Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
I'm not an idiot. Your sexuality can't rub off on you, at least not as far as I know lol.

If you've ever studied psychology (which I have to an advanced level) you know the importance of having a mother and a father. Both are key in the development of the child. I'm not going to go into detail because I'm not a psychologist myself but if you didn't already know this then look it up.

As far as I know it's extremely hard to adopt as a single parent. Especially if you're a single male.
Say what now? If you're such a scientist about this perhaps you should cough up some science that demonstrates gay adoption is harmful. Because all I've ever heard on the subject is pure speculation. "Oh it could be harmful." Could be is not an argument.

Not to mention that there is no shortage of so called ideal couples who inflict much damage onto their kids in various forms, psychological for one. People who are unfit to be parents for various reasons, and yet there's lots of gay couples out there who won't demonstrably perform any worse.

And what exactly is wrong with having a kid not having produced it? Is Byrone on the blacklist now?

As for this embarrassing post that started us off:
I should just quit everything and have babies full time to facilitate the homos of the world. After all they can't reproduce they're just in it for the sexual ride. While I'm at it we should start recruiting the heterosexual males to go fight wars, build homes, construct roads, etc. because all the Chris Crocker gays can't break their nails. They're worse than Paris Hilton-esque women.
it sounds like you've never even asked a gay person about these topics you make claims on and then proceed to claim all gays are like this. All the while going around telling people they should not *gasp* generalize.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Zé Tahir

JhoolayLaaaal!
Moderator
Dec 10, 2004
29,281
Say what now? If you're such a scientist about this perhaps you should cough up some science that demonstrates gay adoption is harmful. Because all I've ever heard on the subject is pure speculation. "Oh it could be harmful." Could be is not an argument.

Not to mention that there is no shortage of so called ideal couples who inflict much damage onto their kids in various forms, psychological for one. People who are unfit to be parents for various reasons, and yet there's lots of gay couples out there who won't demonstrably perform any worse.

And what exactly is wrong with having a kid not having produced it? Is Byrone on the blacklist now?

As for this embarrassing post that started us off:

it sounds like you've never even asked a gay person about these topics you make claims on and then proceed to claim all gays are like this. All the while going around telling people they should not *gasp* generalize.
I never claimed to be a scientist on the subject, I meant that I've taken advanced courses in it.

As for my "embarassing" post, it was referring to the type of homosexuals that don't know how to carry themselves in public. Hence the Chris Crocker reference. Maybe you only see those in America.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,112

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,112
'Cash-for-clunkers’ sales disappoint Detroit

Edmunds estimates that, based on visits to its websites, “purchase intent” is down 11 per cent from the average in June, before the cash-for-clunkers programme began.

A sizeable number of “cash-for-clunkers” participants already have buyers’ remorse as they contemplate hefty payments on their new car loans, according to CNW, an Oregon-based market research company.

Those payments “could negatively impact the total family budget more than expected prior to buying the new vehicle”, CNW reported. :howler: :rofl2:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/12066e64-92...gi-ticker/akcs-www?post=108599&nclick_check=1
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,768
Well, lets divert our attention to something we can all agree on.

Isn't she hot, Elvin? Could be Playboy soon.
Is that Eazy?

That's the most hideous thing I've ever seen.

At least the one I posted looks like a woman. :agree:
Animal, mineral, or birth defect?

That site doesn't render in either Firefox nor IE for me.

Is it because it's a "wide screen" edition? (Necessary for Wal-Mart customers.)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 109)