no, imagine what that poor kid has to go through when his/her parents hate how he/she lives his/her life

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No, you misunderstood what I meant by 'funny.' I mean it'll be funny to watch the parent get hit by karma, if you believe in that. There is nothing funny about the kid has to go through, I totally agree with you on that one. Sorry for the confusion.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

ohhh hahaha whoops, then i guess yeah

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah, I totally understand how you might have gotten it confused though. I read it again and it does sound like I'm amused by the kid's pain, but that's just cruel, 'cause discovering you're gay and dealing with all that is no easy task.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

What about when those homophobes start physically or emotionally abusing their kids because they're gay?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

*cough*my dad*cough* he threatened to beat the crap out of me once. Haven't seen him in a few years...the day I came out. It's better that way though. He was a jackass.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Murder.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You say "when" as if it's inevitable.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I think this all the time, would they suddenly not love their child?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

1 in 10 people are gay, I can't understand how anyone can believe homosexuality is a choice or worthy of discrimination because of their preference. There is no logical explanation for people like that. For one thing, why would people choose to be gay if they're just going to be the subject of abuse?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I cannot tell you the stupidity I see in your post. Do people choose to be emo? Do they choose to be nerds? Do they? Yeah.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Depends on what you mean. People who are dominantly left-brained are highly likely to become nerds, as people with emotional abuse in their life are more likely to be genuinely emo. There are some asshats out there who say that they're something they're not just for the attention, but that goes with anything.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Take a classic nerd. A bookworm, straight A student. 9 times out of ten you could reform him. Even if being gay has it's roots in childhood experiences, does that mean we shouldn't let gay people adopt? Heck yes. Just like we shouldn't let prostitutes have kids. Or drug addicts. Because they're a bad influence. Either way, you lose.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I don't see how being gay is a bad influence on kids. It teaches them open-mindedness and acceptance of others as they are born. A gay couple is less able to raise a child in a loving environment than a straight couple? Laughable, especially given the circumstances that a gay couple cannot have an accidental pregnancy. They really have to want a child. Prostitutes are, globally, most often not in the profession by choice, but rather by negative economic and social influences. Drug addicts should've taken a better path in life, but hard drugs are insanely difficult to get off. Being gay isn't nearly comparable to those in any sense, as a heterosexual couple is more likely to produce a gay child. I cannot see how I lose, when I represent love. If people could stop beating down on those for being different from them, the world would be a much happier place (though unbalanced, as I also believe in positive and negative being necessary in all paths of life).

by Anonymous 13 years ago

hell yes. i love you.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Thanks :)

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Let's start with the irrationality. You are telling me that the prostitutes did not choose to be hookers? Really? They are, by gunpoint at every second, forced to have sex for money. Are they? Really. Then that REALLY needs to be addressed. There are far more noble, but less paying, jobs than prostitution. Nobody is forced into being a hooker. It cannot be done. No one can force you to do something against your will. The other alternative may be bankruptcy, but it's a choice. Next, you say that, statistically, "A heterosexual couple is more likely to produce a gay child." Now, really, did you just make this up? Because I'm almost positive two guys cannot produce ANY child, let alone one who choices to be gay. However, if you meant "upbring" a child whose orientation leans toward homosexuality, then you just made up something new. That would mean that homosexuality would HAVE to be a choice. Because, if it isn't a choice, then the ratio would be the same...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

For homosexual parents and heterosexual parents of the orientation of the children. The ratio would not change based on the parents if it weren't a choice. You lose.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually, there are forced prostitution rings in countries all over the globe, so someone, somewhere, is literally forcing a person into prostitution, most likely at this very moment. I still defend my position that a gay couple can be just as loving as any straight couple. I don't bash straight couples, I don't say that they should have to wear bright colors or drink appletinis or do anything they wouldn't want to do in their personal life. Just let others live theirs, and everyone will be happier for it.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I'm sorry, but it sounded as though you were defending prostitutes. What do you mean they don't choose that profession? They don't choose to stand on street corners dressed like sluts? well, that's news to me... if i was broke, i wouldn't be a prostitute. i'd get up off my ass, get a job and make something of myself so that i could have some dignity. and as for gay marriage... the bible forbids it, and i am therefore against it.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

As I said above, not all prostitutes are in the business by choice. Child rings, selling women across country borders illegally as personal prostitutes, etc, all contribute to it. As for gay marriage, how would it even affect you? It's not hurting anybody to allow it, but it is certainly hurting couples who need to help support each other through mutual finances, tax deductions, hospital visits, and many others. The bible never says "no gay marriage," either. Just no gay sex. But I don't subscribe to the Christian Bible, so please don't push your beliefs into the lives of others.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

This post is essentially the same as the other, so I will reply to it. I wasn't really referring to other countries, just the US. Where hooker's children are taken away. Because of the influence, and possibly environment. But do you think that the hookers should be able to keep their children?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Except that forced prostitution happens in the US as well. What about the women who were forced into it at an early age and don't know how to get out/do anything else? I am defending the ones who've been kept in the dark their whole lives and actively try to put food on the table and clothes on the backs of their children. But I can't see how this relates to two people, in love, who want to have a child? Are they less fit than an abusive heterosexual couple who might not have wanted them to begin with? That's not saying there's no fluctuation of emotion in gay relationships, just that it's unfair to judge based on a genetic code. If it's lack of evidence you see in favor of gay couples raising a family, a friend of mine has two mothers, and she is the nicest person I've ever known. She's tolerant, understanding, and (shocker) she's straight. Go figure, huh? Please go and actually listen to gay couples about their lives before you blindly condemn.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Oops I forgot my main point. You asked why he cares; how it affects him. Tell me; are you affected by child molestation or murder? Then why do you care? Guess what; you can give examples all day long but it won't make a difference; it's the statistics that matter. Nothing in life is 100% correlative with a trend. Nothing. So don't give examples. They're useless. Guess what; heterosexual abusive parents get their children taken away too! Big surprise? In fact, my parents are in court right now trying to secure custody of two kids. Their mom was abusive. They get taken away. You keep giving crap examples.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Guess what? At least I give examples to back up my opinion. And the system is not fool-proof, it is flawed, children are often kept in abusive homes because they're too scared to ask for help or the parent(s) in question are too good at hiding the abuse. Guess what? I never said every homosexual couple lives a completely happy, drama-free life. If nothing is 100% correlative, then why should your assumption that all homosexuals make bad parents be considered at all true? A personality makes a bad parent, not sexual preference. And are you truly comparing gay marriage to child molestation? Gay marriage allows love, molestation harms and destroys a child. Not even remotely on the same plane of thought and concern. If two men want to spend the rest of their lives together, you shouldn't be able to say they can't. Not even 50 years ago the issue of interracial marriage was given the argument of being against "family values" and the like.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

And if the statistics are all that matter, yet nothing is 100% correlative, what's the point of statistics? And to which statistics are you referring?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You asked how it affected anonymous up there. Tell me; does murder or child molestation affect YOU? No? Okay then, stop using outdated methods; for anyone smart knows they too, care about things not concerning them. I'm not referring to any statistics. I don't know what the correlation is; I was simply telling you that examples mean nothing. Also, you yourself claimed that being gay was influenced by childhood. Hmm, wouldn't that destroy your arguments on whether or not people are born gay? You act like I claimed the system was perfect and good. What you know I meant is that children of prostitutes and abusive parents are taken away.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Outdated methods? What would those be, or are you not allowed to say, since you seem to have such a strong hate of relevent examples? You were the one who said "it's the statistics that matter," so I was merely curious to which ones you were referring. Show me exactly where I ever said being gay was influenced by childhood. Oh, wait, I didn't. Ever. I was standing by my belief that it is a product of genetics, as with any species that is experiencing overpopulation. Riddle me this batsy, does gay marriage destroy the lives of those involved in it? Is it degrading to be with the one you love? Degrading and detrimental to sanity are the effects of abuse and neglect. That's why it is a concern of any rational person. Now let's stop pussyfooting around the question at hand. Without resorting to a book that I have no belief in, what is wrong with two people being in love? (Note my *gasp* example of interracial marriage from 50 years ago above)

by Anonymous 13 years ago

" as a heterosexual couple is more likely to produce a gay child" That, right there, undoes your entire argument. IF it were genetics, or random chance, or inherent, then the proportion would be the same. You said this. Now you're claiming differently? Trumped by logic? The outdated methods "how does it affect you?" Sorry; I wasn't clear. That is the most conformist argument I've ever heard, and I laugh at anyone who has sunk so low to play that as their trump card. You say it affects the person. How are you, a person detached entirely, affected by molestation? Tell me. See why this trump card is garbage and anyone who uses it is a conformist? What is wrong with two people in love, depends on who it is, and what "love" is. Your definition of love probably is something concerning feelings. While mine is the actual intent, designed by my Creator.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Ok, you missed the entire point of me asking how gay marriage affects someone and actually proved my point. My point is that it doesn't affect anyone not involved in the marriage. So we agree that the marriage of two people only affects those inside of the marriage. So your religion of choice has no place in another person's private life. If you would only read with as much cynicism as you put into your own words, you'd understand. A heterosexual couple will become with child, naturally. And their influence cannot determine the sexual orientation of said child any more than a tiger can be 100% sure its cub will be of the same fur color. Your choice of Deity and/or Deities does not give free will to his/her creatures that they may love who they wish? Wow, wish we could all be animatronics, huh? And yes, my definition of love is most definitely about feelings. How can one love without emotion?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

For that matter, how can we even be sure that souls have a specified gender? Gender is a purely physical anomaly, since your God isn't even specified to having a specific gender, just referred to as He so that the name would not be used time and again. Every person starts out as female, but the optional addition of extra chromosomes is what determines the sex. Thus being the reason of males having nipples.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Okay, now you're just arguing off your back. Rape only affects those involved; why do you care? You aren't affected IN THE LEAST. Like I said; this is a completely invalid (outdated) method. You just can't use that. Wait, if the genetics determine the orientation, then why did you say up there that heterosexual couples have a higher chance of having a gay kid? Huh? What? Why? Or did you just make that up, along with everything else in your argument? What I meant to say is that your definition ONLY concerns feelings, and once you inevitably fall out of love, divorce, amirite? Love is a choice. Infatuation is a feeling. Whether or not "souls" have gender, the one true God commands us to not partake in homosexuality. Does He allow it, yes, free will. Does He forbid it from His kingdom, you betcha.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Let's try the fact that people are only born of male and female parts, or did they skip that in your school, too? That's why only heterosexual couples can produce gay children. People become what they are born to be. I can't make myself be blue, no matter how much I try. Infatuation is an unhealthy obsession, love is a naturally occurring phenomenon that allows human to mate. And within any species, when there is overpopulation, the new offspring will be born homosexual so that there is enough food/space/etc for the rest of the group. YOUR God is not MY God. That is what I mean when I say gay couples have no affect on you. It doesn't matter what they do, it's their life. Live and let live. If anyone is pulling excuses out of their ass, sir, it is you. Science has made theories of biological influence in homosexuality plausible. Stop trying to force your narrow views onto others. Sincerely, Logical Thinkers.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Woah woah, hold up? You're just flipping a 180 on here. You said that heterosexual couples have a higher chance of producing a gay kid. I immediately said gay people can't reproduce, then changed your intent to mean "upbring" for the sake of the argument. Or have you conveniently ignored that? "Next, you say that, statistically, "A heterosexual couple is more likely to produce a gay child." Now, really, did you just make this up? Because I'm almost positive two guys cannot produce ANY child, let alone one who choices to be gay." Remember that?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Wait, so now you're saying it's evolved from evolution. Hold the, pardon my French, apples up. Evolution is, essentially, the passing of good genes to the offspring, yes? That's what it is. What good would that do at all if someone is gay? How on earth would that be beneficial in the least? Oh, it wouldn't. Evolution basically says that reproduction is the purpose of life, and good genes are passed down. No genes are passed down in homosexuality. Thus, no one can be born with homosexuality. Explain that away illogically, as you will, and answer me this: why? Why would they go gay? Horniness? That's honestly the only conclusion I could make. Evolution says the purpose of life is reproduction. Well, you don't reproduce in homosexuality, unless you count abominable acts, which isn't reproducing. I'm just confused how this makes sense to you. There is no way homosexuality is beneficial in the least. No, it can't be overcrowding; for it was common back in ancie...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

In ancient Greece, when the population was much smaller. Also, I still don't understand this genes thing. Homosexuals don't pass the trait on to their kids. Because they don't reproduce. Why would it exist? Still, you haven't answered my, pardon my French again, bonjour question. What the, pardon my french, oui oui man? How does murder affect you in the least, and why can you only repeat the same arguments?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Pourquoi est-ce que vous utilisez le francais mal, surtout parceque ma dispute n'a pas eu un rapport avec la langue? Vous êtes un homme erroné. J'ai un mal à l'estomac parceque vous êtes trop irrationnel. J'irai avec mes dieus et déesses, et vous êtes un trou de la femme avec une odeur rance. Dérangez-vous avec une qualité meuilleur, fagot.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You know i got the gist of that, relying on cognates. Basically, what you did there, was admit my points were too superior to counter? Why didn't you, a semi-reasonable human, actually construct a rebuttal? Because you couldn't is the only logical explanation. But, go ahead, prove me wrong; counter my points. Or else I win.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

"Prove me wrong" is the troll's best friend, isn't it? Seems that if you're not given enough evidence to completely overhaul your life's view, then it must be correct. Ignorance. Why don't you prove me wrong with something that doesn't pertain to religion for once? Let's start this over, shall we? Hello, I'm PirateQueen, and I enjoy a good debate, but I don't expect to change your mind via the internet. Nor should you expect to change mine. Neither side can completely prove the other false, so we'll never know until we're all dead, can we at least agree on that? I view the afterlife as something completely different from the Christian version, so let's leave it at that. Nobody will ever agree with you 100%, so make peace with it. Vous pensez les pensées circulaire ont une dispute rationnel, et vous êtes sur un traducteur avec vos doigts petits. Avez l'amusement petite fille! Vous pouvez crier jusqu'à votre voix est mort; ma vue est solide.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Hey, can you read? I said prove me wrong, and counter my points not "prove me wrong, or else I'm right." Reading comprehension. Go ahead; do it. Try to rebut my points. Why can't you?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

"But, go ahead, prove me wrong; counter my points. Or else I win." Sounds an awful lot like what you said you didn't say, doesn't it? You're constantly trying to make yourself some sort of martyr here, when it is clearly just a clashing of two ideals. I even said there is no way to prove ANYONE wrong on an opinion, because that's exactly what it is. Your opinion, based on a bastardized religion and its text. In our own worlds, we are each right. We'll never know for sure what is really right until we die. Why is that so hard to comprehend? All the evidence I've given contrary to your argument, you've denounced in accordance to your God. Maybe it's right, maybe it isn't. No way to tell with 100% accuracy. There's no use trying to prove anything to you, because you don't want to debate, you want to fight and scream like a spoiled child.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Ahem, what evidence exCtly? I don't recall anything of the sort, and when I even showed the impossibility of homosexuality in EVOLUTION you ignore me. Why? Once again, a lack of counterpoints, and more and more analogies involving my immaturity/ignorance. Why are you unable to devise a good rebuttal?

by Anonymous 13 years ago