Florida courts: "You gay people can't adopt children"

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Good job being an arsehole isn't or you'd be Typhoid ****ing Mary.

[Solly]

Damn. I thought you had me on ignore.

[Agathon]

Are you one of those people who are bigots through ignorance, PA; or just one of those who, deep down, is really a sick ****?

[Solly]

I can't continue this conversation, Ming is probably watching.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nah. You can gussy up your bigotry in religious drag, just proving you're as regressive as the next Ayatollah, and P.A. can swan about pontificating about 'child welfare concern' but you're just two sides of the same coin.

Regressive as the next Ayatollah? I don't force women to work in the home, or to wear a veil.

'see P.A.'s PREVIOUS posts for racist and homphobic crap' not necessarily this thread

Even so, it does not make this statement homophobic. His previous posts on different topics are irrelevant to the topic at hand.

- although with the neat attempt to link automatically link homosexuality and child endangerment

Child endangerment? You'd think I tried to link homosexuality with pedophilia! I do no such thing. In fact, my argument is less restrictive than the one in the article, in permitting gay people to adopt.

[Agathon]

Petition to the mods. Please place the text "GAY BOYZ ARE MY KIND OF BOYZ" in big pink letters in PA's sig file - permanently.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
I can't continue this conversation, Ming is probably watching.

**** you and your *****ing bigoted, stupid, nonsensical remarks.

[chequita guevara]

Gay people suck!

[Agathon]

Damn those gays!!!

[Urban Ranger]

People, would you stop feeding that Stewie troll?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Since most children are molested and abused in hetero homes, it stands to reason that children are safer with gay people.

That is OBVIOUSLY, STUPIDLY a fallacy. Most children are also RAISED in hetero homes, and even if you talk about proportions I would seriously doubt that there is a sufficient sample size.

[Capt Dizle]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


I have yet to see any proof offered for this assertion.

Some things are self evident. Why don't you weigh the number of children placed by God (or nature if it makes you feel better) in the hands of heterosexual couples versus the sum total of homosexual offspring?

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by jimmytrick


Some things are self evident. Why don't you weigh the number of children placed by God (or nature if it makes you feel better) in the hands of heterosexual couples versus the sum total of (*) offspring?

*= Infertile aka "barren" heterosexual couples'

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Some things are self evident. Why don't you weigh the number of children placed by God (or nature if it makes you feel better) in the hands of heterosexual couples versus the sum total of homosexual offspring?

[Berzerker]

Drogue -

I can see Berz's point. While I think that gay people should be able to do whatever they want, I can't help but think I would rather have been raised by a mum and a dad than by two dads.

Thank you

However, there are many children who need adoption, and I would far rather they were adopted by loving gay parents that kept in the system. So I would support a law saying that gay people should be able to adopt, but personally I would rather see children adopted by a mother and a father than by gay parents.

Yes, better in a permanent home than state facilities or temporary homes where kids are effectively shuffled around. But having a mom and a dad is better than 2 daddies or 2 mommies and no amount of "homosexuals can provide a suitable home" can alter that reality. If there are no married couples available, then we can look at homosexual couples for adoption privileges...