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.
The pro gay movement have moved themselves into the corner. What science does know is that over the millions of years in mammal survival, multitudes upon multitudes of species go extinct, evolve and are constantly changing, as a matter of fact thats what life is all about.
One of the largest indications of change & extinction is a cessation of propagation.
Pro Gay people are telling us that the homosexual is normal....ok, I will agree. It therefore demonstrates another species has failed out of the human and is refusing to propagate.
Therefore we know because the gay cannot propagate, it will represent the portion of extinction in the species called humanity. All part of life, no doubt the Gay people if it is normal and natural are not part of the human species and therefore will need to devise their own idea of what rights are apart from being what is known as a human.
No matter how many times you post lies, it never makes them true. Homosexuality is part of a necessary adaptation mechanism for the survival of species. Numerous animal species have flourished as a direct result of an increase of homosexuals in the population.
Your scientific illiteracy is noted. But you are 100% wrong no matter how many ways you slice it.
Here, I'll post it again without that last comment... try and respond now, please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
Absolutly it is.
I do not support any law that would prevent a homosexual from living their lifestyle if that is what they wish.
So if their lifestyle includes marrying the one they love, raising children, and/or working in a job where children are present - do you still oppose any laws to prevent them from this lifestyle? Those are more closely in line with most normal gay folks, but you seem to think their "lifestyle" is only related to sex. Weren't you the one who also said "why do people always assume relationships involve sex?" You can't even keep your own opinions straight, no pun intended.
Quote:
I would not be acting in love if I did not warn them that their actions were wrong.
BS line from people who hate in the name of G-d or Jesus... and my G-d would be ashamed at how you're treating His children. It is not your job to "warn" anyone, leave that to their loved ones and whatever higher power they may or may not believe in. Besides, do you really think a non-religious gay person CARES what your sky daddy might believe?
Quote:
I advocated for people to be aware of whom their children are with - and warned them of a potential danger - hopefully all would be vigilant of the people in whose care their children are in.
There is no danger, so you are basing this unconstitutional concept on propaganda & lies. Next?
Quote:
I support marriage as a union of a man and a woman.
So do I.
Quote:
My positions allow all to live as they see fit - without imposition on anybody else.
Wrong again!! If they want to live as a married gay man/woman, or as a parent, or as a lifeguard/teacher/pediatrician, you DO NOT support allowing them to "live as they see fit." Sorry to sound like a parrot, but you're flat-out lying.
Quote:
I would say that it is a very loving and tolerant approach.
Boo hoo... it wasn't really a negative comment, since I post here a lot too (though not as much as you). Was I attacking myself too??
I really have been wondering if you work, since much of what you say is inconsistent. But whatever, let's get back to the topic at hand. Again, care to respond to my relevant points in that post? Or are you just gonna cry about "ad hominem attacks" now?
If you hadn't derailed the thread with your irrelevant jibes - then perhaps we could have been doing so - instead of wasting the last page talking about the nonsense that you started.
Here, I'll post it again without that last comment... try and respond now, please.
So if their lifestyle includes marrying the one they love, raising children, and/or working in a job where children are present - do you still oppose any laws to prevent them from this lifestyle? Those are more closely in line with most normal gay folks, but you seem to think their "lifestyle" is only related to sex. Weren't you the one who also said "why do people always assume relationships involve sex?" You can't even keep your own opinions straight, no pun intended.
BS line from people who hate in the name of G-d or Jesus... and my G-d would be ashamed at how you're treating His children. It is not your job to "warn" anyone, leave that to their loved ones and whatever higher power they may or may not believe in. Besides, do you really think a non-religious gay person CARES what your sky daddy might believe?
There is no danger, so you are basing this unconstitutional concept on propaganda & lies. Next?
So do I.
Wrong again!! If they want to live as a married gay man/woman, or as a parent, or as a lifeguard/teacher/pediatrician, you DO NOT support allowing them to "live as they see fit." Sorry to sound like a parrot, but you're flat-out lying.
And I would say you're deluding yourself.
I don't care what homosexuals do as long as they don't impose their lifestyle on children and society.
If you hadn't derailed the thread with your irrelevant jibes - then perhaps we could have been doing so - instead of wasting the last page talking about the nonsense that you started.
What were those points - I have forgotten?
See above... not that it's so difficult to read back a page, and simply ignore that ONE line of many.
I don't care what homosexuals do as long as they don't impose their lifestyle on children and society.
What is so hard to understand about that?
Then you have a hateful opinion, since many of them desire a "lifestyle" that includes marrying, raising children, and/or working around children - all of which has NOTHING to do with you, and poses no inherent threat to our children or society.
Then you have a hateful opinion, since many of them desire a "lifestyle" that includes marrying, raising children, and/or working around children - all of which has NOTHING to do with you, and poses no inherent threat to our children or society.
What's so hard to understand about that?
We are talking about right and wrong here - this is a moral issue.
Protection of children and the preservation of society should be paramount to everybody.
One should not support something that would harm and erode them.
We are talking about right and wrong here - this is a moral issue.
Protection of children and the preservation of society should be paramount to everybody.
One should not support something that would harm and erode them.
And being around homosexuals does nothing. It isn't a morality issue. It does not harm the protection of children
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.
