It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whether Or Not Homosexuality Is A Choice Is Irrelevant

page: 12
27
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
I never got caught up in the gay marriage argument. I have heard that it was being pushed by parents of adult homosexuals, who wanted to get their children into stable relationships and home environments - and out of the diseased bar scene. I can sympathize with that.

But the reality is that most gay marriages only last about 18 months. And going thru Divorce Court is a lot more complicated than just throwing your clothes in a car and roaring off:

homochild.wordpress.com...
STATISTICS ON HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES
Gay couples are more promiscuous outside of marriage, have more domestic violence, and thus fewer long-lasting commitments/marriages.

www.christiannewswire.com...
HOMOSEXUALS DIE 20+ YEARS SOONER THAN HETEROS

And as far as how the Homosexual Agenda got it removed from the psychiatric Manual of Disorders ...

conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com... om-list-of-disorders/
HOW HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVISTS INTIMIDATED THE 'AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION' INTO REMOVING HOMOSEXUALITY FROM ITS LIST OF DISORDERS



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
a reply to: Gryphon66

Whatever you say, you've gone far off-topic and I hoped that a moderator would show up long ago.


Are you serious? You who shanghaied a thread about whether homosexuality is a "choice" into expectorating about your own personal ideas about good parenting?

Are you kidding me here?

Every one of your arguments has been countered by evidence multiple times. You have nothing to say in the face of facts except to try to squirm aside and misrepresent what you've been arguing.

Please, look over to the side of this post. See my avatar information? See the little green guy at the very bottom left? Click on that and choose ALERT! and express your concerns about off-topic posts.

Our moderators are some of the best; if I'm off-topic, they'll take care of it.

Let's break this down. For some reason, your statement is that homosexuals aren't fit to be parents.

Why? In two straightforward sentences or less. Say something FACTUAL or be clear about your OPINION.
edit on 12Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:07:06 -050015p122015366 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:07:45 -050015p122015366 by Gryphon66 because: Left, right, who knows?



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: MKMoniker
POST REMOVED BY STAFF


ALL of your links are from: Traditional Family sites.

They NEVER hold up to scrutiny.



What About Claims That Scientific Research Proves Gay Men Are Likely To Molest Children?

Some conservative groups have argued that scientific research strongly supports their claims that homosexuality and pedophilia are linked.

The Family Research Council has produced what is perhaps the most extensive attempt to document this claim. It is an article by Timothy J. Dailey titled Homosexuality and Child Abuse.

With 76 footnotes, many of them referring to papers in scientific journals, it appears at first glance to be a thorough and scholarly discussion of the issue. On further examination, however, its central argument – that "the evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls" – doesn't hold up.

psychology.ucdavis.edu...

edit on 20-3-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)

edit on Fri Mar 20 2015 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MstWntd


Did you fail to see my descriptive use of "throwing babies"? I can't say much on your understanding of English.

You used a euphemism.

I can assure you that my command of English is far beyond your comprehension.

I didn't "fail" to see anything, INCLUDING your very telling euphemism designed (whether you realize it or not) to 'analogize' the practice of allowing loving, willing couples to adopt children that the parents didn't want as "throwing babies" at them.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: MstWntd


I only copied and pasted some stats from a youtube poster

Oh.....well then.
/sarc
wow.

And I know my date is a french model - because it was on the internet. They can't put anything on the internet that isn't true.

Good Gawd.....*facepalm*


Are you mentally sound?.. What you're quoting isnt said by me at all.. you address a reply to me.. quote someone else.. and digress the topic entirely.. please fix up..



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: MstWntd

I just noticed that English may not be your first language; sorry for poking fun at your mistakes.

Perhaps if you establish the "right" of a child to have a male father and a female mother?

Not everyone in the world was able to be born in your "perfect" family.

I don't need any disclaimers.

You're more worried about what happens in the parents' bedroom than you are in indoctrinating a child into what is typically a neurotic and often psychotic set of beliefs that have no basis in reality; I get that.

Homosexuality is accepted and normal now. Encouraged? I don't think you have to worry about that.

Nature seems to take Her own course in that regard.

Best,



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: MstWntd


I only copied and pasted some stats from a youtube poster

Oh.....well then.
/sarc
wow.

And I know my date is a french model - because it was on the internet. They can't put anything on the internet that isn't true.

Good Gawd.....*facepalm*


Does it mean that the data I posted was wrong? Can you prove those stats are wrong?



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: MstWntd

I apologize - I got mixed up on who I was responding to and quoting. It was ISeekTRUth guy.
I'll fix it.



edit on 3/20/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I thought I'd provide a few "links" that indicate that everything is going to be okay and we don't to worry about these bad ol' homosexuals.

www.disney.com

www.candyland.com

www.anniethemusical.com

Just whistle while you work and slide down to the Candy Castle ... the links prove it!

Seriously though. I believe that some folks think that ANY link to ANY information is considered a valid source.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MstWntd

Finally something sensible.. like I have stated.. a) the child has rights to hetrosexual necular family and b) theres plenty of hetrosexual couples wanting to take them.. moving on this isnt about the stupid abortion laws in the US..


Wait, a child now has rights to live in an family of zombies?

I really do learn something new everyday on ATS.

PS: Great Understanderer of English ... it's nuclear family, not necular or necromantic, or necrotic.

(I wouldn't pick on your grammar if you weren't trying to attack the competency of others so foolishly.)


Yes, my english bad. You clever much. Now moving on from the personal and pointless attacks to the topic at hand.

How you derived zombies from someone that doesnt harm the child is in all possible terms stupid.. I mean that isnt what I have being saying all along if you have been paying attention.. my points here are

A) Someone should put the rights of the child forth rather than those that have no relation to the child
B) The child's own family is best suited to shape the impressionable into a model citizen, provided they do not harm the child physically, mentally, etc...

Why are you so desperate to try and shoot me down? You are taking pot shots and being very selective in your approach to putting forth what I have said.. Its a joke that you have to go these extents to try and discredit my sound opinion.. Why dont you be more direct and face the argument in its entirety?.. It would certainly give you more credibility because at the moment you're clutching at straws..
edit on 20-3-2015 by MstWntd because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Amid all this blubbery concern for "gay rights", and endless circular arguments about Choice Versus Determination, one key fact is being ignored: the extremely negative impact homosexuals have on society as a whole.

www.lifesitenews.com...
(July 2013) CDC WARNS GAY MEN IN U.S. OF "EPIDEMIC" HIV RATES
There was a 22% rise in HIV/AIDS infection rate from 2008 to 2010.

www.christianpost.com...
(Nov. 2013) CDC REPORTS RISE IN UNPROTECTED SEX BY GAY MEN
Unprotected sex among gay men increased nearly 20% from 2005 to 2011, but only 67% of gay men went for an HIV test in the past 12 months.

www.nytimes.com...
(2003) DOUBLE BLACK LIVES ON THE 'DOWN LOW'

www.idph.state.il.us...
WOMEN AND HIV/AIDS - AND BOY FRIENDS ON THE 'DOWN LOW'
HIV infection is the leading cause of death for African-American women between the ages of 25 and 34. Roughly 68 percent of Illinois women living with HIV are African American, while African Americans only make up 15 percent of the Illinois population.

www.prisonplanet.com...
(June 2011) GAY ESCORTS MEETING BILDERBERG CONFERENCE ELITISTS

www.thegayreport.net...
2012 - BILDERBERG ON GAY MARRIAGE
Bilderberg views themselves as "resource management." And despite their secret agenda, they are clearly pushing gay marriage and now this mixed-up transgender thing. They want the Supreme Court to intervene, and elevate the issue as "part of the [Bilderberg]'s agenda." And they are just certain that the court will rule in favor of gay marriage.

www.nytimes.com...
MANLASHES, MANSCARA AND MANTYHOSE



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: MstWntd


Did you fail to see my descriptive use of "throwing babies"? I can't say much on your understanding of English.

You used a euphemism.

I can assure you that my command of English is far beyond your comprehension.

I didn't "fail" to see anything, INCLUDING your very telling euphemism designed (whether you realize it or not) to 'analogize' the practice of allowing loving, willing couples to adopt children that the parents didn't want as "throwing babies" at them.



Well done, seeing that you claim to understand the question, how about gathering the courage to answer it, put your views forward rather than hiding behind petty insults.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: MKMoniker


the extremely negative impact homosexuals have on society as a whole.

Did you just say "extremely negative"?

Wait.....................

Wait.....
is this compared to the extremely negative impact that ISIS has on society?

Your thinking makes me sick. So does your religion and arrogance.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: MstWntd


Well done, seeing that you claim to understand the question, how about gathering the courage to answer it, put your views forward rather than hiding behind petty insults.


Feel free to review my threads and posts.....
my views are transparent.

Today I'm rather tired.
But - I'll get back to you. And sorry again about the improper 'reply to' .



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
a reply to: Gryphon66

Whatever you say, you've gone far off-topic and I hoped that a moderator would show up long ago.


Are you serious? You who shanghaied a thread about whether homosexuality is a "choice" into expectorating about your own personal ideas about good parenting?

Are you kidding me here?

Every one of your arguments has been countered by evidence multiple times. You have nothing to say in the face of facts except to try to squirm aside and misrepresent what you've been arguing.

Please, look over to the side of this post. See my avatar information? See the little green guy at the very bottom left? Click on that and choose ALERT! and express your concerns about off-topic posts.

Our moderators are some of the best; if I'm off-topic, they'll take care of it.

Let's break this down. For some reason, your statement is that homosexuals aren't fit to be parents.

Why? In two straightforward sentences or less. Say something FACTUAL or be clear about your OPINION.


But I am writing in English? How can I be more clear to you, I can only assume that you have learning difficulties because I have stated that homosexual parents can get the job done just as single parents can. I even made a direct correlation between both, except I didn't blame the mother for the negative impacts I blamed the homosexual parents for raising a child with the absence of a father or mother figure.

My argument was the impact on the emotional development .. lmao ... I have repeated this too many times today I have had enough actually.

I can't believe you still don't understand what I posted, it's still there - go back and check my argument.

Two sentences or less? If you are lazy to read then it ain't my problem. My text was clear, your understanding is weak as another poster IMMEDIATELY understood my premise the first time I posted it.

A



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: Prezbo369



Can you give a reason why same sex parents are detrimental to a child's upbringing that isn't based purely on what has been traditional in the past or your subjective feelings and emotions?


Check the sources in this OP here

Read them all then do your own research.


The studies carried out in the 60s when homosexuality was a crime punishable by chemical castration and jail time?

do you expect any kind of objective analysis from that kind of source?

There are similar studiesthat done on black people around that time too, would you also attempt to source them?



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: MKMoniker


the extremely negative impact homosexuals have on society as a whole.

Did you just say "extremely negative"?

Wait.....................

Wait.....
is this compared to the extremely negative impact that ISIS has on society?

Your thinking makes me sick. So does your religion and arrogance.


LOOOOL says the arrogant poster ^^

My argument is that same-sex marriages deprives any children in the marriage of an opposite-sex parent. These are people who have not looked at the statistics for single parents raising children. Heterosexual marriage does not protect the children when one spouse leaves. But this is circumstantial, and homosexual parenting is a choice from the onset.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: ISeekTruth101


I blamed the homosexual parents for raising a child with the absence of a father or mother figure.

How the hell do you know they aren't providing an appropriate opposite gender role model?

Two lesbians who have brothers, for example. Or who choose to include the 'sperm donor' in the rearing of the child?

Two gay guys who include the birth-mother or (if she wishes to be 'anonymous' and absent, then) include their women friends in the nurturing and rearing of the child? Their sisters? Their mothers?

Male and female adults are readily available. All responsible parents make sure that their child of whichever gender has a mature male role model, as well as a mature female role model.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MstWntd

I just noticed that English may not be your first language; sorry for poking fun at your mistakes.


Its kewl, first language might be one reason, the other might be a form of dyslexia.



Perhaps if you establish the "right" of a child to have a male father and a female mother?

Not everyone in the world was able to be born in your "perfect" family.

That is fine, that is the course of life, which if you notice means male father, female mother. homosexuals dont reproduce, hence they are a "dying breed", forget the "god".. even "evolution" and "natural selection" didnt think it fit for homosexuals to have children.. hence it can in all terms be said that having a male father and female mother is natural for the child, that is what the events of evolution have brought about..



I don't need any disclaimers.

Good stuff.



You're more worried about what happens in the parents' bedroom than you are in indoctrinating a child into what is typically a neurotic and often psychotic set of beliefs that have no basis in reality; I get that.


Sorry, what? where did that come from?.. you drew a wrong conclusion



Homosexuality is accepted and normal now. Encouraged? I don't think you have to worry about that.


Yes, in your neck of the woods, world is bigger than your town, city or country.



Nature seems to take Her own course in that regard.

Best,


Nature/evolution, like i said doesnt think homosexual couples should have kids.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join