• 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.

Can gay people have babies

RightatNYU said:
One thing that I would like to mention that I think everyone's forgotten.

As to whether or not gay people can have babies, if they get the Stork's phone number, can't they place an order just like any straight couple?

I mean, seriously, wtf, mate?


Gee, I don't know, ask my teenage son! :shock:
 
once again i make my special stop in here and make some comment again. First i want to say i have been in the process of moving and will be for about another week , so until then here is my comment of the month or whatever it is. I saw the first post in this thread about how apparently everyones going to become gay if gay marriage isn't banned and that made me want to throw up in disgust. I'm not the person to come out and say something like that but who in their right mind thinks this stuff up. Gay's raising kids is no different than straight people raising kids. Just because 2 people are the same sex and choose to raise a child does not mean they are going to say to that child "oh you should be gay , or you should be a lesbian". Gay's and lesbians are regular people with brains,morals, ideals, and the right mindset to not "convince" their adopted child to be gay. It's more straight couples who try and convince there children not to be gay. I want to write more , i really do but i have been packing for days on end with little sleep and i do need to rest or else i feel like im gonna pass out on the keyboard. ..........and one last note , justine i can't wait to get back posting again so I can hear what you have to say about life,freedoms , and everything. oh wait a minute what did i want to say yes.......RIGHT listen , you do not need to tell people to stay on topic , your not their parents, your not the administrator of this site, your not god, and i don't think your my principal, so next time you get some clever idea of trying to keep people in line by making a stupid comment DON'T.
until we speak again.
 
Gay's raising kids is no different than straight people raising kids.

Then it must also be no different then pedophiles raising kids, coprophiles raising kids, zoophiles raising kids, and necrophiels raising kids.
 
Libertarian said:
Then it must also be no different then pedophiles raising kids, coprophiles raising kids, zoophiles raising kids, and necrophiels raising kids.

Well, if you could logically make the argument that homosexuality was akin to any of those things, then yes, you'd be right.

Unfortunately, the logic chain is missing a link or two.
 
all of those behaviors are abnormal....now, do you admit to being a homosexual?
 
Libertarian said:
all of those behaviors are abnormal....now, do you admit to being a homosexual?

If those are all abnormal, then so is abusing alcohol, being a bigot, and jaywalking. Should everyone who is "guilty" of any of those offenses not be allowed to have kids either?

And does supporting gay rights make one a "self-identified homosexual?"
 
You asked me to draw the parallel to homosexuality, zoophilia, coprophilia, etc, and I just did it, thus answering your question, even though you refuse to admit that you are a homosexual....now, try answering it.
 
Libertarian said:
You asked me to draw the parallel to homosexuality, zoophilia, coprophilia, etc, and I just did it, thus answering your question, even though you refuse to admit that you are a homosexual....now, try answering it.

No, you didn't.

You claimed that they were all connected because they were abnormal. I pointed out several other things that were abnormal, and asked if they were also worthy of denying someone the right to bear a child. You avoided answering the question, and again fixiated on whether or not I'm gay, a topic which has no relevance.
 
Axctually, you asked me to show the link, I did, then you tried to get away with not answering my question by asking me a second one.

Is it safe to assume you don't wish to answer the question asking whether you are a homosexual?
 
RightatNYU said:
No, you didn't.

You claimed that they were all connected because they were abnormal. I pointed out several other things that were abnormal, and asked if they were also worthy of denying someone the right to bear a child. You avoided answering the question, and again fixiated on whether or not I'm gay, a topic which has no relevance.


Well let's break it down here, just because something is "abnormal" doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. Being Left-handed is "abnormal", is it bad? No.
Being a Red head is "abnormal" is that Bad? No.
Any trait or preference that does not coincide with the majority is "abnormal." This is not to say all things "abnormal" are bad.

What's being missed here is that all the things that Lib has claimed as being abnormal, with the exception of homosexuality, are actually in and of themselves harmful. They either create victims or are directly harmful to the person possessing such proclivity.
Someone who molests children harms children. Someone who drinks to the point of addiction will cause physical health harm.
Someone who happens to be gay is not causing harm to themselves or anyone else.
Risky sexual behavior is not a direct effect of homosexuality as it is not limited to homosexuals.
Not all homosexuals partake of risky sexual behaviors, nor do they target others who are unable to make informed decisions or give informed consent.

All Eagles are birds, All penguins are birds. But all Eagles are NOT penguins.
 
Libertarian said:
Axctually, you asked me to show the link, I did, then you tried to get away with not answering my question by asking me a second one.

Is it safe to assume you don't wish to answer the question asking whether you are a homosexual?

I'm curious, what question did you ask me? Whether or not I was gay?

How about a deal? You give me an answer to my question:

If those are all abnormal, then so is abusing alcohol, being a bigot, and jaywalking. Should everyone who is "guilty" of any of those offenses not be allowed to have kids either?

And I'll give you an answer to yours.
 
galenrox said:
Let me get this straight libertarian, you now believe that everyone that is abnormal is gay? Correct me if I'm wrong.


Find where I ever posted that!

As the moderators say, "put up or shut up"
 
galenrox said:
Dude, 90% of the time I have no idea what point you're trying to make, that's why I said "correct me if I'm wrong." I thought that saying that would be pretty straightforward, but since you didn't get it, I'll make it a little more simple for you, if I am wrong about what I said about your point, then tell me that I am wrong by telling me what your point is, in other words, what's your point?
It's really not that hard.


Oh, I get it, you can make the most inflammatory accusations created without a shred of evidence, as long as you preface it by saying "correct em if I am wrong"?

Galenrox, correct me if I am wrong, but are you a chickenhawk heavy leather HIV positive pedophile serial molesting public restroom stall lurking homosexual from the liberalforum.org? I am not saying you are, I am just asking.....
 
He was making an assumption about your ideas through what he's read. You're making enflamatory insults about galenrox's character and person that aren't based on anything, but malice and your dislike for homosexuals and anyone who believes that they are people too.

See that? That was an assumption made from things I've heard you say.

galenrox has said nothing that could paint him to be an HIV positive homosexual pedophile etc.

galenrox,
Libertarian,

Please do not let this turn into a party of throwing insults at each other, or else I'll throw it in the basement where it would belong. Thank you. Have a nice day :2razz: .
 
Last edited:
How about getting your own avatar? I have been using this one for months and I don't want to be mistaken for you.
 
Libertarian said:
Galenrox, correct me if I am wrong, but are you a chickenhawk heavy leather HIV positive pedophile serial molesting public restroom stall lurking homosexual from the liberalforum.org? I am not saying you are, I am just asking.....

How offensive does this moron have to be?
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
galenrox,
Libertarian,

Please do not let this turn into a party of throwing insults at each other, or else I'll throw it in the basement where it would belong. Thank you. Have a nice day :2razz: .

galenrox has been quite polite. The hateful Libertarian has been the exact opposite. Please throw him in the basement forthwith.
 
Libertarian has been banned for 5 days:

- Exceesive hate speech (rude and name calling only to promote negative speech - aka troll)
- Copyright infringement (full posting of material & sometimes without source)
- Distruption to the forums as defined in the rules

All these after multiple attempts of kindly asking this person to stop.

If there are any questions - please PM me or any of the MODS.
 
vauge said:
Libertarian has been banned for 5 days:

- Exceesive hate speech (rude and name calling only to promote negative speech - aka troll)
- Copyright infringement (full posting of material & sometimes without source)
- Distruption to the forums as defined in the rules

All these after multiple attempts of kindly asking this person to stop.

If there are any questions - please PM me or any of the MODS.

Well done!

Personally I hate to see someone being silenced, and there are [plenty of people (Vauge himself included) that I often strongly disagree with, but sheesh, that guy was just going way too far and spreading hate filled nonsense for absolutely no reason.
 
He never got a chance to answer my question and find out if I was gay or not.....oh well.

=)
 
Can we get back, at least, to where we were before the whole thing got so blown out of porportion?

Please?

I'll repost my last, just so we know where we were.

Well let's break it down here, just because something is "abnormal" doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. Being Left-handed is "abnormal", is it bad? No.
Being a Red head is "abnormal" is that Bad? No.
Any trait or preference that does not coincide with the majority is "abnormal." This is not to say all things "abnormal" are bad.

What's being missed here is that all the things that Lib has claimed as being abnormal, with the exception of homosexuality, are actually in and of themselves harmful. They either create victims or are directly harmful to the person possessing such proclivity.
Someone who molests children harms children. Someone who drinks to the point of addiction will cause physical health harm.
Someone who happens to be gay is not causing harm to themselves or anyone else.
Risky sexual behavior is not a direct effect of homosexuality as it is not limited to homosexuals.
Not all homosexuals partake of risky sexual behaviors, nor do they target others who are unable to make informed decisions or give informed consent.

All Eagles are birds, All penguins are birds. But all Eagles are NOT penguins.
 
JustineCredible said:
Can we get back, at least, to where we were before the whole thing got so blown out of porportion?

Please?

I'll repost my last, just so we know where we were.

As far as I can tell, I think you're preaching to the choir.
 
Back
Top Bottom