Gay Adult Wants vs Children's Needs: Mississippi Weighs Gay Adoption

[Seawytch]

At an age when I was old enough to know the difference between normal (straight) and abnormal (any of the freak ways)

And who told you the difference between "normal" and "abnormal"? You see the logical trap you have put yourself in?

Didn't have to be told. Unlike you, I'm smart enough to figure out two of the same things don't attract normally. Look at magnets. Two of the same repel each other. Any more questions fool?

So you were attracted to men but repelled at the same time?

 

[Conservative65]

At an age when I was old enough to know the difference between normal (straight) and abnormal (any of the freak ways)

And who told you the difference between "normal" and "abnormal"? You see the logical trap you have put yourself in?

Didn't have to be told. Unlike you, I'm smart enough to figure out two of the same things don't attract normally. Look at magnets. Two of the same repel each other. Any more questions fool?

So you were attracted to men but repelled at the same time?

Nice try but typical of your kind. I can't help it you chose to be a faggot. I chose to be normal and heterosexual.

 

[Syriusly]

Why are you pissed? Not everyone jumps up and down about you expecting them to thing your faggot lifestyle is OK.

I'm not pissed. What would I have to be pissed about? I'm legally married to the love of my life and we have a beautiful family. Life is GOOD.

You're "married" to someone of the same sex. Nothing beautiful about that. Funny you use being a freak as good. Nothing good about that.

You keep forgetting that in this day and age, you're the freak not gays. You homophobes are the minority now.

Don't worry, we'll still bake cakes for y'all.

Bigots like him are a dying breed- bitter old white dudes who cling to their bigotry like a child clutches the sand in the surf.

You can cling to the faggots if you want. If you want to join the 2nd class crowd, I'll agree that's where you belong.

f*ggot- n*gger- k*ke- c*nt

All words used by bigots- all used for the same reason.

 

[Conservative65]

I'm not pissed. What would I have to be pissed about? I'm legally married to the love of my life and we have a beautiful family. Life is GOOD.

You're "married" to someone of the same sex. Nothing beautiful about that. Funny you use being a freak as good. Nothing good about that.

You keep forgetting that in this day and age, you're the freak not gays. You homophobes are the minority now.

Don't worry, we'll still bake cakes for y'all.

Bigots like him are a dying breed- bitter old white dudes who cling to their bigotry like a child clutches the sand in the surf.

You can cling to the faggots if you want. If you want to join the 2nd class crowd, I'll agree that's where you belong.

f*ggot- n*gger- k*ke- c*nt

All words used by bigots- all used for the same reason.

Afraid to spell them out? Much like the typical cowardly Liberal.

They are reserved for situations where they apply. Don't confuse character identification with bigotry.

 

[rcfieldz]

The rot of souls taught in today's media.

 

[JoeB131]

Didn't have to be told. Unlike you, I'm smart enough to figure out two of the same things don't attract normally. Look at magnets. Two of the same repel each other. Any more questions fool?

So why do you think some people choose to be gay? This should be hilarious.

 

[Silhouette]

Didn't have to be told. Unlike you, I'm smart enough to figure out two of the same things don't attract normally. Look at magnets. Two of the same repel each other. Any more questions fool?

So why do you think some people choose to be gay? This should be hilarious.

Choose to be.

But that choice should not be a lifestyle forced on kids as a matter of law to structurally deprive them for life of either a mother or father. That's where we as the custodians of orphans MUST draw the line. Be married alone in your house. But when you try to draw kids into that lifestyle, our most vulnerable citizens without any voice or advocacy for them beyond the adoption agent and application form, are "harvested" once again cajoling society gay-teen-suicide style with the LGBT chant: "since they're vulnerable already, why deny them placement with homes that REALLY want them?"

It's that "REALLY want them" part that should wake you up from your slumber. See the OP for details.

 

[JoeB131]

Choose to be.

But that choice should not be a lifestyle forced on kids as a matter of law to structurally deprive them for life of either a mother or father.

then you think we should ban divorce, then? That deprives more kids of a parent of a certain gender than gay marriage does.

That's where we as the custodians of orphans MUST draw the line. Be married alone in your house. But when you try to draw kids into that lifestyle, our most vulnerable citizens without any voice or advocacy for them beyond the adoption agent and application form, are "harvested" once again cajoling society gay-teen-suicide style with the LGBT chant: "since they're vulnerable already, why deny them placement with homes that REALLY want them?"

My dear friend who is gay raised three kids with her partner. (Two of her own, one of her partners). All of those kids are straight.

It's that "REALLY want them" part that should wake you up from your slumber. See the OP for details.

Buddy, the problem is, most straight couples want white babies, not teens of color with problems. There are thousands of kids who could benefit from adoption and no one is going to get any gay on them.

The kids might learn- gasp- tolerance.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Take it up with the mercyproject. Gays have no business adopting children...none whatsoever

Even if the gay people adopting were the paragon of humanity as to morality, they CANNOT provide the opposite gender as a vital role model for any child in their home. It can't be done. So just on the physical structure of the marriage, it cannot provide the best environment for children. They are always inferior marriages when it comes to kids. As usual, when gays get one increment of law, they assume all others must follow. But there are others involved here: children. They can live their quiet "married" gay life at home but when it comes to involving children, states still have the say-so

Interesting to say the least!

So with that it is safe to say that you would be alright removing a child from a single parent home too, right?

Remember in a single parent home the child will not have the opposite sex there to help them in life, and how can we subject a child to that type of life, or is it different as long as the parent of the single parent home is straight?

Please answer the questions.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

This is another gay bashing thread by the OP'er, and the OP'er is like the old racist that once thought it was wrong for interracial couples to marry and have children, and will be the minority in the near future.

The OP'er has no problem with children being bounced around foster families or living in a single parent home but has a major issue with a Same Sex couple raising a child that has no parents because the couple is gay.

How sad and pathetic is that?

So if the OP'er had a child and the OP'er and their partner passed away and their child became a orphan the OP'er would rather have their child raised in Foster Care where some kids have been mistreated physically and sexually and not by a Same Sex couple because of the OP'er hatred for the Homosexual community!?!

In the end the world will march on and those like the OP'er will end up becoming more and more like ISIL while this fine nation moves forward with the understanding that if two people can give a child a caring home then they should not be denied because of their sexuality.

Finally, it is the OP'er claiming a child need both parents of the opposite sex, and is fine with single parent homes because the possibility the parent might one day get married again, but what if that single parent got married to a same sex partner should the child then be removed from the home even though the child is the parent actual child?

Gay men have children with straight women and then go on with their gay life, so should the gay father be denied his parental rights because of his sexuality?

I am sure I know the answer but it will be enjoyable to read the OP'er response...

 

[Silhouette]

This is another gay bashing thread by the OP'er, and the OP'er is like the old racist that once thought it was wrong for interracial couples to marry and have children, and will be the minority in the near future.

The OP'er has no problem with children being bounced around foster families or living in a single parent home but has a major issue with a Same Sex couple raising a child that has no parents because the couple is gay....

Incorrect. Interracial couples did not and do not deprive children of a father and mother, if they are straight in behavior (not a static thing inescapable like race). A black man and a white woman still provide the necessary elements to children in the married home. Gays of any race or description guarantee children in that home will NEVER have either a mother or father.

It's a question of physical structure and whether or not the children (who come in both genders) will have their gender (themselves) represented in a parent in the married home.

I'm not about orphans being deprived, asshole. I'm about the screening process for them going to new homes to be one such that they are not sent out of the fire and into the frying pan on "high heat", just because gays want them to be.

 

[Silhouette]

Just lesbians are challenging this Mississippi law. Wonder why? See the OP for details..

 

[Syriusly]

This is another gay bashing thread by the OP'er, and the OP'er is like the old racist that once thought it was wrong for interracial couples to marry and have children, and will be the minority in the near future.

The OP'er has no problem with children being bounced around foster families or living in a single parent home but has a major issue with a Same Sex couple raising a child that has no parents because the couple is gay....

Incorrect. Interracial couples did not and do not deprive children of a father and mother, .

No- he was quite correct- during the court case of Loving v. Virginia, Virginia actually argued that allowing inter-racial couples was wrong because their children would be harmed by their inter-racial marriage.

Of course- that was as stupid as your argument.

Marriage does not deprive any children of any parents. Marriage may - or may not result in children.

But if a couple does have children- preventing the couple from marrying doesn't magically mean that the children will have opposite gender parents.

Preventing them from marrying only ensures that the children do not have married parents.

Which is a harm to children.

Which begs the question- why do you want to harm the children of gay parents?

 

[Silhouette]

Which is a harm to children.

Which begs the question- why do you want to harm the children of gay parents?

The only people harming children of gay parents (a thing that doesn't exist) are those people insisting a child never have both genders in their life as parents.

 

[Syriusly]

Which is a harm to children.

Which begs the question- why do you want to harm the children of gay parents?

The only people harming children of gay parents (a thing that doesn't exist) are those people insisting a child never have both genders in their life as parents.

No- the people harming the children of gay parents are bigots like you- who still try to deprive those children of having married parents.

Still waiting for you to suggest the law requiring lesbians to be sterlyzed to prevent them from having children without a male parent in their lives.

 

[Silhouette]

No- the people harming the children of gay parents are bigots like you- who still try to deprive those children of having married parents.

Still waiting for you to suggest the law requiring lesbians to be sterlyzed to prevent them from having children without a male parent in their lives.

What's more important to a child's psychology? Marriage or having a mom and dad in marriage? We all know the answer is "having a mom and dad in marriage". "Marriage" is just a word to a child. Whereas "mom" or "dad" is everything in the world to a child.

 

[Syriusly]

No- the people harming the children of gay parents are bigots like you- who still try to deprive those children of having married parents.

Still waiting for you to suggest the law requiring lesbians to be sterlyzed to prevent them from having children without a male parent in their lives.

What's more important to a child's psychology? Marriage or having a mom and dad in marriage? We all know the answer is "having a mom and dad in marriage". "Marriage" is just a word to a child. Whereas "mom" or "dad" is everything in the world to a child.

The universe Silhouette does not constitute 'we'.

What is most important for a child's psychology? As a parent I would say having good parents or a good parent.

What is most important for a child's emotional and financial well being? Having two married parents who are dedicated to raising the children the child well.

Again- I will point out- preventing a gay couple from marrying doesn't provide their children with a magical opposite gender parent- it only deprives the children of married parents.

So when are you going to be honest and tell everyone that you want to require sterlization of lesbians to prevent them from having children?

 

[Silhouette]

The universe Silhouette does not constitute 'we'.

What is most important for a child's psychology? As a parent I would say having good parents or a good parent.

What is most important for a child's emotional and financial well being? Having two married parents who are dedicated to raising the children the child well.

I guarantee you that a stunning majority of people, and many gay people too, believe that a child should have both a mother and father in their daily lives. Anything represented from you to the opposite is a bold lie. Now that that matter is cleared up..

..Your opinion is thinking about the situation from the adults'-wants POV. The majority of the world in contrast is thinking of the situation from the child's POV. Now, which frame of reference is more likely to be concerned with the wellbeing of children, understanding that one of the paramount edicts of good parenting is to put aside adult wants on many occasions in order to see to a child's needs?

 

[mdk]

The universe Silhouette does not constitute 'we'.

What is most important for a child's psychology? As a parent I would say having good parents or a good parent.

What is most important for a child's emotional and financial well being? Having two married parents who are dedicated to raising the children the child well.

I guarantee you that a stunning majority of people, and many gay people too, believe that a child should have both a mother and father in their daily lives. Anything represented from you to the opposite is a bold lie. Now that that matter is cleared up..

..Your opinion is thinking about the situation from the adults'-wants POV. The majority of the world in contrast is thinking of the situation from the child's POV. Now, which frame of reference is more likely to be concerned with the wellbeing of children, understanding that one of the paramount edicts of good parenting is to put aside adult wants on many occasions in order to see to a child's needs?

A majority of people believe you so much that only one state doesn't allow gays to adopt. lol. One. That law is presently being challenged and likely will fall.

You wouldn't know the edicts of being a good parent if it was poured in your lap.

 

[Silhouette]

A majority of people believe you so much that only one state doesn't allow gays to adopt. lol. One. That law is presently being challenged and likely will fall.

You wouldn't know the edicts of being a good parent if it was poured in your lap.

Only because that was forced upon them by a new set of "civil rights" (for behaviors). Care to have a national referendum on it? No? Didn't think so..