Married lesbian trio from Massachusetts expecting first child together

And the question that is on everybodies mind.........................

Which one will do the breastfeeding?

Are you serious? OMG, dim, dim, dim. One of them was inseminated. One of them will give birth. She is the one who will breast feed. Got it now? :cuckoo:

I think a lot of our posters slept through Biology and probably weren't allowed to attend SexEd.
 
This thing is going to end badly

You mean like half of the straight marriages?

They seem committed. They have divided their assets evenly. Many straight couples get married with a pre-nup, so they can keep their stuff when it ends.

I noticed that you used the term "straight", not "hetero".
As opposed to "crooked" or "bent".
Your choice of words is interesting.
 
And the question that is on everybodies mind.........................

Which one will do the breastfeeding?

Are you serious? OMG, dim, dim, dim. One of them was inseminated. One of them will give birth. She is the one who will breast feed. Got it now? :cuckoo:

Which one is called "Dad"? There is no substitute for a father or a mother in a child's life. Those who have to grow up in single parent homes statistically suffer because this is so.

Which one is "Dad"? And if one of them is role-playing a masculine role, why are the other two women attracted to "him"? I thought they were lesbians?

And so on...

No such thing as a slippery slope eh?
 
And the question that is on everybodies mind.........................

Which one will do the breastfeeding?

Are you serious? OMG, dim, dim, dim. One of them was inseminated. One of them will give birth. She is the one who will breast feed. Got it now? :cuckoo:

Which one is called "Dad"? There is no substitute for a father or a mother in a child's life. Those who have to grow up in single parent homes statistically suffer because this is so.

Which one is "Dad"? And if one of them is role-playing a masculine role, why are the other two women attracted to "him"? I thought they were lesbians?

And so on...

No such thing as a slippery slope eh?
It is optimal for a child to have a mother and father. The reality is, among heterosexual marriages, millions of children in this country are raised by a single parent, male or female, and the other parent is not in the picture. So, being rasied without either a father or mother in this country is already being done, big time, by hetersexuals.
 
It is optimal for a child to have a mother and father. The reality is, among heterosexual marriages, millions of children in this country are raised by a single parent, male or female, and the other parent is not in the picture. So, being rasied without either a father or mother in this country is already being done, big time, by hetersexuals.

Is that your logic for expanding the playing field?
Just curious.
 
And only one is a parent. Who is the dad?
How arrogant can people be to intentionally deny a human being the opportunity to be raised by his two actual parents.
Neocon homofascists.

The child will be raised by his parents. The fact that some guy jerked off into a cup does not make him one of the parents. It looks as though this child will have a full-time, stay at home Mom. Most kids don't.

You're a neocon democrat pseudo-liberal, stuck in the 1980's. Empirical data demonstrates that kids need a mom and a dad, not two of one or one of either. Or three of one. Out of touch, dangerous to society are those who still insist on creating alternatives to structured families.
 
I think homosexual marriages will have a much higher rate of divorce

Homo male marriages will for sure. That's because of the natural propensity toward promiscuity. Males are wired differently than females even though neocon pseudo-liberals still try to insist they can change nature. Lesbos tend to be serial monogamists by nature so their 'marriages' will likely last longer. That's because women are naturally wired to be more selective. In spite of what neocon democrat pseudo-liberal out-of-touch people think and propagate.
 
It is optimal for a child to have a mother and father. The reality is, among heterosexual marriages, millions of children in this country are raised by a single parent, male or female, and the other parent is not in the picture. So, being rasied without either a father or mother in this country is already being done, big time, by hetersexuals.

Is that your logic for expanding the playing field?
Just curious.

You have missed the point. The point is that we should not require something of homosexual couples we don't require of heterosexual couples. Why, oh why do conservatives think in such literal, simplistic terms. Why do I have to spell every little thing out to you? It is not okay to require something of lesbian couples we don't require of hetero couples. Millions upon millions of hetero people are single parents, either male or female, raising children on their own, with kids who either don't have a father or a mother. Yet you say it's wrong for gay couples to have children because the kids won't have either a father or a mother. Your reasoning is just stupid. It has nothing to do with kids having single sex parenting and all to do with your bigotry against gays.

Did I spell it out clearly enough for you?
 
Last edited:
DriftingSand simply wants to tell others how to live their lives.

No, not going to happen.

Get in your backyard and rake leaves right now. Then have a BBQ. The I want you to go to the grocery store and when you get back fill your car tires with air. Got it? Good!

The last thing I want to do is tell others how to live their lives. If they want to live a perverted lifestyle then so be it. I just don't want them to force me to accept it as normal because it isn't. I do feel really sorry for kids that have to suffer through suck strange behavior.
 
Last edited:
Millions upon millions of hetero people are single parents, either male or female, raising children on their own, with kids who either don't have a father or a mother. Yet you say it's wrong for gay couples to have children because the kids won't have either a father or a mother. Your reasoning is just stupid. It has nothing to do with kids having single sex parenting and all to do with your bigotry against gays.

Did I spell it out clearly enough for you?

And where there are pluralities or majorities of numbers of those kids being raised missing one of their parents (usually the father) you see social demise. Failing schools and higher crime. That's a new phenomenon of the past forty years. Nothing previous in our history to compare it to, except possibly the number of orphans who went on to become outlaws in the old west.
Granting single parenthood by choice or homo couple adoption adds to that problem. But it requires true liberals and literally progressive people to be aware of this. Neocon pseudo-liberal lefties are still stuck in the 1960's - 1980's.
Time to Lean forward.
 
This thing is going to end badly

You mean like half of the straight marriages?

They seem committed. They have divided their assets evenly. Many straight couples get married with a pre-nup, so they can keep their stuff when it ends.

I noticed that you used the term "straight", not "hetero".
As opposed to "crooked" or "bent".
Your choice of words is interesting.

It is a common term for heterosexuals. I am not insulted by it. I know plenty of gays who use the term, and they do not mean that anyone who is not straight is "bent".
 
And only one is a parent. Who is the dad?
How arrogant can people be to intentionally deny a human being the opportunity to be raised by his two actual parents.
Neocon homofascists.

The child will be raised by his parents. The fact that some guy jerked off into a cup does not make him one of the parents. It looks as though this child will have a full-time, stay at home Mom. Most kids don't.

You're a neocon democrat pseudo-liberal, stuck in the 1980's. Empirical data demonstrates that kids need a mom and a dad, not two of one or one of either. Or three of one. Out of touch, dangerous to society are those who still insist on creating alternatives to structured families.

Actually, the long term studies show no difference between kids raised by straights and kids raised by gays.

Kids need parents who love them and raise them well.
 
I have not read all the thread. With that said....I think three lesbian women being together and then wanting kids is not a family setting. Its more likst plain ol lust to me.
Mormons with multiple wives is the same thing. One old man, marrying many women/girls and it being called a family. No. It is one old man that wants his pecker in my holes and lots of kids.

So three women can turn into 4. Four can turn in to 5. Artificial insemination occurs and they have a family of kids and just women...all sleeping in the same bed or connecting rooms, being intimate, with impressionable young children knowing Mommy Mommy and Mommy are "doing it" once they get old enough to know what "doing it" means. To say this will not have an impact on them is ludicrous. Some might be able to deal with the differences of their 3 mommies compared to a heterosexual couple...and some will not. Point is...now it is 3. When will it turn in to more than 3 and calling it a "marriage" when in reality, it is just flat out sexual desires overriding the well being of children they decide to bring forth from their wombs compliments of some male stranger?
 
This kind of puts a sickening twist on Mother's Day.

Happy Mother's Day Mom Mom Mom Mom...................

Poor kids.
 
It is just lust. Plain and simple...LUST. Love is woman woman or man man or woman man. When it becomes more than two..it is lust.
 
It is just lust. Plain and simple...LUST. Love is woman woman or man man or woman man. When it becomes more than two..it is lust.

Many people are capable of loving more than one person. Polyamory is not new. But to say it is only lust, without knowing the people, is a bit of a stretch. You have no way of knowing whether or not they love each other.
 
So weird:

1398329028350.jpg



Ummm..the big one in the middle doesn't look like "she" originated as a female. Actually, the blond on the left looks a little questionable, also.

Three people of any gender can't be legally married in the United States.

Poor kid, that's all I can say.
 
It is just lust. Plain and simple...LUST. Love is woman woman or man man or woman man. When it becomes more than two..it is lust.

Many people are capable of loving more than one person. Polyamory is not new. But to say it is only lust, without knowing the people, is a bit of a stretch. You have no way of knowing whether or not they love each other.

Hogwash. People may love more than one person yes, but that does not mean wanting to have sex with them. This particular triplet set are just lusting. You know, to "perk up their sexlife". They love all right. They love the sex of 3 all piled together. To say otherwise is tunnel vision.
 

Forum List

Back
Top