Grahame   10 #373 Posted February 5, 2007 Given that you're so fond of pointing out possible sources of bias, is this the same Family Policy Network whose motto is 'Informing Christians and Confronting the Culture On the Important Moral Issues of the Day'? Didn't you say in a previous post that this wasn't a religious issue?  It shows how disreputable these people are and the depths to which lesbians will stoop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest   #374 Posted February 5, 2007 It shows how disreputable these people are and the depths to which lesbians will stoop. Let me just check; you're joking, right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Halibut   12 #375 Posted February 5, 2007 Where does it say my beliefs, there you go trying to twist peoples words again. If you look at my previous responses that is not my belief or view, I am posting an opinion which is until there is absolute proof that there would be no detriment to a child then it is better to play it safe for the sake of the children.  You said and I quote -  ''nobody knows the effects of a gay (male) couple of parents would have on certain children, and I would rather all gay couples went without children rather than screw some kid up in the mind.''  So it was an utterly reasonable question to ask. Again, what possible grounds do you have for thinking that homosexuals would ''screw some kid up in the mind?'' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grahame   10 #376 Posted February 5, 2007 How terribly, all us nasty rationalists repressing you poor bigots and intimidating you with our nasty facts  You mean your twisted fiction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grahame   10 #377 Posted February 5, 2007 Plekhanov? Why do you assume he's gay? Plekhanov isn't gay. Even the word is a corruption of the English language. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grahame   10 #378 Posted February 5, 2007 People who oppose gay adoption are quite rightly 'branded as homophobes' as there are no reasons other than homophobia to oppose it.Reasons being the unnatural behavior of two women attempting to have sex with each other, perverted behavior. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
shoeshine   10 #379 Posted February 5, 2007 Plekhanov isn't gay. Even the word is a corruption of the English language.  I remember the word gay meaning something different, Grahame, until I looked it up in the Chamber's Online Dictionary recently....  gay adj (gayer, gayest) 1 homosexual; relating to, frequented by, or intended for, homosexuals • a gay bar. ETYMOLOGY: first attested in the 1930s, though it may have been in use earlier; now the principal sense, so much so that to use gay in any other sense causes raised eyebrows or a titter. Compare queer adj 1 happily carefree. 2 bright and attractive. 3 fun-loving or pleasure-seeking. noun a homosexual. gayness noun the state of being gay, especially in the sense 'homosexual'.  Note: words in bold type have been highlighted by me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Halibut   12 #380 Posted February 5, 2007 Reasons being the unnatural behavior of two women attempting to have sex with each other, perverted behavior.  If Jesus could hear you saying that he'd tell you off you know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grahame   10 #381 Posted February 5, 2007 This may come as a shock to you but men have been raising children for millennia and sinlge men have been adopting and raising children for decades why is it that you think the addition of an additional male to the household will make everything go horribly wrong?  Because these men may very well have been married, you are wanting to pervert the course of nature. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest   #382 Posted February 5, 2007 Reasons being the unnatural behavior of two women attempting to have sex with each other, perverted behavior. At last Grahame's true colours are revealed .  I really don't know why you bother couching your arguments and statements in polite terms. You should have just stated your view on gay folks' 'perverted behaviour' from the outset, then we would all know where we are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Halibut   12 #383 Posted February 5, 2007 Reasons being the unnatural behavior of two women attempting to have sex with each other, perverted behavior.  Do you have a thing about cunnilingus, Graham? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grahame   10 #384 Posted February 5, 2007 I remember the word gay meaning something different, Grahame, until I looked it up in the Chamber's Online Dictionary recently.... Note: words in bold type have been highlighted by me.  1178, "full of joy or mirth," from O.Fr. gai "gay, merry," perhaps from Frank. *gahi (cf. O.H.G. wahi "pretty"). Meaning "brilliant, showy" is from c.1300. OED gives 1951 as earliest date for slang meaning "homosexual"  Like I said, gay is a modern corruption of the word.   http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...