What Are You Doing Right Now? (206 Viewers)

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

And 90s were a good argument? Well, I don't see why I couldn't take 13th century as an example.

At least there's an example, unlike for democracy.

(1300's is 14th century)

In any case, I think it was obvious that I was joking and using that as a farcical point.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Not according to any medical professional whatsoever. And you can be sure they have undergone as many examinations as is humanly possible, given just how much people have wanted to deny that someone could naturally be a homosexual.

Do you have new findings?

exactly

 

[Dostoevsky]

Not according to any medical professional whatsoever. And you can be sure they have undergone as many examinations as is humanly possible, given just how much people have wanted to deny that someone could naturally be a homosexual.

Do you have new findings?

Funny thing it took them 2000 years to say that it could be natural.

No governmental system has ever worked. What defines how well one "works"? There are ones that "work" better than others, that are more efficient. In that sense, democracy has always "worked" better than other systems of government.



Define "mentally disturbed" so I can own you on this argument using your own definition.

I meant sick in my own specific way. Can they have babies together? No. People in village used to put an axe on a tree that gives no fruit.

If it was supposed to be normal life would begin with two Adams.

(1300's is 14th century)

In any case, I think it was obvious that I was joking and using that as a farcical point.

It was even earlier, I know why I said 13+

 

[Martin]

Funny thing it took them 2000 years to say that it could be natural.

It didn't. It took them 2000 years to try in vain to prove that it was unnatural. It's not as if for 2000 years doctors had good evidence that it was unnatural. And then suddenly they discovered it was natural. They never had any evidence, only dogma.

And again, even if that were the case, so what?

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

I meant sick in my own specific way. Can they have babies together? No. People in village used to put an axe on a tree that gives no fruit.

If it was supposed to be normal life would begin with two Adams.




It was even earlier, I know why I said 13+

Sure they can have babies together, I know a gay couple that has two sons.

Cutting down a tree that bears no fruit is one of the stupidest things ever. Most non fruit-bearing trees are the ones that fertilize the ones that do bear fruit. For example: If you grow kiwis, you have to have one "male" tree for every three "female" trees. The "male" one never bears fruit. But you would cut that one down and have three other fruitless trees.

Two Adams? Do you seriously believe that the Earth is 10,000 years old and Adam and Eve were the first people on the planet? Because if you do, then the gay thing really is the least of your worries.

 

[Dostoevsky]

I want children to be born, they cannot provide that.

Just one of the examples. And also, not that only sounds wrong, but now even animals do that...yeah well, some do I think but it's minority. Males never miss with other males.

 

[X Æ A-12]

How is it not natural? Acts of homosexuality are present in nature and have been presents throughout human history.

Besides anyone with a background in psychology will tell you that sexuality is very complicated and there isn't any such thing as "normal".

 

[Dostoevsky]

Sure they can have babies together, I know a gay couple that has two sons.

Adopting, yeah... I find it noble how some do want a kid and take one.

From my point of view I'd never want some gay couple to raise my child, though. I believe it would mess kids head. I might be wrong, but I just see it fu#ked up really.

 

[Martin]

I want children to be born, they cannot provide that.

Who cares what you want? Why should they not have equal rights just because you don't want them to? Children are being born as it is, we have 7 billion and by the latest estimates in 2050 we will have 9 billion. So what's the problem?

Just one of the examples. And also, not that only sounds wrong, but now even animals do that...yeah well, some do I think but it's minority. Males never miss with other males.

What difference does it make what animals do? Animals don't get married, humans do. Did we get marriage from studying the animals?

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

It didn't. It took them 2000 years to try in vain to prove that it was unnatural. It's not as if for 2000 years doctors had good evidence that it was unnatural. And then suddenly they discovered it was natural. They never had any evidence, only dogma.

And again, even if that were the case, so what?

...and that is the biggest point of all.

 

[Martin]

Adopting, yeah... I find it noble how some do want a kid and take one.

From my point of view I'd never want some gay couple to raise my child, though. I believe it would mess kids head. I might be wrong, but I just see it fu#ked up really.

Based on what? If gay couples don't have and never have had the right to adopt, what basis is there to claim that they would be unsuitable?

 

[Dostoevsky]

Who cares what you want? Why should they not have equal rights just because you don't want them to? Children are being born as it is, we have 7 billion and by the latest estimates in 2050 we will have 9 billion. So what's the problem?

And who cares what they want?

So you wanna say we've capped children number and it should stop? FYI more people die than being born in Serba.

What difference does it make what animals do? Animals don't get married, humans do. Did we get marriage from studying the animals?

We are worse than animals.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

How is it not natural? Acts of homosexuality are present in nature and have been presents throughout human history.

Besides anyone with a background in psychology will tell you that sexuality is very complicated and there isn't any such thing as "normal".

Exactly.

"Gay" things happen in nature all the time.

Adopting, yeah... I find it noble how some do want a kid and take one.

From my point of view I'd never want some gay couple to raise my child, though. I believe it would mess kids head. I might be wrong, but I just see it fu#ked up really.

Most children raised in gay families tend to turn out more stable and free-thinking.

1) Because religion plays little part in their day-to-day life.
2) They have two parents.

 

[Dostoevsky]

Based on what? If gay couples don't have and never have had the right to adopt, what basis is there to claim that they would be unsuitable?

So we should actually test it now for next 500 years when those scientists and doctors (that have no clue what's going on in the Universe whatsoever) say that it does affect kids on a bad way and how it should stop?

 

[Martin]

And who cares what they want?

They do. Just like women cared about women's rights, gays care about gay rights. It was unjust to deny women equal rights and on the same basis it's unjust to deny gay rights.

You already have rights, you're privileged. They don't. For you to deny them something that you have is wrong, wouldn't you agree?

So you wanna say we've capped children number and it should stop? FYI more people die than being born in Serba.

Are you saying we are running the risk that our species will become extinct? Again, on what basis? There are more people in the world every day.

 

[Dostoevsky]

Exactly.

"Gay" things happen in nature all the time.

How exactly?

Most children raised in gay families tend to turn out more stable and free-thinking.

1) Because religion plays little part in their day-to-day life.
2) They have two parents.

Fact stated after a survey on 5 families after 5 years? Because I can't see how can that be a fact when gay marriage isn't legalized in too my countries.

 

[Martin]

So we should actually test it now for next 500 years when those scientists and doctors (that have no clue what's going on in the Universe whatsoever) say that it does affect kids on a bad way and how it should stop?

You're right, scientist and doctors don't know anything. They only cure illnesses, built the internet and so on. It's not like they have proved anything. You are the expert here.

All the advances in technology have come from unqualified people with a gut feeling.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

And who cares what they want?

So you wanna say we've capped children number and it should stop? FYI more people die than being born in Serbia.

"They" aren't you. "They" have just as much to lose as you. "They" have just as much freedom of thought, religion, expression, etc. as you.

And that just says that Serbia has high numbers of old people or violence. Very little problem with Homos in the latter category.

We are worse than animals.

We ARE animals, dude.

 

[Martin]

I'm not buying this, Dusan got drunk and he's trolling us.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

They do. Just like women cared about women's rights, gays care about gay rights. It was unjust to deny women equal rights and on the same basis it's unjust to deny gay rights.

You already have rights, you're privileged. They don't. For you to deny them something that you have is wrong, wouldn't you agree?



Are you saying we are running the risk that our species will become extinct? Again, on what basis? There are more people in the world every day.

How exactly?

Prepare to be owned.

Fact stated after a survey on 5 families after 5 years? Because I can't see how can that be a fact when gay marriage isn't legalized in too my countries.

Gays don't only exist in Serbia, bro. Gay marriage has been legal in quite a few countries for years, and prior to that, gays did live together and raise children.

It's not as though the world said "gay marriage: APPROVED" and fags were like "HEY, NOW WE CAN LIVE TOGETHER!."

Guys have lived together for years.