• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

All things being equal which is the most ideal way for a child to be raised

All things being equal which is the most ideal situation to raise a child?

  • A mother and Father

    Votes: 46 79.3%
  • A gay couple

    Votes: 11 19.0%
  • A single parent

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • Total voters
    58
Stace said:
I suggest you revisit Rule 18 of this forum.

I'd say that calling these folks a freak show is intended to ridicule and degrade those people. What I find especially offensive?

Where you said that folks with Down Syndrome should not be able to adopt. Where you called them freaks of nature. Oh, and let's not forget that whole substandard citizen bit.

You know, I could introduce you to a number of people with Down Syndrome, and you'd never know they had it unless you were told. And I just can't believe you would call them freaks of nature when A) they didn't ask to be born that way, and there's nothing they can do to help it; and B) They can't be TOO freakish, seeing as how Nature made them that way to begin with.
You are 100% correct and I appologize! I used harsh statements to rebut years of subtle brainwashing by Hollywood to make my point and I was wrong to do so. I do not hold any person in a lower category of citizenship regardless of how nature sent them here.

I am conservative and conservatives like to see change over decades rather than overnight... I take offense to the method the Gay agenda pushes at the strait majority and think they should try a little sugar verses vinegar.

I think the Don't ask - Dont Tell policy passed by congress and signed into law by Prez Clinton, as he bit his bottom lip... is the baromoter of American culture as to how gays should innereact in the culture... In my mind you can't litigate or legislate love and understanding so the Gay Agenda should be to gain the will of the culture to want them to be lifted to another plane verses making them lifted there.
 
I take offense to the method the Gay agenda pushes at the strait majority and think they should try a little sugar verses vinegar.

I take offense at anyone who uses this "Gay Agenda" strawman.

Mods, where the hell are you? You'll bitch at me for wanting to curb hate speech plenty but
you won't follow your own blasted rules.

And hey, this poll is fixed! Where is the "any of the above" option?
 
talloulou said:
I can see how that situation might be surprising but what does it have to do with the topic?? Are you suggesting that disabled women shouldn't have children! 'Cause that's outrageous.
No, you see no one had told me that Hector's mom had lost her legs and when she refussed to come in I went to my wife and asked what's wrong with this woman, does she think she is too good to come into our house? My wife says ... it takes too much trouble with the wheel chair and I stopped her as emotions overcame me.

I grew up when polio was the norm and am overwhelmed by something shocking like Hector's mom being delivered so surprisingly.

No it's nothing like that. WTF is wrong with you???? Being gay is not illegal in the US.

You're weird to me.
I don't have problems with gays... I don't care if they have legal unions... I don't think they should be out of the closet nor adopt children because I find both ideas rather shocking. I would think gays would like to live in the vacinity of other gays like SF... they have their norm and I have my norm... to me a gay couple has zero effect until they show sexual affection towards each other... I watch gays on my wives garden shows every Sunday and don't frown when John and Steve are on a budget of $40,000 to fix up their landscape other than thinking wow budget? But when I see the news with the two guys with the cowlick hair at the alter kissing I want to puke.
 
Rosalie said:
I take offense at anyone who uses this "Gay Agenda" strawman.

Mods, where the hell are you? You'll bitch at me for wanting to curb hate speech plenty but
you won't follow your own blasted rules.

And hey, this poll is fixed! Where is the "any of the above" option?
Do I need to appologize again?

I think if if you Google"Gay Agenda" you get 14,000,000 hits in .0.16 seconds. Why do you consider it not to be an orginized agenda?

I understand the new agenda is buying politicians while being less confornting in the public... I've read campaign contrabutions and lobbies are the new agenda to cause the desired agenda to be accomplished.
 
I don't have problems with gays... I don't care if they have legal unions... I don't think they should be out of the closet nor adopt children because I find both ideas rather shocking.

How can you if you don't have problems with "gays"?

There has certainly been no studies showing that being raised by gay parents is in any way harmful. Kids will always have grandparents, aunts and uncles, friends of family, etc., that will ensure they get a balanced view of gender.
 
Do I need to appologize again?

No. You need to go back to your army and stop talking about things you don't know about.

I think if if you Google"Gay Agenda" you get 14,000,000 hits in .0.16 seconds. Why do you consider it not to be an orginized agenda?

Because it's not. Can you show me some proof that this "Gay Agenda" exists? What I see is a doddering old
man trying to put a sinister sounding label on a group of people he doesn't like.

http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&q="Gay+Agenda"&btnG=Search&meta=

You only get 476,000 (and why the hell does the time matter?), not 14,000,000.

Meanwhile, "giant robot" turns up 1,000,000. Are you suggesting that there is a conspiracy by Giant Robots to take over the world, with their Cybernetic Agenda?

180px-Csmegatronii3.jpg


Yyyyeeeeeesss...

I understand the new agenda is buying politicians while being less confornting in the public...

You understand **** all. The "Gay Agenda" is nothing more than a movement seeking 1)
Equal rights, 2) Recognition of the problems that gay people face still in modern society. The reason that it's demonised is that there are people that oppose it due to the fact that it challenges their beliefs which state it's acceptable and encouraged to oppress homosexuality, who scour the Intarwebs for any evidence of any overzealous sounding activist to pin up as an example(as opposed to doing the same thing with right wingers, who usually actually indriectly agree with the examples you associate them with).
 
Last edited:
Rosalie said:
I take offense at anyone who uses this "Gay Agenda" strawman.

Mods, where the hell are you? You'll bitch at me for wanting to curb hate speech plenty but
you won't follow your own blasted rules.

And hey, this poll is fixed! Where is the "any of the above" option?

Um, I am a mod. And you'll note that I did tell Topsez that he was bordering on hate speech.
 
Rosalie said:
No. You need to go back to your army and stop talking about things you don't know about.



What I see is a doddering old man trying to put a sinister sounding label on a group of people he doesn't like.

Comments like these? Not necessary or acceptable. I'm pretty sure you've already been warned about flaming other members.
 
Rosalie said:
No. You need to go back to your army and stop talking about things you don't know about.
I love my expected norm.

Because it's not. Can you show me some proof that this "Gay Agenda" exists? What I see is a doddering old
man trying to put a sinister sounding label on a group of people he doesn't like.

http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&q="Gay+Agenda"&btnG=Search&meta=

You only get 476,000 (and why the hell does the time matter?), not 14,000,000.
Well, here is a portion of a letter I received from AFA ( google it)
When Wal-Mart announced their support for the homosexual agenda a few weeks ago, they meant what they said. You will remember that Wal-Mart asked for, and received, permission to join the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC). The company announced they were giving two large grants to NGLCC. The world's largest retailer was rewarded with a position on the board of NGLCC. Wal-Mart also announced they would give preference to homosexual-owned businesses in purchasing products.

Justin Nelson, president of NGLCC, said he expects Wal-Mart to use its influence to pressure suppliers like P&G, Johnson & Johnson, and Gillette to give homosexual businesses preferential treatment. Wal-Mart is also working on a plan to provide domestic-partnership benefits to homsexual employee "partners." The NGLCC is a leading promoter of homosexual marriage.
And if you take off the " " your results show a little different result...

You understand **** all. The "Gay Agenda" is nothing more than a movement seeking 1)
Equal rights, 2) Recognition of the problems that gay people face still in modern society. The reason that it's demonised is that there are people that oppose it due to the fact that it challenges their beliefs which state it's acceptable and encouraged to oppress homosexuality, who scour the Intarwebs for any evidence of any overzealous sounding activist to pin up as an example(as opposed to doing the same thing with right wingers, who usually actually indriectly agree with the examples you associate them with).
I failed to comprehend what you were tring to communicate... try simple terms linked to each other.
 
SouthernDemocrat said “Why would stable, supportive, and loving environment in the home of a same sex couple be any less "right" than a stable, supportive, and loving environment in the home of a heterosexual couple?

If you could, please keep your answer as concise as possible.”


This might be tough…I’m long winded. Ok. Two reasons……


If we define marriage as “whatever adults want’ I think the result is harmful to children and in the long run for society.
I believe there is a fundamental difference between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. I believe that marriage isn’t simply the union of two people. It's the union of one woman and one man, who by NATURE compliment each other. Takes one of each to bring a child into the world. There by mere natures sake…..both are important, needed and valuable to that child.

I find it very sad that on Massachusetts marriage licenses, the words bride and groom have been replaced with Party A and Party B. Mother and father have been replaced on birth certificates to read Parent A and Parent B.


Secondly because of my faith. I believe the New Testament speaks with clarity about homosexuality as being wrong.
 
Look, I'm living in 1967 when it comes to gays in American culture... I spent twenty years in the army from 67 to 88 then traveled a lot to Europe and lived there for a while and now have lived in PR for sixteen years.

Got news for ya azere, it's 2006. Vietnam's over. Elton Jhon is a beloved and acclaimed artist and Global warming is a real threat.

I'm sure I served with some gay - lesbian troops in my carreer but they never told me that out loud. I guess that is the point, I don't give a crap if someone likes to do a guy or girl or animal for that point as long as I don't know about it.

Yes because every gay person alive is just willing to blurt out what they're doing in their bedrooms infront of you right? I guess it must be your clear acceptance of their acts.

Sex is a private matter to me, well relatively anyway and I'm not interested in learning about anyones sexual activities through announcement. The mere mention of homosexuality by gays turns me off because it relates to sexual acts by gays... yet, the mention of the same by lesbians doesn't bother me... guess I like to watch those cool tools in action... but the thought of this open statement of I like sex with the same sex yet I demand the right to rear children seems abnormal to me considering the way the coungress views homosexuality... don't you agree?

Just because I have sex in the privacy of my own room with a same sex partner I'm not allowed to adopt children? Do you understand that doesnt make any sence what so ever?

Sex is a private issue... don't ask or tell... Children are to be raised by men and women in a normal home environment... should a couple divorce then a single parent or family member.... but I simply can't for the life of me see why a child should be subjected to an abnormal culture experience such as same sex parents since it isn't even acceptable for service to the nation.

An abnormal culture? Have you studied gay culture? What makes it abnormal. What the hell is gay culture anyways. I doubt someone like you would even dare to enter a gay bar and mingle with such abnormal individuals. You do know there are 100s of gay americans in Iraq fighting to protect your *** right?

Where am I going wrong here? There are gay folks in congress that were there when the don't ask - don't tell policy was put in place... In MA folks of the same sex may marry but they can't join the army... why? because the congress says their lifestyle is abnormal to military lifestyle... Wow, military lifestyle is already abnormal environment for raising children but it is absolutely to abnormal for a gay or gay married couple to join in let alone a gay couple with children... I think it would freak everyone out.

Is this guy serious? Let's not let gay people join the army because it would freak everybody out? I think you're just making all of this up to get people pissed at you. Are you 14?

I know I was freaked out when I found out my sons best friends mom had no legs... she wouldn't have been normal in the army either... gays with kids simply freakes me out... imagine if my son wanted to have a sleepover and I found out the kids parents were a gay couple... that's freaky! That would be like showing up in the office on Monday morning wearing clothes and everyone else is naked... freaky!

Gays with kids simply freak you out....wow let's change the world because one person is feeling "icky" by "the gays". I think your son is going to be one of those kids who says he's gay just to get his dad pissed off.
 
Secondly because of my faith. I believe the New Testament speaks with clarity about homosexuality as being wrong.

*cough* Separation of church and state *cough*
 
Hatuey said:
Got news for ya azere, it's 2006. Vietnam's over. Elton Jhon is a beloved and acclaimed artist and Global warming is a real threat.
Point?

Yes because every gay person alive is just willing to blurt out what they're doing in their bedrooms infront of you right? I guess it must be your clear acceptance of their acts.
I don't understand what you are tring to say.

Just because I have sex in the privacy of my own room with a same sex partner I'm not allowed to adopt children? Do you understand that doesnt make any sence what so ever?
It violates nature's law... Humans are compassionate torwards folks born different than the herd... in the henhouse all but the strongest are simply pecked to death... I see acceptance that gays are born not by choice and I have compassion for their difference and wouldn't want them harmed but I wouldn't slap Mother Nature and allow social expermintation... it just violates nature.

An abnormal culture? Have you studied gay culture? What makes it abnormal. What the hell is gay culture anyways. I doubt someone like you would even dare to enter a gay bar and mingle with such abnormal individuals. You do know there are 100s of gay americans in Iraq fighting to protect your *** right?
I've heard enough to know I don't want to learn more "fisting" My nephew is gay.

Is this guy serious? Let's not let gay people join the army because it would freak everybody out? I think you're just making all of this up to get people pissed at you. Are you 14?
Pay attention and read the part where I laid out my life... It was congress that said out of the closet gays can't join the military. Guess it would freak everyone out or they wouldn't have made the policy. Who want to be the one to force the open admission of openly gay people to join the military... apparently no one because it may cause a backlash resulting in a draft leaving the gays and the persons who approved such an act to blame for the draft.

Gays with kids simply freak you out....wow let's change the world because one person is feeling "icky" by "the gays". I think your son is going to be one of those kids who says he's gay just to get his dad pissed off.
That's funny! When I was 18 I worked in a job with my dad and in the locker room everyone was beating up (verbally) a couple gay men there... one was an AH and the other was about my age and I thought they picked on him for no reason... so I took the gay kid on an overnight road trip to WV from NJ just to piss off my dad and the biggots that worked there... I didn't get a pass until I got caught by the dad of the town slut comeing out of the woods...
 

Taking anything from the AFA about homosexuals as truth is like presuming the KKK back their arguments with facts. Does the AFA provide anythign to back up their claims?

I should not have to google for a claim on a known homophobic website.

And if you take off the " " your results show a little different result...

That's because it would also include any documents that feature the words "gay" and "agenda". To search for a specific phrase, you have to enclose it in quotation marks.

I failed to comprehend what you were tring to communicate... try simple terms linked to each other.

How on earth could I make it any simpler?

There is gay agenda, just people looking for recognition as a minority. The reason the phrase exists is because conservative christians have beliefs that state it is acceptable to discriminate against homosexuality, and homosexuals violate their beliefs. They do not have any logical grand to stand on, so they resort to negative spin and demonising the gay rights movement.

Doughgirl;
I believe there is a fundamental difference between heterosexual and homosexual relationships.

Then please demonstrate how it is so. If you have a belief, it must be formed on some partial evidence. Otherwise, we're just going to presume that you've been preprogrammed to feel that way like the majority of CCs have.

I believe that marriage isn’t simply the union of two people. It's the union of one woman and one man,

You say that like it's deep and meaningful and not an overused stance endorsing discrimination.

who by NATURE compliment each other.

Homosexuality is found in nature. Do you really believe love is nothing more than baby making?

Takes one of each to bring a child into the world. There by mere natures sake…..both are important, needed and valuable to that child.

Yet no sound studies seem to support this notion at all. Children do not look to their parents as their sole role models.

This is the problem; everyone wants to have an opinion based on vague theory. But when there isn't an emprical evidence to back up offensive claims, it really is little more than an insult to the accused party's intelligence.

I find it very sad that on Massachusetts marriage licenses, the words bride and groom have been replaced with Party A and Party B. Mother and father have been replaced on birth certificates to read Parent A and Parent B.

Yes; because words on a document nobody looks at anyway are more important than equal rights for a discriminated minority.

Irrelevant Appeal to Emotion.

Secondly because of my faith. I believe the New Testament speaks with clarity about homosexuality as being wrong.

Circular reasoning; the Bible, especially your interpretation of it, is not proven fact. Even if it was, that would just mean God is a homophobe, it does not back his claim that homosexuality is wrong. Homosexuality is not wrong because it is not malicious; it does not have the intent of hurting anyone. There is no logical way to cast homosexuality as an "Immoral" behaviour.

so I took the gay kid on an overnight road trip to WV from NJ just to piss off my dad and the biggots that worked there... I didn't get a pass until I got caught by the dad of the town slut comeing out of the woods...

Shame that you didn't do it out of compassion, instead of to spite your father. And also a shame that you seem to have regressed from that level of acceptance.
 
Rosalie said:
I take offense at anyone who uses this "Gay Agenda" strawman.

Mods, where the hell are you? You'll bitch at me for wanting to curb hate speech plenty but
you won't follow your own blasted rules.

And hey, this poll is fixed! Where is the "any of the above" option?

1. If you don't think there is a gay agenda out there then you live in fantasy land..

2. All of the above does not fit the poll......Its a cop out......
 
he three alternatives are not enough.

There are imany more combinations...and no such thing as ideal.

Ideal now us different from the ideal of 1878

And New Deli, from Salt Lake city.

When I was a young boy my grandfather said (often) the best way
to raise a child, is to place him in a barrel and feed him through the
bung-hole, untill he was 16. Then close the bung-hole.

In Sum: There is no ideal way.
 
Rosalie said:
Taking anything from the AFA about homosexuals as truth is like presuming the KKK back their arguments with facts. Does the AFA provide anythign to back up their claims?

I should not have to google for a claim on a known homophobic website.
Picky picky Read this news release National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce Announces Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Membership at this link http://www.nglcc.org/ht/display/ReleaseDetails/i/5735

How on earth could I make it any simpler?

There is gay agenda, just people looking for recognition as a minority. The reason the phrase exists is because conservative christians have beliefs that state it is acceptable to discriminate against homosexuality, and homosexuals violate their beliefs. They do not have any logical grand to stand on, so they resort to negative spin and demonising the gay rights movement.
This same agenda includes forced indoctrination of public school students and ligagating the Boy Scouts out of existense also doesn't it? I'm not Christian and gays don't violate my secular beliefs they simply upset my expected norm... I think homosexual couples counter the rules of nature when they would attempt to rear children as parents.

Shame that you didn't do it out of compassion, instead of to spite your father. And also a shame that you seem to have regressed from that level of acceptance.
It was a mixture of both but you should have been a fly on the wall when I explained the rules to the gay dude before starting our road trip... Like I said earlier I have no problem with gays that fall within the Don't ask don't tell standard approved by congress... The kid in the locker room never said he was gay but his feminity assred he was and everyone bothered him without him giving them cause... I found this unprovoked attack stupid... I had friends that enjoyed bothering gays but I never joined in because I don't bother anyone that doesn't bother me. One of my friends said to me hey we're going to NYC to roll some gays for spending money ... you want to come? No thanks not my idea of fun... I saw the guy a couple days later and he had been sissy whipped with black eyes and scrapes... guess he tried to roll the wrong gay dude.

Back to the debate... I don't think it is within the rules of nature for gay persons to rear children as parents... Gays are significantly different than nature's intent of retention of the best of the best of each species... It seems to me that congress has established a standard that remains unchallenged so the gay folks shouldn't bother the Christians but congress. Or, see if the Supreme Court is willing to address the public standard approved by congress as to its constitutionality... I think it is a hot potatoe that no one wants to settle because to do so would result in a draft...

Because of the status quo of the congress and the courts and marriage being a state issue... then gay folks need to leave the Christians alone and choose the state, the courts or congress to remedy their complaints. It is a catch 22 because with a court decision in your favor with a reaction resulting in a draft your rights could be moved back for decades along with being placed on an open season for harm by people you caused to be drafted.
 

I don't see anything wrong with this article.

This same agenda includes forced indoctrination of public school students and ligagating the Boy Scouts out of existense also doesn't it

What do you mean by "forced indoctrination"?

Heterosexuality is pushed on us from a young age. We are, in essence, programmed to be heterosexual. Homosexuality is kept away as an "adult" thing, which is of course ridiculous, if you can have boys and girls holding hands in a kids' cartoon, why not boys and boys and girls and girls?

Back to the debate... I don't think it is within the rules of nature for gay persons to rear children as parents...

Yet no studies so far have suggested so.

Gays are significantly different than nature's intent of retention of the best of the best of each species...

Yet homosexuality exists in nature.
 
Rosalie said:
What do you mean by "forced indoctrination"?

Heterosexuality is pushed on us from a young age. We are, in essence, programmed to be heterosexual. Homosexuality is kept away as an "adult" thing, which is of course ridiculous, if you can have boys and girls holding hands in a kids' cartoon, why not boys and boys and girls and girls?
I honestly don't understand your point... cartoons are for simple consumption as a way to pass time and be entertained... School is a place where children are educated in preparation for a productive life. To select one minority sub culture to educate the masses on seems a waste of time or unfair to other alternate lifestyles of the masses... We don't dwell on Mormons or Quaker lifestyles yet children grow up to understand they exist among us...

Yet no studies so far have suggested so.
Experminting with children should be against the law... the state is the ward of minors absent parents and should not allow those minors to participate in a social study.
Yet homosexuality exists in nature.
I grew up on a farm, a dairy farm and spent a lot of time with nature and have never experienced gay animals... I bet you have some links though don't you?

Let me bore you with a story about gay bulls... Our farm was bordered by another farm and each farm had the breed bull in a pasture opposite each other separated by a fence made from telephone poles with strands of barb wire every six inches from the ground to six feet. These bulls each weighed in at about 3,000 + pounds and would pace the fence daily wanting to kill each other so they could be the dominate male. One day as I passed the neighbor's bull had finally had enough and reared and crushed his heavy body against the barbed wire fence and I could hear the staples singing through the air as they popped out... the bull screamed in pain as the barbs slashed his neck and chest ... but now he was in our pasture and the fight was on and on and on... an hour or so later after continual battle they booth stood exhausted and my father went and took our bull away by the ring in its nose and put it in a pen.

The next Saturday my dad and the neighbor decided to sell the bulls and start using artificial insemination because they had became too much trouble. I went to the stock market sale early and guess what... these two bulls ended up in the same pen... You could have put an apple in my young mouth it was hanging open so wide as I watched them continually sodomize each other... mortal enemies had became gay lovers.... do you think they were latent homosexuals or simply in an environment of stress and distress?
 
Marilyn Monroe said:
Where do we draw the line with sexuality as a society? When do we say no?

You honestly believe that accepting homosexuality is going too far?

You are advocating the slippery slope fallacy. Just because we push a line a little further out doesn't mean it flies out indefinitely.

I would say the only line we should draw with anything is when something actually hurts people(and not just people who are setting out to be "hurt" and offended). Homophobia most definitely does hurt people, even if indriectly therefore it should not be socially acceptable.
 
Rosalie said:
You honestly believe that accepting homosexuality is going too far?

You are advocating the slippery slope fallacy. Just because we push a line a little further out doesn't mean it flies out indefinitely.

I would say the only line we should draw with anything is when something actually hurts people(and not just people who are setting out to be "hurt" and offended). Homophobia most definitely does hurt people, even if indriectly therefore it should not be socially acceptable.



You didn't really answer the question.
 
Marilyn Monroe said:
You didn't really answer the question.

Unless they impede upon the rights of others, or there is a demonstrable and irrefutable societal harm if not addressed, then moral lines are not societies responsibility, but rather, it is an individual issue.

Same sex parrenting would fit neither of those descriptions, thus no line to draw.
 
To select one minority sub culture to educate the masses on seems a waste of time or unfair to other alternate lifestyles of the masses...

Who says they don't do this? And if it's unfair, wouldn't those minorities be speaking up for themselves and not need someone like you to point them out?

Experminting with children should be against the law...

What, so then we'd never know whether homosexual parents are fit to bring up kids or not? It'd be very convenient for you, wouldn't it?

It doesn't matter. The fact is you're wrong and homosexuals can raise children. You make everything sound so sinister - they merely observed homosexual families that were already formed.

I grew up on a farm, a dairy farm and spent a lot of time with nature and have never experienced gay animals... I bet you have some links though don't you?

Well, yes, that is how arguments work. Generally the person with either the most logic or who actually provides sources is the one with the upper hand in a debate.

Instead of directing you to specific studies, here's a nice Wiki page on the matter(good for beginners):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexuality

do you think they were latent homosexuals or simply in an environment of stress and distress?

Actually, many animals have very little inhibitions about sexuality one way or another. Even early pre homo-sapien "humans" pretty much humped anything. Self critical humans have identities and thus are much more concious. The unfortunate truth(for you) is that most likely, most people are at least a little bisexual. This doesn't make it fair to push someone over to the other side though, as that "little bisexual" could just be that someone kind of likes guys with long hair. Those who identify as "gay" are just very much at one end of the spectrum to the degree where they're mostly incomfortable with the other. As society becomes more accepting, more and more people will identify as bisexual. Though that no doubt disturbs you, people actually being true to themselves and not your outdated morals :(
 
Rosalie said:
Heterosexuality is pushed on us from a young age. We are, in essence, programmed to be heterosexual. Homosexuality is kept away as an "adult" thing, which is of course ridiculous, if you can have boys and girls holding hands in a kids' cartoon, why not boys and boys and girls and girls?
hetero is not pushed on anyone, you are or you arent
and homos are gettting plenty of tv time these days
Rosalie said:
Yet homosexuality exists in nature.
it exists as a mutation/aberration/malformation or whatever it turns out to be caused by
it is not normal. it is not beneficial to the species, because they can not perpetuate the species
gays are not gay by choice, as i am not hetero by choice
so they are entitled to live a full and happy life
but to push homosexuality, indoctrinate lil kids, with queer cartoons is not necessary
especially since it seems like alot of the people hosting kids shows are so freaking flaming to begin with
 
Back
Top Bottom