I don't like HAPPY people...
- Thread starter Contagious Locc
- Start date
@ 2-0-Sixx The thing that makes gay people raising children, and the cases you mention different to me, is that gay folks raising children is unnatural. I guess you don't understand what I mean, but let's say a single mother is raising her child(ren) cuz the pops walked out, died, etc etc etc. That's unfortunate, but she already had the kid. She's stuck with that kid, it's an unfortunate situation, but that's life. Whereas, with the gay couple, they never HAD the kid. It's PHYSICALLY impossible for them to have produced a child together. You see where I'm getting at? That's why I don't think it should be allowed.
Homosexuality in general, true, they aint hurting nobody as long as they leave me alone and keep their shit to themselves. However, once you put a kid in that environment, a very impressionable human being is in the mix now; for good or for worse. That much you can't deny. All I'm saying is nobody knows for SURE is it for better or for worse ya feel me?
Anyway, that's the way I feel about it, and my mind will probably never change on that. Call me ignorant etc etc. doesn't matter to me because that's my belief.
Homosexuality in general, true, they aint hurting nobody as long as they leave me alone and keep their shit to themselves. However, once you put a kid in that environment, a very impressionable human being is in the mix now; for good or for worse. That much you can't deny. All I'm saying is nobody knows for SURE is it for better or for worse ya feel me?
Anyway, that's the way I feel about it, and my mind will probably never change on that. Call me ignorant etc etc. doesn't matter to me because that's my belief.
So then you’re basically saying that all cases of adoption are unnatural. What should we do with the children then, throw them in a pit of fire? Because, if a single mother or a married heterosexual couple adopt, it’s not their kid, thus being unnatural and wrong, correct?
It's physically impossible for a lot heterosexuals to have children, again, under your definition this is unnatural thus they should not be allowed to adapt.
But you’re still not explaining to me why it’s wrong or why you believe it’s wrong, comrade. You’re simply stating that we don’t know if there are any negative physical or mental effects, right? Have there been any studies that suggest they do? At best, according to the article that you provided a few pages ago, they may or may not grow up more likely to be gay. Even if it’s true, what’s the problem with that again? If the child is raised well, provided with food, shelter, clothing, an education, love and lives a happy life, what exactly is the problem again?
I’m not calling you anything comrade nor am I judging you, just talking with you. I used to have the same type of mentality when I was younger, but that all changed as I grew older...for the most part. I’m not asking you or anyone else to change their beliefs, just trying to show my logic behind my opinions.
The point you made before was that children raised by gay parents are more likely to become gay. My point is if a boy who is raised by a single mother and 5 sisters is more likely to become gay or “fruity” (as in the case of Dennis Rodman) then you should also consider this wrong and probably illegal under your own logic.
That’s true but at the time he was the only person I could think of who was raised in those particular circumstances that is also well known.
It's physically impossible for a lot heterosexuals to have children, again, under your definition this is unnatural thus they should not be allowed to adapt.
But you’re still not explaining to me why it’s wrong or why you believe it’s wrong, comrade. You’re simply stating that we don’t know if there are any negative physical or mental effects, right? Have there been any studies that suggest they do? At best, according to the article that you provided a few pages ago, they may or may not grow up more likely to be gay. Even if it’s true, what’s the problem with that again? If the child is raised well, provided with food, shelter, clothing, an education, love and lives a happy life, what exactly is the problem again?
I’m not calling you anything comrade nor am I judging you, just talking with you. I used to have the same type of mentality when I was younger, but that all changed as I grew older...for the most part. I’m not asking you or anyone else to change their beliefs, just trying to show my logic behind my opinions.
The point you made before was that children raised by gay parents are more likely to become gay. My point is if a boy who is raised by a single mother and 5 sisters is more likely to become gay or “fruity” (as in the case of Dennis Rodman) then you should also consider this wrong and probably illegal under your own logic.
That’s true but at the time he was the only person I could think of who was raised in those particular circumstances that is also well known.
No. It's just not the "environment" that I'm talking about, but also the "example" that the parent(s) are setting for the child.. Actually this is the main point I'm trying to get across!! This is the problem I have, not necessarily whether they can provide a "good" home or not.. There's more to being a good parent then providing food, shelter, clothing and materialistic shit..
In my case, I don't like homosexuality; I don't "agree" with it, for lack of a better word. However, in this country we have (or should have) freedom in our lives to do what makes us happy as long as we aint infringing on other folks freedoms. So, while I don't like homosexuality, they free to be gay. However, I don't think they should be free to raise children.
@ 2-0-Sixx, it's kinda hard to explain what I mean by not natural. A lot of hetereosexual couples that adopt can't PHYSICALLY reproduce, but if they could it would be natural. NO HOMOSEXUAL COUPLE CAN EVER REPRODUCE. That's my point, I can't explain it very well, but I'm saying hetereosexual couples USUALLY DO reproduce. That's why it aint natural ya feel me? Yea, we don't know if it does or does not have negative side effects, so why risk it?
Anyway, those are my views and it aint like I'm forcing them on anybody cuz I'm not in a position to do so. This discussion is getting kind of redundant at this point, so I'ma just leave it at that. I understand and respect your viewpoint; however, I don't agree with it. Ima just leave it at that mayn
@ 2-0-Sixx, it's kinda hard to explain what I mean by not natural. A lot of hetereosexual couples that adopt can't PHYSICALLY reproduce, but if they could it would be natural. NO HOMOSEXUAL COUPLE CAN EVER REPRODUCE. That's my point, I can't explain it very well, but I'm saying hetereosexual couples USUALLY DO reproduce. That's why it aint natural ya feel me? Yea, we don't know if it does or does not have negative side effects, so why risk it?
Anyway, those are my views and it aint like I'm forcing them on anybody cuz I'm not in a position to do so. This discussion is getting kind of redundant at this point, so I'ma just leave it at that. I understand and respect your viewpoint; however, I don't agree with it. Ima just leave it at that mayn
Well, I don’t think it really has to do anything with them not being able to reproduce, I think it's simply based on your dislike for gays and it's a moral issue. But you know, all morals are subjective and really don’t matter on issues like this because your opinions on morality should not have an effect, you know what I mean? People shouldn’t have the right to force their beliefs or morals on society (of course it occurs but it shouldn’t).
This is kind of off topic but I've been thinking more and more lately that it is actually SELFISH for people to have kids these days. Of course it's their right and all, but seriously, what's more selfish than having a child? Why have one instead of adoption? So you can pass down YOUR genes and YOUR family name, etc. This isn’t always true for men (I have absolutely no desire to have offspring), but some women especially can be very selfish when it comes to having a baby. I heard this ignorant biatch the other day tell my comrade (she's pregnant) "Thank you so much for giving me the gift of a child. It was because of you that I'm going to have a little baby that’s going to be all mine." WTF type of shit is that?!? It's not a fucking toy or a puppy! Not to mention she is broke, has no job, no place to live and my comrade is broke, has no job, no future and lives with his folks. Very smart people – lets have another kid even though we can’t even support our selves!
I agree it is getting a bit old.
This is kind of off topic but I've been thinking more and more lately that it is actually SELFISH for people to have kids these days. Of course it's their right and all, but seriously, what's more selfish than having a child? Why have one instead of adoption? So you can pass down YOUR genes and YOUR family name, etc. This isn’t always true for men (I have absolutely no desire to have offspring), but some women especially can be very selfish when it comes to having a baby. I heard this ignorant biatch the other day tell my comrade (she's pregnant) "Thank you so much for giving me the gift of a child. It was because of you that I'm going to have a little baby that’s going to be all mine." WTF type of shit is that?!? It's not a fucking toy or a puppy! Not to mention she is broke, has no job, no place to live and my comrade is broke, has no job, no future and lives with his folks. Very smart people – lets have another kid even though we can’t even support our selves!
I agree it is getting a bit old.