or lesbian couples and what example of it they will show to their adopted kids ? The one which they propagate - love to perverntess.

So your concern is for the kids?

Please refer to any study, evidence or anything that suggests that the will be harmed by being raised by gay couples.

Otherwise its just your opinion and not the fact you have stated.

This is all about my opinion expression. I did not said it has to be a fact. If anyone of you wants to be a gaylover fine, it's your bloody call.

But I think gays create a gay proned environment for a child and that is why it can be a risk for kid which is adopted by gays. I will not start to look for any proofs of it. Cause it's surely enough for me to have my own opinion which is not builted by "modern attitudes".

What goes for a society where same-sex marriage is allowed ? I don't see any point to be proud of that. It's all about this so called "modern attitude" which I believe those who belong to sex minority came up with this term searching for a gap to infiltrate their pervertness into clean society.

Is it really so on earth, the more we tolerate the more it makes us better persons ? I think tolerance might have reached it's ceiling and now turning it's dark side on those who overuses it.


P.S. I did mentioned it was my final words on this thread right ? Since I have nothing more to add I'll leave it as it is.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Max2147

I agree, families are vitally important to our society.

But which is better in terms of a family - A kid being raised by loving, caring gay parents, or a kid having no parents at all?

With gay couples adopting, the choice isn't between gay parents and hetero parents, it's between having parents and being an orphan.

No. Principally speaking, the choice is between gay parents and hetero parents. Are you aware of how many desperate hetero couples try to adopt children? I do not have precise numbers right now, but I do know for sure that is is damn many - numbers increasing, I know that from former colleagues in Berlin, who work in social jobs, burt I also read it occasionally, and it is reported oin TV as well occasionally. Infertility is spreading amongst humans. Reproduction medicine therefore is kind of "booming".

As for Conatct's fear of gay parent'S creating a gay environment for kids, that is a risk, but I would not say it is a general rule with every gay couple. But two unpleasant facts must be remembered. Gay organisations are oncredibly loud to demand more gay-friendliness in society, anf there are even those whomdemand that society should give juvbeniles "gay-years" when they should experience gay/lesbian experiences and then they should make a choice. That way, an exception from the biological rule of how our species is designed to function and to reproduce is turned into a norm that is claimed to be equal to the norm itself: heterosecuality, and of course it is demanded to see homosexuality as previous and vital a cultural nd communal function for the survival of a people. This is just total BS, and I even would say it is in parts a criminal agenda. It reminds me of pedophiles demanding a right to have sexual contacts with young kids for they claim a right for satiasfaction of themsleves and call it usually the tender, special feelings of theirs. At this point I stop to discuss and start distributing kicks and beatings.

[Biggles]

Concerning adoption, shouldn't it be focused on the parents abilities as humans (work, health, crime-record) rather than their sexuality?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Biggles

Concerning adoption, shouldn't it be focused on the parents abilities as humans (work, health, crime-record) rather than their sexuality?

As I said repeatedly, it is about social role-modelling, and there are subtle difference between how a mother and a father approaches themes in the outside-of-family life, or when interacting with their son or daughter. Regarding the factors you mentioned, these get taken into account by deciding committees anyway.

I do not ujnderstnad this social drive of the past years to make it appear as if a homosxual man equals a heterosexual mother, or a lesbian women is the same like a heterosexual father. Neither socially nor psyhcologically, this is true.

Have you guys never heared than men and women are different? there shall not be discriminati0on towards the one or the other, although unfortunately rthere is a lot of open discirmination of individual women and hidden discrimination against men, collectively. But to say that there shall not be discrimination is not the same like saying both are equal.Both are obviously NOT equal, not only in physical features, but also by psychiological, mental, emotional design and social interaction.

It also is about social role modelling of families themsleves. There is absolutely no need for social comunities and civilisations, to adapt artificially created homosexual families with "foreign" children" as a social communal scheme equal to that of self-emerging heterosexual family constellations that can secure the community'S biological survival without any artificial intervention or crook-constructions from the outside.

Mankind, like all mammals, is a heterosexual species, and homosexuality is an abberation from this design that happens to be such that we can afford to tolerate and must not discriminate against. But we certainly must not distort it and try to push it to a status and give it a presumed importance that makes it equal in value to the institution that just came as a result of man'S normal biologicl heterosexuality: families as social core-cells and fundament of human societies.

the only exception to this that comes to my mind are some very rare primitive societies, as well as a minority in China and Iceland, when the traditonal man-womean-children structure gets dissolved, children are being taken care of by all adult members of society, and not necessarly refer two one certain couple as their parents excluisvely. But even here, you have no homosexual couples explicitly replacing hetereosexual couples in their function as "reference-parents". On Iceland, there are many mothers raising their children without father and marriage. In China, this minority (I just don'T recall their name) I refer to, is a matriarchat, kind off. And in primitive societies, all the tribe is taking care of all children together, like in the communist ideal collective.

Let'S leave homosexuality as what it is: nothing we must discriminate, but alos nothing that we must see as more and more precious than what it is: a biological dead-.end, and an aberration from a norm in the design of a given species. Seen that way, homosexuals indeed are not equals (in the meaning of: they are not the same like the norm: heterosexuals). that it appears in many mammals species frequently, does not mean that it is any more precious and respectable than let's say an Albino. we also must not discriminate Albinos, but to redesign our life, culture and social community on the basis of any special needs of Albinos, simply would be stupid, and not justified. and it would become even insane if we do so by pulling back vital interests that secure survival of the community.

Again, I am not about discirminating gyas, but I also refuse to give them any special rights that lead beyond what they are, and that come at the cost of damaging even further the one institution that has suffered already so incrdibly much in the industrial world, and is so very vital for our civilisational survival: families. the idea of families already has been damaged so verymuch in the past 150 years or so, that I am raising a fight over anything damaging it even further now. that includes "social" political agendas that rip them apart even earlier in childhood, but that also includes the idea of homosexuals being the same social role-model like mothers and fathers. If they would be the same role-model indeed - they would be heterosexuals, then.

[joea]

I have to say that my view fits with Skybird's 100%. I don't see why we can't treat homosexual couples just like common-law couples as these laws are already on the books and do not need a redefinition of the family.

[joea]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

And how many hot lesbian chicks have you seen outside of porn films?

P.S. That skank Lindsay Lohan doesn't count, she apparently has jumped back on the other side.

P.S.S. Although I'll admit Jodie Foster doesn't look too bad...

I wonder how much I'd provoke Contact if I pretended to be Gay. :rotfl:

Also fully support gays having completely equal rights, its just sex after all nothing wrong with it.

[antikristuseke]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

And how many hot lesbian chicks have you seen outside of porn films?

Quite a few actualy, but as I stated earlyer, lesbians are a waste of time, look for the hot bisexuals

Originally Posted by Contact

Of course I think its icky, cause it's against the nature. And God gave bigger brains to human just to separate them from animals (if somebody wishes to find similiarities in same sex occurances in nature) What kind of twisted love can be in gay or lesbian couples and what example of it they will show to their adopted kids ? The one which they propagate - love to perverntess.

1) It is not against nature as it is occuring for natural causes.
2) There is no evidence for the existance of any god, but this is a discussion for a whole nother thread, or if you want you can PM me.
3) Gay couples of both sexes, at least the ones I know, are no more open in displays of sexuality than your average heterosexuals are, therefore the fear of exposure to perverse love, as you claim, is no more of a threat than it would be for a child adopted by straight people.

[FIREWALL]

Peer pressure. The children's school life will be living hell.

Even the nerds and geeks will look down on them.


In Sweden a Proctoligist must be making a killing.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by joea

P.S.S. Although I'll admit Jodie Foster doesn't look too bad...

Wait wait wait wait, Jodie Foster is a lesbian?? PICS PLZ!!!

[XabbaRus]

Yea for ages. Why is that your dreams shattered?

I read rumour that Kiera likes the girls too....

Syaing that as an ex of mine said bisexuals are just greedy.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Why is that your dreams shattered?

Yup, gonna cry myself to sleep tonight.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by joea

I have to say that my view fits with Skybird's 100%. I don't see why we can't treat homosexual couples just like common-law couples as these laws are already on the books and do not need a redefinition of the family.

I hate to say it, but I agree with Skybird too.