Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I said nothing of living arrangements for children. I'm speaking only of Sexual Orientation. I'm assuming that you accept red hair, left handedness, green eyes, etc., all of which are "natural" to only a small percentage of the population. Do you reject those, just because the numbers are small?What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?
no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Why do you think it wouldn't be? Let's say that it's entirely a choice, and I lived 1,000 years ago when gay people were tortured, killed, burned at the stake. We know that such things happened. Now, knowing that, would I really choose such a thing? Did I just want to give my society the finger? If it's a choice, why wouldn't I choose the one that wouldn't get me killed by the authorities if they found out?What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?
no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Send a gay couple to the moon and civilization ends there, send a man and woman to the moon, and a whole new civilization starts. Liberals still think homosexuality is natural. Sheesh
I said nothing of living arrangements for children. I'm speaking only of Sexual Orientation. I'm assuming that you accept red hair, left handedness, green eyes, etc., all of which are "natural" to only a small percentage of the population. Do you reject those, just because the numbers are small?What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?
no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Are step-families "unnatural"? Are "adopted children" unnatural?
I think that no matter how many words you use, or how pretty you try to dress things up, anything other than full equality will clearly shine forth as 'separate but equal.'
And therefore unacceptable.
Homosexuality is a part of nature, yes, period.
It replicates itself in every generation and ever so many species.
Why do you think it wouldn't be? Let's say that it's entirely a choice, and I lived 1,000 years ago when gay people were tortured, killed, burned at the stake. We know that such things happened. Now, knowing that, would I really choose such a thing? Did I just want to give my society the finger? If it's a choice, why wouldn't I choose the one that wouldn't get me killed by the authorities if they found out?no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Send a gay couple to the moon and civilization ends there, send a man and woman to the moon, and a whole new civilization starts. Liberals still think homosexuality is natural. Sheesh
So step-parents and adopted children are "natural"?I said nothing of living arrangements for children. I'm speaking only of Sexual Orientation. I'm assuming that you accept red hair, left handedness, green eyes, etc., all of which are "natural" to only a small percentage of the population. Do you reject those, just because the numbers are small?no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Are step-families "unnatural"? Are "adopted children" unnatural?
No neither, but then again, the children are Always created between a male and a female. It can happen in no other coupling.
Get it?
Not really the question now is it? What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?
Blind is natural, but only for a few, by all means they should not be prohibited from driving semi trucks.
Not really the question now is it? What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?What if gay is natural, but it's just natural for a minority of the population? Will you accept it then?
Blind is natural, but only for a few, by all means they should not be prohibited from driving semi trucks.
But what if it is part of the "natural" order? Will you accept it then?Correct. These people wish to redefine the natural order...and force everyone to accept it...it doesn't work, NEVER will.no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Sure, but very few would ever want to be burned at the stake. So, are you suggesting that all of these people, down through the ages, all chose to be gay because they liked pain?Why do you think it wouldn't be? Let's say that it's entirely a choice, and I lived 1,000 years ago when gay people were tortured, killed, burned at the stake. We know that such things happened. Now, knowing that, would I really choose such a thing? Did I just want to give my society the finger? If it's a choice, why wouldn't I choose the one that wouldn't get me killed by the authorities if they found out?Send a gay couple to the moon and civilization ends there, send a man and woman to the moon, and a whole new civilization starts. Liberals still think homosexuality is natural. Sheesh
You don't believe that masochists exist?
I don't spend any time worry about two people who love each other making a lifelong commitment.
But what if it is part of the "natural" order? Will you accept it then?Correct. These people wish to redefine the natural order...and force everyone to accept it...it doesn't work, NEVER will.no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
So step-parents and adopted children are "natural"?I said nothing of living arrangements for children. I'm speaking only of Sexual Orientation. I'm assuming that you accept red hair, left handedness, green eyes, etc., all of which are "natural" to only a small percentage of the population. Do you reject those, just because the numbers are small?
Are step-families "unnatural"? Are "adopted children" unnatural?
No neither, but then again, the children are Always created between a male and a female. It can happen in no other coupling.
Get it?
Did you know that we can make a child that has three biological parents? That if you want only a girl we should soon be able to make one from two women, no male genetics at all? If I make a baby in a lab, we do that, is it natural?
Why do you think it wouldn't be? Let's say that it's entirely a choice, and I lived 1,000 years ago when gay people were tortured, killed, burned at the stake. We know that such things happened. Now, knowing that, would I really choose such a thing? Did I just want to give my society the finger? If it's a choice, why wouldn't I choose the one that wouldn't get me killed by the authorities if they found out?no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Send a gay couple to the moon and civilization ends there, send a man and woman to the moon, and a whole new civilization starts. Liberals still think homosexuality is natural. Sheesh
I agree. Wouldn't it be odd of me to say then, well, I can't accept small pox? Wouldn't I be better off just to deal with it as needed?But what if it is part of the "natural" order? Will you accept it then?Correct. These people wish to redefine the natural order...and force everyone to accept it...it doesn't work, NEVER will.
Small pox is part of the "natural order."
I said nothing of living arrangements for children. I'm speaking only of Sexual Orientation. I'm assuming that you accept red hair, left handedness, green eyes, etc., all of which are "natural" to only a small percentage of the population. Do you reject those, just because the numbers are small?no....because it is abnormal for the rest of the population......because it is not 'natural' for children to have 2 mothers or 2 fathers....marriage is the basis for the family unit which is the basic foundation of society....the family unit is naturally composed of a mother, a father, and a child....
Are step-families "unnatural"? Are "adopted children" unnatural?
No neither, but then again, the children are Always created between a male and a female. It can happen in no other coupling.
Get it?
Oh I don't know that I'd say that but it's been down. The question is, if it's a choice, why would I risk it?Why do you think it wouldn't be? Let's say that it's entirely a choice, and I lived 1,000 years ago when gay people were tortured, killed, burned at the stake. We know that such things happened. Now, knowing that, would I really choose such a thing? Did I just want to give my society the finger? If it's a choice, why wouldn't I choose the one that wouldn't get me killed by the authorities if they found out?Send a gay couple to the moon and civilization ends there, send a man and woman to the moon, and a whole new civilization starts. Liberals still think homosexuality is natural. Sheesh
No one is advocating burning gay people at the stake, nimrod.
