Gay Marriage Is About to Be Legal in Alabama

[elektra]

The Dinah Shore doesn't exist anymore...it's called something else...but it sure was/is in Palm Springs. But...DO tell me more about where I live, eh?

Yes, for idiots we will tell you to come to Palm Springs, but the Dinah Shore Golf Tournament was never played in Palm Springs. Always Ranch Mirage, where Dinah Shore lived.

You are simply always wrong.

What Is the Origin of the Dinah Shore Golf Tournament Golfsmith

First Dinah Shore Tournament
Jane Blalock shot a 54-hole total of 213 to win the first Dinah Shore tournament in 1972 at Mission Hills Country Club in California, the only home the event has known.

Mission Hills Country Club
34-600 Mission Hills Drive
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270

 

[Syriusly]

But that does happen occasionally. That is what the courts are for....to determine constitutionality. Keep in mind, in some states, like CA, it is the people who vote in UNconstitutional laws....such as Prop 8 and earlier Prop 186.

Only unconstitutional due to an activist court that overstepped its bounds.

There is no end to this argument between us. You think the constitution means whatever suits you at the moment, and I do not.

Translation: A court that made a constitutional decision you didn't like.

No, a court MADE up something that I do not oppose to on it face, but I do oppose HOW it was allowed to happen.

So you oppose our checks and balances as written in the U.S. Constitution. Share with us your Constitutional Law background.

Where is the check/balance on the courts? It used to be the amendment process but that is next to impossible to bring about nowadays, so basically we have 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers creating new law.

I don't need a constitutional law background to talk about the constitution, I'm a fucking american.

You can talk about consitutional law- so can I.

Courts don't create new law- all they can do is repeal laws that are unconstitutional.

And thats what they are supposed to do- whether those laws have to do with guns, or religion or marriage.

 

[bodecea]

Some great pics today:

Same-sex couples marry in some Alabama counties Live updates from across the state AL.com

 

[elektra]

Eating is not a lifestyle, Washing the car is not a lifestyle. Watching movies is not a lifestyle.

You simply can not bring yourself to telling the truth or including anything remotely relating to homosexuality into your narrative.

Then you must cherry pick my post to another and add it to your quote, as if we are having that particular discussion, again why can you not be truthful?

You do not think 100% of all children want a mother and a father?

You have to show us any 3 year olds who are forced to be homosexual. That would definitely be child abuse of the highest order. Other than that, you are full of it.

How do you feel about 3 year olds being adopted into a fundamental christianity lifestyle? Or about 3 year olds being adopted into a rich lifestyle. Or 3 year olds being adopted into a Kansas farm lifestyle?

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

 

[martybegan]

Only unconstitutional due to an activist court that overstepped its bounds.

There is no end to this argument between us. You think the constitution means whatever suits you at the moment, and I do not.

Translation: A court that made a constitutional decision you didn't like.

No, a court MADE up something that I do not oppose to on it face, but I do oppose HOW it was allowed to happen.

So you oppose our checks and balances as written in the U.S. Constitution. Share with us your Constitutional Law background.

Where is the check/balance on the courts? It used to be the amendment process but that is next to impossible to bring about nowadays, so basically we have 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers creating new law.

I don't need a constitutional law background to talk about the constitution, I'm a fucking american.

You can talk about consitutional law- so can I.

Courts don't create new law- all they can do is repeal laws that are unconstitutional.

And thats what they are supposed to do- whether those laws have to do with guns, or religion or marriage.

guns and religion are explicit in the document, marriage is not. You can't just lump in the last one with the first two because you feel like it.

 

[martybegan]

Only unconstitutional due to an activist court that overstepped its bounds.

There is no end to this argument between us. You think the constitution means whatever suits you at the moment, and I do not.

Translation: A court that made a constitutional decision you didn't like.

No, a court MADE up something that I do not oppose to on it face, but I do oppose HOW it was allowed to happen.

So you oppose our checks and balances as written in the U.S. Constitution. Share with us your Constitutional Law background.

Where is the check/balance on the courts? It used to be the amendment process but that is next to impossible to bring about nowadays, so basically we have 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers creating new law.

I don't need a constitutional law background to talk about the constitution, I'm a fucking american.

List any new law created by the Supreme Court. Any.

And you don't know jack-shit about Constitutional law. However, it does give me a giggle to watch your ignorance on parade.

What it creates is psuedo-law by finding existing laws unconstitutional when there is no constitutional basis to do so in the first place. its like when they created a "right" to abortion out of thin fucking air.

 

[mdk]

You have to show us any 3 year olds who are forced to be homosexual. That would definitely be child abuse of the highest order. Other than that, you are full of it.

How do you feel about 3 year olds being adopted into a fundamental christianity lifestyle? Or about 3 year olds being adopted into a rich lifestyle. Or 3 year olds being adopted into a Kansas farm lifestyle?

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

Data vs. your obtuse personal opinion. I wonder which carries more validity? That study is certainly more valid than your claims of speaking for 99% of Americans and all children. lol.

 

[elektra]

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

Data vs. your obtuse personal opinion. I wonder which carries more validity? That study is certainly more valid than your claims of speaking for 99% of Americans and all children. lol.

You did not post data, you posted a link to commentary.

 

[Syriusly]

You have to show us any 3 year olds who are forced to be homosexual. That would definitely be child abuse of the highest order. Other than that, you are full of it.

How do you feel about 3 year olds being adopted into a fundamental christianity lifestyle? Or about 3 year olds being adopted into a rich lifestyle. Or 3 year olds being adopted into a Kansas farm lifestyle?

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

God you are such a liar.

So what does the AFCARS Report say?
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/afcarsreport20.pdf

Okay- so the facts are this 101,666 children were waiting to be adopted in 2012.

You think it is preferable for those children not to be adopted- and stay in foster care without any parents- than allowing them to have parents who are homosexual.

14% of those kids waited 5 years or more to be adopted.

Also from that report:

Emancipation 10% 23,396

Emancipation= aged out- the kids are on their own.

 

[Syriusly]

Translation: A court that made a constitutional decision you didn't like.

No, a court MADE up something that I do not oppose to on it face, but I do oppose HOW it was allowed to happen.

So you oppose our checks and balances as written in the U.S. Constitution. Share with us your Constitutional Law background.

Where is the check/balance on the courts? It used to be the amendment process but that is next to impossible to bring about nowadays, so basically we have 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers creating new law.

I don't need a constitutional law background to talk about the constitution, I'm a fucking american.

List any new law created by the Supreme Court. Any.

And you don't know jack-shit about Constitutional law. However, it does give me a giggle to watch your ignorance on parade.

What it creates is psuedo-law by finding existing laws unconstitutional when there is no constitutional basis to do so in the first place. its like when they created a "right" to abortion out of thin fucking air.

Whine whine whine- you just complain when you don't agree with the court.

 

[elektra]

Eating is not a lifestyle, Washing the car is not a lifestyle. Watching movies is not a lifestyle.

You simply can not bring yourself to telling the truth or including anything remotely relating to homosexuality into your narrative.

Then you must cherry pick my post to another and add it to your quote, as if we are having that particular discussion, again why can you not be truthful?

You do not think 100% of all children want a mother and a father?

You have to show us any 3 year olds who are forced to be homosexual. That would definitely be child abuse of the highest order. Other than that, you are full of it.

How do you feel about 3 year olds being adopted into a fundamental christianity lifestyle? Or about 3 year olds being adopted into a rich lifestyle. Or 3 year olds being adopted into a Kansas farm lifestyle?

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Lots of opinion here, you link does not use the word "Abandoned" once. That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

 

[Syriusly]

Translation: A court that made a constitutional decision you didn't like.

No, a court MADE up something that I do not oppose to on it face, but I do oppose HOW it was allowed to happen.

So you oppose our checks and balances as written in the U.S. Constitution. Share with us your Constitutional Law background.

Where is the check/balance on the courts? It used to be the amendment process but that is next to impossible to bring about nowadays, so basically we have 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers creating new law.

I don't need a constitutional law background to talk about the constitution, I'm a fucking american.

You can talk about consitutional law- so can I.

Courts don't create new law- all they can do is repeal laws that are unconstitutional.

And thats what they are supposed to do- whether those laws have to do with guns, or religion or marriage.

guns and religion are explicit in the document, marriage is not. You can't just lump in the last one with the first two because you feel like it.

Sure can- the courts exist to address constitutional questions. You don't get to screen which ones you approve of the courts reviewing just because you disagree.

 

[Syriusly]

You have to show us any 3 year olds who are forced to be homosexual. That would definitely be child abuse of the highest order. Other than that, you are full of it.

How do you feel about 3 year olds being adopted into a fundamental christianity lifestyle? Or about 3 year olds being adopted into a rich lifestyle. Or 3 year olds being adopted into a Kansas farm lifestyle?

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Lots of opinion here, you link does not use the word "Abandoned" once. That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

You have offered nothing but opinions- feel free to argue with the facts

And the facts are is that in 2012 there were 101,000 kids waiting to be adopted.

And you would prefer that they just wait....and wait.....and wait.....rather than be adopted by a homosexual.

 

[elektra]

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

God you are such a liar.

View attachment 36650

So what does the AFCARS Report say?
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/afcarsreport20.pdf

View attachment 36651

Okay- so the facts are this 101,666 children were waiting to be adopted in 2012.

You think it is preferable for those children not to be adopted- and stay in foster care without any parents- than allowing them to have parents who are homosexual.

14% of those kids waited 5 years or more to be adopted.

Also from that report:

Emancipation 10% 23,396

Emancipation= aged out- the kids are on their own.

Again you are a fraud, where is the word "Abandoned".

Oh, and they "Age Out", meaning they became adults and left. More fraud, they describe 18 year old men as children, "Age Out" meaning they are 18. And this silly organization is recommending that they stay in Foster Care until 21 years old.

 

[Syriusly]

You have to show us any 3 year olds who are forced to be homosexual. That would definitely be child abuse of the highest order. Other than that, you are full of it.

How do you feel about 3 year olds being adopted into a fundamental christianity lifestyle? Or about 3 year olds being adopted into a rich lifestyle. Or 3 year olds being adopted into a Kansas farm lifestyle?

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Lots of opinion here, you link does not use the word "Abandoned" once. That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

From now on, every time you mention orphans and homosexuals, I am going to just quote you

That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

Every time you mention 'orphans' and homosexuals without a link to support your claim- I am going to use your words in response.

Luckily cut and paste is fast, as I will be busy responding to your posts.

 

[mdk]

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

Data vs. your obtuse personal opinion. I wonder which carries more validity? That study is certainly more valid than your claims of speaking for 99% of Americans and all children. lol.

You did not post data, you posted a link to commentary.

Actually, I didn't post it all. You haven't posted a lick of evidence in this thread, only conjecture and unsubstantiated claims. Any time a poll or study is posted you call it biased and ignore it outright b/c it doesn't for your narrow narrative.

 

[Syriusly]

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Ha, ha, that website is bunk, its a meta-analysis of a study. Studies that did not include children adopted into homosexual lifestyles.

Not valid at all.

God you are such a liar.

View attachment 36650

So what does the AFCARS Report say?
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/afcarsreport20.pdf

View attachment 36651

Okay- so the facts are this 101,666 children were waiting to be adopted in 2012.

You think it is preferable for those children not to be adopted- and stay in foster care without any parents- than allowing them to have parents who are homosexual.

14% of those kids waited 5 years or more to be adopted.

Also from that report:

Emancipation 10% 23,396

Emancipation= aged out- the kids are on their own.

Again you are a fraud, where is the word "Abandoned".

Oh, and they "Age Out", meaning they became adults and left. More fraud, they describe 18 year old men as children, "Age Out" meaning they are 18. And this silly organization is recommending that they stay in Foster Care until 21 years old.

You have provided nothing to support your claim.

That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The answer is that is regulating marriage. You don't like it, don't marry someone who looks like you.

You didn't answer my question. You just made a detached comment. Why should the public be forced to subsidize male-on-male buttfucking?

Probably for the same reason it subsidizes male on female buttfucking as long as it is done within a marriage. And it does.

But that provides the option of hetero intercourse that creates babies. Homos don't.

Sorry you are confused by the biology.

buttfucking- whether by male to a female or male to a male- will never create babies.

Nor should the State be subsidizing any sex of any kind.

At most, the State should be supporting relationships between couples that benefit the state.

That would be traditional heterosexual couples with moral values, a trait gays lack.

You are a man who would put blacks into slavery and you lecture to your betters about morality?

 

[elektra]

I do not have to show you anything, I have been using you as an example to others, to the reader of the threads who never posts.

Anybody reading your post I am responding to will see that you have no logical response.

I never ever said or implied that 3 year old orphans are being raped by homosexuals.

If you have all the facts, why make things up?

So...you did not attempt to speak for children being adopted by gay couples? Yes or no.

Adoption is my biggest concern of legal homo marriage. A kid being denied the opportunity to be raised by the ideal circumstance all because of selfish, counterproductive homo politics. Cruel.

Oh lets look at the facts again- and the facts are cruel

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

You think having kids languish in foster care, waiting for what you consider to be 'the ideal circumstance' is preferable to allowing the child to be adopted by a single parent or a homosexual couple- now that is cruel

In 2012, 23,396 youth aged out of the U.S. foster care system without the emotional and financial support necessary to succeed. Nearly 40% had been homeless or couch surfed, nearly 60% of young men had been convicted of a crime, and only 48% were employed. 75% of women and 33% of men receive government benefits to meet basic needs. 50% of all youth who aged out were involved in substance use and 17% of the females were pregnant.

You think kids aging out of the system- to live on the streets- is preferable to allowing these kids to be adopted by single parents or homosexual parents- now that is really cruel.

Facts and Statistics

The vast majority of these children were born- and abandoned- by their biological- and heterosexual parents.

The 'mom and dad' which you consider 'ideal' abandoned these kids.

So you think that the only 'ideal' situation is to make them wait for another 'mom and dad' and to hell with how many years it takes or if they end up being abandoned by the state.....now that is cruel.

Lots of opinion here, you link does not use the word "Abandoned" once. That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

From now on, every time you mention orphans and homosexuals, I am going to just quote you

That makes your post and yourself a fraud.

Every time you mention 'orphans' and homosexuals without a link to support your claim- I am going to use your words in response.

Luckily cut and paste is fast, as I will be busy responding to your posts.

You stated you had statistics showing "Abandoned" children, the link you gave has zero data on the claim you made of it. That is fraud.

 

[JakeStarkey]

But that does happen occasionally. That is what the courts are for....to determine constitutionality. Keep in mind, in some states, like CA, it is the people who vote in UNconstitutional laws....such as Prop 8 and earlier Prop 186.

Only unconstitutional due to an activist court that overstepped its bounds.

There is no end to this argument between us. You think the constitution means whatever suits you at the moment, and I do not.

Translation: A court that made a constitutional decision you didn't like.

No, a court MADE up something that I do not oppose to on it face, but I do oppose HOW it was allowed to happen.

So you oppose our checks and balances as written in the U.S. Constitution. Share with us your Constitutional Law background.

Where is the check/balance on the courts? It used to be the amendment process but that is next to impossible to bring about nowadays, so basically we have 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers creating new law.

I don't need a constitutional law background to talk about the constitution, I'm a fucking american.

So continue to talk like the ignorant dumb shit you are.

Marriage equality will be national by the end of June. The ruling of Alabama makes that quite clear.