Europe to destroy traditional family and sexual identity

Originally posted by thebtheb

Originally posted by Aeons
The mouth is a sexual organ - You can taste and smell all sorts of things about your partner that you are not aware of consciously but which have reproductive or bonding meaning.

Then that should prove once and for all that if homosexuals are driven to have sex with each other ,there must be all kinds of tastes, smells about each other that are bonding them and to them, mean something, thus making their behavior based on something natural.

No idea. There is no research into it.

I haven't ever argued about the naturalness of homosexuality.

Doesn't stop me from being concerned about the governments consistently assaulting the concept of family to make it into a complete bureaucratic abstraction.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Annee
Homophobic children are put on a register in the UK

Reply:-

Good..

You were refering to the following incident.

Are you sure that it is good that a 10 year old boy should be put on a 'homo-phobic' register for calling another boy 'gay bay'?

You think that is good?

I think it's a lot better than the kid thinking he needs to try to change his "sexual identity" to conform to social standards set out by closed-minded neanderthals or "find another way out" (AKA suicide, you know -- that epidemic among homosexual youth right now... nevermind it's not your kid so you don't care if he kills himself as a direct cause of your little brat emotionally bullying him... that's when your piece of garbage child needs defending, right?)

Stop enthusing about word definitions and how "politically correct" you want family semantics to be and then crying about other people being "politically correct" for ADDING more options to a damn form. Seriously, you might have a little intellectual dignity left come the end of this discussion if you just stop all together.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
So you think "equity and fairness" is not giving gays/lesbians the very same rights you expect, simply because it goes against your faith??? And you have the nerve of talking about tolerance

My faith?

I'm an athiest.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by MrXYZ
So you think "equity and fairness" is not giving gays/lesbians the very same rights you expect, simply because it goes against your faith??? And you have the nerve of talking about tolerance

My faith?

I'm an athiest.

Shhhh.... The commie left has been trying to hard to convince everyone that the Atheists all back them. Most of the ones I know don't....but you'll hurt their pride to find out they are wrong.

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy
You're going to tell me that, in the Bible, it says that you can't put "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" boxes underneath "Mother" and "Father" on a passport form? That's morally repugnant, eh? Who is that harming? You? Families? Get real.

Sorry, that's not religious belief, that's religiously absurd scripture-warping at best.

I'm not a Chritian. I am an athiest.

Originally posted by Aeons
Doesn't stop me from being concerned about the governments consistently assaulting the concept of family to make it into a complete bureaucratic abstraction.

Nobody is replacing your strict semantic morality here. I can see why you type of people get mad when definitions of things are changed in the name of equal rights; if it's not spelled out for you in bold text you simply can't investigate more before crying about how "politically correct" everything is while you yourself go around over-enthusing about definitions that AREN'T EVEN BEING CHANGED..

You might as well take that "politically correct madness" sticker that you folks seem to stick to everything else and glue it right on to your own foreheads. It would be a hell of a lot more accurately placed there.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Annee
You confuse people's rights with belief.

Gays are people. They are not a belief.

Yet you seek rights for one group (gays - you have no objection to gays adopting) but not for others (Christians - you do object to Christians adopting, very strongly).

Who doesn't have freedom of religion? Tell me.

Mostly I said it to annoy you.

In America if you have strong religious beliefs you can request that be part of the adoption. If the children are wards of the court - - I do not know if that still applies.

Originally posted by ollncasino
I'm not a Chritian. I am an athiest.

Clearly one without any religious knowledge at all. Since you think adding a line underneath the words "Mother" and "Father" that say "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" could possibly be against someone's religious beliefs. Sounds more like partisan retardation than anything.

Originally posted by Annee
Who doesn't have freedom of religion? Tell me.

You said you would not object to gays adopting your grandchildren but you would object to Christians doing so.

You are pro Gay and anti-Christian.

reply to post by RidgidHarpy


As a descendent of neaderthals, I object to your sub-species bias.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by RidgidHarpy

 

As a descendent of neaderthals, I object to your sub-species bias.

And ignore whatever truths make you look foolish.

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy
Clearly one without any religious knowledge at all. Since you think adding a line underneath the words "Mother" and "Father" that say "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" could possibly be against someone's religious beliefs.

Sounds more like partisan retardation than anything.

A clear ad hominem attack.

I have no religious knowledge and I am a 'partisan retard' according to you?

I am neither anti-gay or anti-Christian, although I suspect strongly that you would greatly prefer it if I was anti the latter but pro the former.

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy

Originally posted by Aeons
Doesn't stop me from being concerned about the governments consistently assaulting the concept of family to make it into a complete bureaucratic abstraction.

Nobody is replacing your strict semantic morality here. I can see why you type of people get mad when definitions of things are changed in the name of equal rights; if it's not spelled out for you in bold text you simply can't investigate more before crying about how "politically correct" everything is while you yourself go around over-enthusing about definitions that AREN'T EVEN BEING CHANGED..

You might as well take that "politically correct madness" sticker that you folks seem to stick to everything else and glue it right on to your own foreheads. It would be a hell of a lot more accurately placed there.

The definitions are being changed.

You see, I wanted to be like you. But what I do, is I go look. I look at what all sides claim. What I found is that while I sympathize with you, the people you are screaming about.... they aren't wrong.

So you stick me in a hard place. What you just said is a lie, one that you believe, but if you went and looked you'd find out it was. And then you'd come back and make something up about how it is okay that it is a lie because the ends justify the means. I've had the argument before. When it comes down to it, you don't really care, you just care that you "won."

I don't agree with the homophobes - I find them annoying. However, I do share some of the fundamental concerns they have about the intrusive government expansion of making family into a government creche.

I don't have any interest in being politically correct. I'd rather be Politically RATIONAL. Something both sides seem to be missing in their all out war to win.

reply to post by RidgidHarpy


Oh no. I mean it literally. Your beliefs are out of communist think tanks, and as a Classical Liberal I reject them as the communist nonsense they are.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy
Clearly one without any religious knowledge at all. Since you think adding a line underneath the words "Mother" and "Father" that say "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" could possibly be against someone's religious beliefs.

Sounds more like partisan retardation than anything.

A clear ad hominem attack.

I have no religious knowledge and I am a 'partisan retard' according to you?

I am neither anti-gay or anti-Christian, although I suspect strongly that you would greatly prefer it if I was anti the latter but pro the former.

edit on 14-10-2011 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)

You should look up the definition of terms like "ad hominem" before using them. Your last line is the most ad hominem thing that has been said by far.

My apologies, I'll disregard any more of your posts, you clearly have no intentions to engage in arguments. Keep sputtering, pro.

P.S. the "argument" you're having with annee right now is hilarious because she is trying to point out the current double-standards from "certain people" via adverse examples and it's going right over your head.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by RidgidHarpy

 

Oh no. I mean it literally. Your beliefs are out of communist think tanks, and as a Classical Liberal I reject them as the communist nonsense they are.

edit on 2011/10/14 by Aeons because: (no reason given)

What beliefs do I have? You need to tell me, surely. I don't know my beliefs, you do, and I'M the communist.. right? I guess you'd be the thought-flinging dictator, so that makes sense.

If it makes me a "commie" to say that you'd have to be a complete fool to think that changing some words on a piece of paper is going to redefine everyone's morals and "family values", then I'd rather be a "commie" than a ridiculous alarmist with no attachment to reality in any of my arguments.

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy
P.S. the "argument" you're having with annee right now is hilarious because she is trying to point out the current double-standards from "certain people" via adverse examples and it's going right over your head.

What has gone right over your head, is that it isn't about 'gay rights' its about what is best for the children.

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy
If it makes me a "commie" to say that you'd have to be a complete fool to think that changing some words on a piece of paper is going to redefine everyone's morals and "family values", then I'd rather be a "commie" than a ridiculous alarmist with no attachment to reality in any of my arguments.

So if it doesn't matter either way, why change it at all?

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by RidgidHarpy
If it makes me a "commie" to say that you'd have to be a complete fool to think that changing some words on a piece of paper is going to redefine everyone's morals and "family values", then I'd rather be a "commie" than a ridiculous alarmist with no attachment to reality in any of my arguments.

So if it doesn't matter either way, why change it at all?

So that men don't have to put their name under "Mother" and go through a series of phone calls and paperwork to make sure it's proper... Is that so hard to understand?

It's not complicated, and it's certainly not "destroying families" (unless of course someone magically correlates that to reality for once instead of just saying it as if it holds any weight), it's making it make more sense in processing for "modern families". I couldn't even force myself to care about something so non-affecting to me but pointlessly challenging to others. then people come in here, adhering to strict family semantics and screaming "PC MADNESS!"; just another lot of irrational hypocrites caught up in partisan political madness.