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.

 

I Just Want To Say I Told You So. RE: LGBT

page: 20
35
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2017 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.




posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: TiggersTheMan

First, The truth is parents want their own children. It's part of our genetic makeup. Second, all those kids waiting to be adopted are part of the statistics of births per household.

Next, gay people certainly aren't to shoulder the majority of the blame. As a small percentage, 1-2%, yes the population will manage just fine. As 5x or more than that, no it won't. In fact, if you dive deeper into the stats you'll see that most of the gains are coming from Hispanics and Asians. Those are two big contributors to our current birth rate (they tend to have more children than white people). That's where the problem is. Those who are choosing to be gay. Which is to be expected with normalization.


You haven't proven anything remotely resembling the thesis of your OP which is "more people CHOOSE to be gay". Unless this is your way of admitting that you are attracted to the same gender as your own and would like to have intercourse with people of your own gender but instead chose a different path because more white people need to make babies? So aremyoumjust anholophgemor a homophobic racial purist? Just asking because if that's the case, it doesn't affect my personal life and don't care how you choose to live. That is if you are indeed choosing a heterosexuals lifestyle in order
To make more white babies because more white babies are important to you. I can disagree with the rationale without judging you for it or caring how you live your life until it affects me or those I care about. And please don't try to say that's not what you're getting at because it's all there in black and white where you quote statistics and make claims about population increases being attributed to Asians and Hispanics (who are Caucasian whether you want to believe it or not because how the US conducts its census has nothing to do with biology or Anthropological definitions of where and how a persons is classified scientifically).



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Tardacus

The point is that it does not matter if they are but if there is a demand for 'laws' that could affect the majority for the minority I do have an issue. I think gay marriage is great because it boosts the economy. Let them pay for weddings and divorce lawyers just like straight people. If a kid wants to identify as something fine as long as it does not affect my family. I see nothing wrong with that. To each there own.


exactly!, make it legal for them to get married then they will have to get screwed by the divorce laws like straight people do.
it`s ironic isn`t it that the political party that hates gay people the most does everything they can to make laws that benefit gay people.

no gays in the military? if you hate gay people wouldn`t it serve your purpose to make sure that all gay people had to join the military so you could send them off to die in a war and reduce the number of gays in the U.S.?

by not allowing gays to get married, straight people are being discriminated against.a straight person who gets married and then gets divorced gets screwed by the courts. 2 gay people who live together for 40 years and don`t get married because they are not allowed to can spilt up and go their separate ways and never have to deal with the courts of divorce blackmail.
as a straight person I find it offensive and discriminatory that if I divorce my wife after 36 years of marriage I have to give her half of everything I have worked for but a gay couple who have been together for 36 years can just split and walk away and not have to give up anything,or deal with court and scum bag lawyers.
so in my eyes the laws that prohibit gay marriage are actually discriminating against straight people who get married.

The way I see it is that the polticians know that gay married people won`t have kids, whereas straight married people might have kids who will grow up to pay taxes and vote.without voters and tax payers the politicians would be out of a job.

seriously, think about it, what do gay people do that straight people don`t do that would affect a politicians life?

well, they don`t have kids and they pay more taxes, since they aren`t allowed to get married,but other than that I can`t think of anything else that would cause a politician to get so rabid about being against gay marriage.
politicians are all about money so if they are against something it means they aren`t getting a cut of the money.
so if a politician is against something without a damn good reason then to me it means they aren`t getting a cut of the money by screwing somebody so I`m automatically for it.

look, I`m just telling ya I know how they government operates, I`ve been through the whole spectrum, I`m almost 60 years old, I`ve worked for the county government the state government, the federal government and I was in the military,hell I was even in the state pen for a bit so I know how the system works. I`ve never been in national politics but I imagine it`s just an inflated version of all the other government systems I`ve been involved with.
and from what I`ve experienced and seen they don`t do anything for the good of the private citizen, their top priority is themselves.

so when the government or a politician says that they are against gay marriage I automatically think, gay marriage is bad for the politicians and government and affect their lives and income,but won`t make a damn bit a difference to us commoners.



edit on 9-8-2017 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-8-2017 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Except, as I showed earlier, whites aren't the people who are driving the increased identification as LGBT. You misunderstood what I was saying. It's hispanics and asians who are identifying much more heavily than they were a few years ago. More of asians and hispanics identifying as LGBT results in fewer asian and hispanic babies. So If I were a racial purist, I would be pushing normalization as it would mean fewer asians and fewer hispanics in the future. But I'm not pushing a racial purism point of view, that's just the story you're telling yourself because the truth of my argument is causing massive cognitive dissonance. See, if I'm right, then there is something wrong with normalizing LGBT behavior (regardless of whether LGBT behavior itself is right or wrong or neutral) and you just can't have that because you've convinced yourself that normalization is good.

So you've told yourself a story about why I'm saying what I'm saying, rather than addressing what it is that I'm saying. Even if I was a racial purist (I'm not) or a closet homosexual (I'm not) that wouldn't change the validity of my argument.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: mOjOm

I would agree with you except that it is affecting other people. There are numerous examples of behavior associated with gender. For example: women typically sit with their knees together where men typically sit with their knees apart.

If this is a foolproof qualifier for gender, then I'm totally a guy based on how I sit, and Patrick Stewart is TOTALLY a woman based on how he sits.

Takes a special kind of stupid to believe how one is most comfortable sitting is an issue.
edit on 8/9/2017 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: peter vlar

Except, as I showed earlier, whites aren't the people who are driving the increased identification as LGBT. You misunderstood what I was saying. It's hispanics and asians who are identifying much more heavily than they were a few years ago. More of asians and hispanics identifying as LGBT results in fewer asian and hispanic babies. So If I were a racial purist, I would be pushing normalization as it would mean fewer asians and fewer hispanics in the future. But I'm not pushing a racial purism point of view, that's just the story you're telling yourself because the truth of my argument is causing massive cognitive dissonance. See, if I'm right, then there is something wrong with normalizing LGBT behavior (regardless of whether LGBT behavior itself is right or wrong or neutral) and you just can't have that because you've convinced yourself that normalization is good.

So you've told yourself a story about why I'm saying what I'm saying, rather than addressing what it is that I'm saying. Even if I was a racial purist (I'm not) or a closet homosexual (I'm not) that wouldn't change the validity of my argument.


exactly, strip away the politics and money and there isn`t one good reason why gay folks should be banned from getting married.
over time politics and religion changes I refuse to a pawn to manmade politics and religion,because when I die and when my wife dies we aren`t taking politic or religion with us when we go. I`m paraphrasing but a wise man once said politics and diapers have a lot in common, they need to be changed often and for the same reason,well I`m not going to take a dirty diaper or dirty politics with me when I go.
edit on 9-8-2017 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

SMDH...
edit on 9-8-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 12:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.


and politicians hate that, how many gay couples have children? how many gay couples have children that grow up to pay taxes and vote? now you see why politicians hate gay people. most gay people have no children that will grow up to be tax payers and voters so politicians have no interest in fighting for people who won`t produce future votes and money for them.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.


Nice spin.. Doesn't work like that. Too many variables.

All Im saying is, its unfair for a child to be born in this world with gay parents.

Straight parents will always be default, anything else is a step into the uknown.

Keep in line with design, minimize deviation.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.


Nice spin.. Doesn't work like that. Too many variables.

All Im saying is, its unfair for a child to be born in this world with gay parents.

Straight parents will always be default, anything else is a step into the uknown.

Keep in line with design, minimize deviation.

Explain. My mothers-in-law are gay, my husband and his 2 brothers don't seem to be at any disadvantage of the "unknown".

Before you shove your foot down your throat, my husband's the eldest at 46, so this is not a '"90's or newer" phenomenon to latch on to.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

Well maybe politicians should be more concerned about people who are actually alive and can vote rather than worrying about the possible future or what voters will be around later on.

Because adult gay people still vote whether or not they have children.

So that sounds like a pretty weak argument on your part.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:53 AM
link   
a reply to: kyleplatinum

To many variables??? It's the same argument you just gave me only reversed.

If it's bad for straight kids to have gay parents, which is what you said.

Then shouldn't also be bad for gay kids to have straight parents???

It's your logic being used. So are you going to admit that it's the wrong way to look at it or not??

I think kids are fine as long as they have parents who love and support them and take care of them. That's more than many kids gets already.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:56 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

It's bad for a cat parents to raise a non cat kid.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 02:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Deaf Alien


i'm scared now.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 02:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.


Nice spin.. Doesn't work like that. Too many variables.

All Im saying is, its unfair for a child to be born in this world with gay parents.

Straight parents will always be default, anything else is a step into the uknown.

Keep in line with design, minimize deviation.


The majority of children in the world were born to Chinese parents. Minimise deviation, no non-chinese parents.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 02:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

If it's bad for straight kids to have gay parents, which is what you said.



No.

I said, for third time..... I think it is unfair for a child to come into this world with gay parents. Stop dramatically twisting.

By then the child has started deviation from default. That doesn't mean in this scenerio that "all" the kids become gay.

Just my opinion.. everybody else get to throw around theirs.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 02:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.


Nice spin.. Doesn't work like that. Too many variables.

All Im saying is, its unfair for a child to be born in this world with gay parents.

Straight parents will always be default, anything else is a step into the uknown.

Keep in line with design, minimize deviation.


The majority of children in the world were born to Chinese parents. Minimise deviation, no non-chinese parents.


Another spinner huh.

You very well know I was speaking of a mother (female) and a father (male) being default parents.

Your deviation comparison is invalid.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 02:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

If it's bad for straight kids to have gay parents, which is what you said.



No.

I said, for third time..... I think it is unfair for a child to come into this world with gay parents. Stop dramatically twisting.

By then the child has started deviation from default. That doesn't mean in this scenerio that "all" the kids become gay.

Just my opinion.. everybody else get to throw around theirs.

Deviated toward what? Exactly?
My husband and brothers-in-law haven't filled me in on this mysterious secret deviation. Evidently, you think you can, albeit vaguely & ambiguously.



posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: kyleplatinum

How about gay children being born to straight parents??? Is that bad for the child then too???

Because I'm pretty sure the majority of LGBT people are born from straight parents than they are from Gay ones. Gay couples don't make up the majority of couples birthing children compared to straight couples.


Nice spin.. Doesn't work like that. Too many variables.

All Im saying is, its unfair for a child to be born in this world with gay parents.

Straight parents will always be default, anything else is a step into the uknown.

Keep in line with design, minimize deviation.


The majority of children in the world were born to Chinese parents. Minimise deviation, no non-chinese parents.


Another spinner huh.

You very well know I was speaking of a mother (female) and a father (male) being default parents.

Your deviation comparison is invalid.


No it was completely valid if not entirely serious.

Just in case you don't know no two sets of parents are exactly alike so worrying about deviation from the norm is pointless.

There are a lot of things that are unfair for children to be born into.

Parents who are abusive.
Parents who are alcoholics.
Parents who are neglectful.
Parents who are ginger.

Parents having the same genitalia is way way down that list.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join