French march by tens of thousands against homo "marriages" and adoptation

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Armistead

The only truth to this is the reason children of homo parents deal with some problems is more due to a bigoted racist culture that bullies, makes fun, etc., of the children, not the homo parents. Why I agree a mother/father may offer more benefit, I wouldn't call it more normal or that homo marriage or adoption doesn't offer benefit. The world isn't perfect. We certainly can't say that hetero marriage is perfect either, it's clear a 70% divorce rate causes more emotional issues than homo marriage.

Putting aside any personal views I may have on homosexuality and same sex marriage, I have to say that any couple who wish to adopt a child have put some thought into it. In most cases I doubt if it's done on a careless whim and for gay couples even more so. It isn't an accident like some child births to hetro couples. You are right, it isn't a perfect world. A home with loving and committed parents is better than no home or an orphanage.

I say this, if your against gay marriage, don't marry a gay, other than that, mind your own F'n business.

[em2nought]

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that people think that these "folks" must secretly be pedophiles? And everybody knows that sex is bad, France must be getting americanized.

[Betonov]

Probably old fat farts that couldn't get laid because the women were either lesbians or pretendet to be lesbians

Its a wierd thing, gay marriage/adoption are really a pretty much "so what" topic, yet the more you see of the arguements against it the more logical the arguements for it become.

[Betonov]

There are no arguments for it. There's no need for arguments for it.
If adoption is a human right it's extended to homosexuals. Anything else is bigotry

[Red Brow]

"You "tolerate"? Who put you in charge?"

[CaptainMattJ.]

Because having 1 parent is completely fine, having abusive parents is fine, but having 2 homosexuals parenting is terrible? I have yet to find an unbiased study "proving" homosexual parents have lacking parental skills. Most studies conducted fail to recognize whether said child had gone through a divorce, or a family crisis, or something traumatizing, no, they simply took a random group of kids who have at one point seen their parents in a homosexual relationship and failed to inquire about what their experiences were, if their parents had affairs, money troubles, divorces, turmoil, anything of the sort, and some they improperly grouped people.

They need to conduct a controlled study with children in stable environments. Take children in relatively stable environments and compare them with children in a stable environment.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Agreed. I'd much prefer that loving couples looking to adopt should be denied because it's unnatural. Leave the kid in the natural orphanage until a natural couple comes along.

Yes. That is true.

Gay's aren't natural. That is true. It is also true that Hitler got a sex change and is now the Queen of England.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Again, it sounds like you believe you should be in charge of making that decision. Do you have any idea how frightening that sounds to most people?

"You" and "most people" are two different things. And no, by the quote of my words that you give I completely fail to see what is frightening about them. It partially already is law. Children, according to such laws, should only be allowed to be adopted by suitable couples/families who are assessed and seen as forming socially stable entities, and who are in the material/financial position to support the raising and educations of the adopted child. It is not frightening when I repeat that, but it is common sense. That mother and father serve as different sexual/gender role models, and that a lesbian is no man and a gay is no woman, again is no frightening statement, but common sense, and in accordance with experience and feedback from children psychology and school biographies.

That some kids get raised by alcoholic parents or junkeys, would lead nobody to now demand that alcoholics and junkeys should be allowed to adopt children. Homosexual people may not be junkeys or alcoholics, but the social setting their relation represents is such that the sexual role modelling factors are different from that a child experiences with a mother and a father. A gay man or or a lesbian woman cannot replace a mother or a father, like a single parents cannot replace the missing counterpart in case of divorce or death of one parent. That'S why in most countries singles cannot adopt children, as far as I know, except they are the biological parents. And that is the one exception where I accept adoptation by homosexual couples as well: if it is indeed the biological child of one pf the adults, from an earlier mixed relationship.

Note: I said relationship, implying their is a contact and state of familiarity between both. In case of a child resulting from a brief affair or a one-night-stand, it already becomes complicated again. If I rate the interest iof the child as the highest good, I would treat that constellation the same like foreigners wanting to adopt a foreign child.

Very fri-hi-hightening all, that, eh? Beware tayranney! Beware the Fuhuhurer! Beware the dicidicitatorship! A rule has been spotted somewhere? Oh you poor freedom - duck and cover, they are really going after ya!

Nonsense. It is old-fashioned common sense, nothing more. And of course, it is politically incorrect and makes gender-engineers shiver indeed. I would feel I said something wrong if they would agree with me, for all what modern genderism stands for imo is totally and completely wrong, and a crime against human nature and against socially responsible culture.

For readers fluid in German language, i again refer to the site cuncti.net where they have most of their essays on issues of genderism, feminism, anti-male discrimination (which already starts in schools, btw), education and occasionally on same-sex marriages - and on the psychological, cultural and financial costs of these social experiments.

Heck, genderism is not even a real science, it is pure ideology only,but iot gets treated with all the respect and benefits of a science, science has repeatedly proven it wrong on all accounts. This of course does not stop the propaganda claiming different. The deconstruction of families and the denial of differences in psychological structure and it'S development in boys and girls, resulting for example in different interests, is a huge disaster, and is something that is payed for by the psychological health and "life-happiness" of our children.

Reductionists and materialists - and feminists and lefties are both of that, both feminism and socialism are extremely reductionistic schools of utmost materialism, like capitalism also is - have big troubles to understand and to see this. They lack the terms and structure to see it.

If you want to feel frightened by something, then maybe you better should be frightened by them.

[Red Brow]

My children just submit to the Globalist cause. Stop whining about details that you don't seem to know anything about. I want you to take the anti-Brevik oath. That you never traded emails with Brevik prior to his arrest. Some of the stuff here is almost National Socialist.

Just submit! Like I say to people who grumble about governments, "Just lie back and enjoy it!" Or if not a submission to Globalist ideals, then come join me in unrepentant Zionism. You'll enjoy the movies and TV more. And you won't be fired from your silly job.

Think what your Uncle Obama would want you to do. Think what the collective leaders of the G-8 or 20 or what ever would want. They're going to win anyway, why not hop on the bandwagon before it runs you over?

[AVGWarhawk]

I like puppies.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Very fri-hi-hightening all, that, eh? Beware tayranney! Beware the Fuhuhurer! Beware the dicidicitatorship! A rule has been spotted somewhere? Oh you poor freedom - duck and cover, they are really going after ya!

You can belittle and demean all you want. It's not "a rule" that's the problem. It's people who are convinced they know what's best for everybody else.

Nonsense. It is old-fashioned common sense, nothing more. And of course, it is politically incorrect and makes gender-engineers shiver indeed. I would feel I said something wrong if they would agree with me, for all what modern genderism stands for imo is totally and completely wrong, and a crime against human nature and against socially responsible culture.

Anybody can spout their opinion and call it "common sense". You have yet to prove any of your opinions on this, so once again you fall back on telling everyone else what's good for us.

Can you prove any of the crap you just spouted? Your "science" is no better than the "science" you condemn. It's all your opinion, but you keep acting like you know what's best for everybody.

[Cybermat47]

Is it just me, or do the anti-gay guys look miserable, while the gay supporters look really happy?

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I like puppies.

Me too. But this puppy doesn't like homos. He had some seriously stern views on the matters of purity even when he was less than 8 weeks old. Also, he was very keen on claiming living space from other puppies...

Is it just me, or do the anti-gay guys look miserable, while the gay supporters look really happy?

Perhaps the anti poofs have personal issues

Very fri-hi-hightening all, that, eh? Beware tayranney! Beware the Fuhuhurer! Beware the dicidicitatorship! A rule has been spotted somewhere? Oh you poor freedom - duck and cover, they are really going after ya!

That actually sounds like a typical Skybull rant about fictional legislation he has chosen to warn the world about.
Does that imply that his rather lame attempt just illustrates his lack of common sense and backfires