Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Um ok Angus usually when someone posts an article or video clip that person usually has something to say about said clip/article. I could post random things all day and take no stance on them or have nothing insightful to say about it but I don't. It seems the OP has nothing else to say in the matter?
Gosh, maybe he wanted to hear what you thought of that and didn't want you to be influenced by what he said. Why do you have to know what his position is before you comment on a news story?
Again, this is a political forum. I am posting an article that is political in nature. Sorry if this offends you. I am providing a topic for us to discuss. My sincere apologies if I am not posting in a way that makes you happy. I'll try to work harder at it.
I am well aware of what kind of forum this is I've been posting here for awhile now. My question is WHAT IS YOUR POINT?? Where do you stand? What do you have to say about this?
Gosh, maybe he wanted to hear what you thought of that and didn't want you to be influenced by what he said. Why do you have to know what his position is before you comment on a news story?
Because thats usually how it works, someone reads something, has an opinion on it, voices it and then people discuss.
& heterosexual couples who are infertile should'nt be able to adopt either correct?
Did you even read what I said? I said because of the environmental component of a childs probability of becoming gay, that being surrounded by two homosexuals would greatly increase that childs chances of becoming gay, which would limit his ability to have his own family, thus depriving him of one of the things vital to a fulfilling life.
A heterosexual couple that is infertile will still most likely raise a heterosexual child who most likely will not be infertile thus he would be capable of one of the most important and rewarding parts of life, having a family.
Well, I've read a half a dozen of your posts so far, and I have no idea what you think about the subject at hand. I guess you are a guy that can't post original thoughts but can only react to what other people say.
I guess that's just fine. I'm not sure why you feel everybody has to take that approach, however.
Because thats usually how it works, someone reads something, has an opinion on it, voices it and then people discuss.
Change seems to bother you. Why not post your opinion and then allow others to join in? Rather than demanding the OP provide you some sort of instant-E-gratification. Then again, maybe I missed your memo?
It has already been proven that homosexual tendencies are not genetic
No it hasn't. No one knows why a small percentage of people are homosexual. And actually, no one knows all of the mechanics of heterosexual attraction either. There's still a lot we have to learn about how our brains work.
Quote:
about 70% of the cause of homosexual behavior in men is learned/environmental. Primarily to exposure to other homosexual advances in their developing years.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Quote:
I believe the most important part of any life is having a family. Homosexuals cannot do that, which is why homosexual relationships rarely last.
Homosexuals can have families. In fact, about 25% of same-sex couples in California are raising children.
Quote:
And because of the environmental component of the probability of homosexuality, I don't think we should allow same-sex couples to adopt. Sorry.
Glad you're not in charge of the world. I think I'll put my trust in the American Psychological Association and the American Medical Association who say that same-sex parents are just as good (and in some areas, better) than opposite-sex parents.
I said because of the environmental component of a childs probability of becoming gay, that being surrounded by two homosexuals would greatly increase that childs chances of becoming gay
That's just not true. Being around gay people isn't going to make anyone more likely to be gay, just like being around straight people isn't going to make anyone more likely to be straight.
That's just not true. Being around gay people isn't going to make anyone more likely to be gay, just like being around straight people isn't going to make anyone more likely to be straight.
The lies that people believe.
If this were true, then why would anybody grow up gay at all? Raised by heterosexual parents, surrounded by heterosexual siblings, and in school with a majority of heterosexual schoolmates. Surely all this "Straightness" would rub off on the potential gay child and he would jump to the other side of the fence right?
Sometimes I have to shake my head at these posts, it's like a flash back to 1955 or something.
Did you even read what I said? I said because of the environmental component of a childs probability of becoming gay, that being surrounded by two homosexuals would greatly increase that childs chances of becoming gay, which would limit his ability to have his own family, thus depriving him of one of the things vital to a fulfilling life.
How old are you? I'm really curious? Are you an adult?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
