The Forgotten Demographic: Should States Be Forced To Adopt Orphans To These People?

[Silhouette]

Words from the 10th Circuit appeals court in favor of it's alleged "support" of the gay marriage position [while it stopped gay marriages from happening/the esseence of its OWN decision before the ink was dry: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...gay-marriage-then-stays-its-own-decision.html

“Rather than being mutually exclusive of the procreative potential of marriage, these freedoms – to choose one’s spouse, to decide whether to conceive or adopt a child, to publicly proclaim an enduring commitment to remain together through thick and thin – reinforce the childrearing family structure,” the judge wrote.

“Such freedoms support the dignity of each person,” he said. Utah ban on same-sex marriage violates fundamental right, appeals court rules (+video) - CSMonitor.com

Um....there's one section of the population whose freedoms and dignities are being completely ignored: CHILDREN. Specifically, orphaned children and what their civil rights are to be protected from placement in homes that can be predicted to be abusive to them.

And to that, the topic of this thread "Should States Be Forced To Adopt Orphans To These People"?

Just view the picture below, and vote. Simple as that. If you were an adoption agent and saw any one of these people walk in your office the next day after you saw them in this parade in the scene [or any similar to it] would you adopt orphans to them?

Bear in mind that this is a crucial question since in Utah, only married people can adopt. And LGBT cult penchants for lawsuits means that once they're married they will sue to force the state to adopt to "their sexual orientation". ie their behaviors. Because LGBTs are not a race. They are an incomplete grouping of deviant sexual behaviors: http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...wins-gay-legal-challenges-simple-as-that.html

And they soberly display these behaviors as a matter of "pride" down mainstreet, usually without much advertisement, in full expectation that children are there and passing by..

Here are photos of some folks in Paris France last year who DISAGREE that the people above should be allowed to adopt children or even raise children at all in what they do not recognize as so-called "gay marriage'.

Paris, France. France, the stronghold of liberalism if there ever was. And even they have thought about the forgotten demographic...

 

[Moonglow]

How does one have the ability to foresee the future??

 

[Silhouette]

How does one have the ability to foresee the future??

By simply taking a look at what's going on today in trends. Next ridiculous non sequitor?

 

[g5000]

Just view the picture below, and vote. Simple as that. If you were an adoption agent and saw any one of these people walk in your office the next day after you saw them in this parade in the scene [or any similar to it] would you adopt orphans to them?

 

[Silhouette]

Just view the picture below, and vote. Simple as that. If you were an adoption agent and saw any one of these people walk in your office the next day after you saw them in this parade in the scene [or any similar to it] would you adopt orphans to them?

Before you ask, no I would not adopt to that man either.

Again, that photo is of likely Mardis Gras. At night. Adults all around. Fully advertised for people to avoid. And the people, usually drunk off their asses, regret it the next day. They certainly aren't flaunting themselves as a matter of SOBER PRIDE down mainstreet in broad daylight with the specific intent of sending a message that the behaviors they are engaging in are something they are boldy proud of in public....in front of kids...that they know and anticipate will be there...watching.

The man in the photo above if little kids came by would probably quickly shield himself a bit in shame. He's doing it for the ladies. Whereas the photo in the OP, notice the little pair of hands gripping the rail just up and to the left of the "anal do-me" guy crouching in filth on the street.

 

[g5000]

We are now supposed to believe gay pride parades are spontaneous, unannounced!

 

[g5000]

Before you ask, no I would not adopt to that man either.

And so you take it case by case for heteros, but not gays, eh?

Because you know not all heteros act like this couple, right? You wouldn't be so retarded as to write off an entire group of people as potential adoptive parents BASED ON A PICTURE SOMEONE SHOWED YOU IN AN ATTEMPT TO PERPETRATE A GENERALIZATION FALLACY.

I seeeeee...

 

[TheOldSchool]

[YOUTUBE]1VnEexIhBTU[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]saD-c9D2zs0[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]B9x_E7Gj2qw[/YOUTUBE]

Please watch the second one at least sillyhouette. It explains why you're an asshole

 

[JakeStarkey]

Amazingly, Sil loves nature in spite of what it did to her cognitive abilities. (thanks to Forrest Tucker).

When SCOTUS denies Utah's appeal, marriage equality means married couples can adopt. No state law can avoid that conclusion.

The cult of hetero-fascism is going to face civil injunction after the appeal is denied.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

"These people"?

So, you found a picture of one homosexual deviant (Which I see you use a lot, it must your favorite picture on your hard drive), and you're then attributing the actions of that one deviant to an entire demographic? I don't think you could get any more ignorant or bigoted if you tried.

Tell you what, sit back and wait a minute while I find some pictures of pedophile priests, married republicans who had gay affairs, and various heterosexuals who engaged in deviant behavior.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The premise of the OP fails as baseless demagoguery.

 

[Silhouette]

Before you ask, no I would not adopt to that man either.

And so you take it case by case for heteros, but not gays, eh?
Because you know not all heteros act like this couple, right? You wouldn't be so retarded as to write off an entire group of people as potential adoptive parents BASED ON A PICTURE SOMEONE SHOWED YOU IN AN ATTEMPT TO PERPETRATE A GENERALIZATION FALLACY.

I seeeeee...

Yes. And the LGBT cult itself provides the impetus for me to say that emphatically.

If you accept the premise that gays are BEHAVIORS and NOT "race" [see the link in the OP and the over 300 world's top researchers agreement], I can help you understand why that is.

We have essentially two cultures. 1. Hetero 2. LGBT

Here are the innate differences in a general trend in either culture:

1. Heteros denounce, decry and incarcerate known sexual offenders of children and confine their debauchery to adult-only non-proud inebriated behaviors hopefully out of the eyes and sight of children. This is how they push each other and urge each other to adhere to the cultural values.

2. The LGBT culture stands in stark contrast to those values regarding kids. They glom together, defend and praise their messiah Harvey Milk who is known to them to have preyed sexually on orphaned teen boys, presiding at once as their "father figure/guardian" and sodomizing them at the same time. He liked them vulnerable, unprotected and young; which is the same description of Utah's orphans. AND they parade as a matter of sober pride, sex acts down main street in anticipation that children will be in attendance. The man in the OP photo was not only performing a mock sex act in front of the pair of little hands gripping the rail to the left, he was doing so in the presence of smiling approval of all the participants of the parade.

There's your difference.

Your mistake is in examining the question of the differences as if children didn't matter. They do. They matter very much. And how the courts handle how much they matter is different too. If there is even a tiny suspicion that a given subculture might pose a danger to adoptable kids, you are required by law to ACT to prevent that danger to them from happening. You don't need a conviction. You don't even need concrete proof. You only need a sneaking suspicion that that child is or will be in danger and if you fail to act on that sneaking suspicion, you can be charged criminally either misdemeanor or felony, depending on the state.

So this question of children doesn't allow for your "if 99% of LGBTs approve of sex acts in front of kids and only 1% don't, we should ignore the danger to children" angle. This is a whole other kettle of legal fish pal.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The premise of the OP fails as baseless demagoguery.

That's silly's MO

 

[Silhouette]

The premise of the OP fails as baseless demagoguery.

That's silly's MO

The abstract core of this thread is that if 99 gays march in a parade like the one in the OP, approving of the behaviors going on in front of kids and only 1 disapproves of 100 total LGBTs, that still doesn't make a compelling legal argument that this subculture must be allowed access to adopt orphaned kids.

If you regard LGBTs as a "race", then that argument might hold water. But if you know them to be behaviors like the leading researchers say the evidence is in on, it changes the whole ball game. They then properly are a cult and as such have no rights as to the 14th, unless they apply for federal recognition and receive it, and their overall general sucultural values must compel authorities to ACT on behalf of the forgotten demographic: the orphaned children of the state of Utah [and all other states: see CAPTA guidelines]

When childrens' safety is involved, 1 LGBT rejecting the sex acts performed in front of kids at pride-parades while 99 march in it smiling in approval does not mean that 1 subcultural member gets to set a standard to usher an open-door access to kids for the other 99. The law forbids that to protect kids.

If you think protecting kids is "silly" you belong in jail.

 

[TheOldSchool]

No response to my video's huh? Just a Harvey Milk rant...

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Yes. And the LGBT cult itself provides" <and snip>

No one is discussing race or behavior, except baseless demagogues, who will not be allowed to redefine accepted terms and scientific conclusions.

The issue being addressed is marriage equality.

We have one human culture.

All humans "denounce, decry and incarcerate known sexual offenders of children and confine their debauchery to adult-only non-proud inebriated behaviors hopefully out of the eyes and sight of children."

There is no LGBT cult, except in the mind of a few hetero-fascists.

All humans matter, all children matter.

No one ignores dangers of adults to children.

 

[Silhouette]

"These people"?

So, you found a picture of one homosexual deviant (Which I see you use a lot, it must your favorite picture on your hard drive), and you're then attributing the actions of that one deviant to an entire demographic? I don't think you could get any more ignorant or bigoted if you tried.

Tell you what, sit back and wait a minute while I find some pictures of pedophile priests, married republicans who had gay affairs, and various heterosexuals who engaged in deviant behavior.

The difference is again that what's done on the down-low is disapproved of as a general cutlural trend in the hetero group. Whereas open sex acts in front of kids at "pride" parades are encouraged and condoned...again...as a matter of "pride".

The respetive group's value systems are what's in question here, not rebuked individuals deviating from the norm.

Again, you have to understand the premise that LGBTs are behaviors, and ergo, a de facto cult. Then understanding what I'm saying is the essence of simplicity.

 

[TheOldSchool]

"These people"?

So, you found a picture of one homosexual deviant (Which I see you use a lot, it must your favorite picture on your hard drive), and you're then attributing the actions of that one deviant to an entire demographic? I don't think you could get any more ignorant or bigoted if you tried.

Tell you what, sit back and wait a minute while I find some pictures of pedophile priests, married republicans who had gay affairs, and various heterosexuals who engaged in deviant behavior.

The difference is again that what's done on the down-low is disapproved of as a general cutlural trend in the hetero group. Whereas open sex acts in front of kids at "pride" parades are encouraged and condoned...again...as a matter of "pride".

The respetive group's value systems are what's in question here, not rebuked individuals deviating from the norm.

Again, you have to understand the premise that LGBTs are behaviors, and ergo, a de facto cult. Then understanding what I'm saying is the essence of simplicity.

^ the essence of stupidity

 

[JakeStarkey]

"These people"?

So, you found a picture of one homosexual deviant (Which I see you use a lot, it must your favorite picture on your hard drive), and you're then attributing the actions of that one deviant to an entire demographic? I don't think you could get any more ignorant or bigoted if you tried.

Tell you what, sit back and wait a minute while I find some pictures of pedophile priests, married republicans who had gay affairs, and various heterosexuals who engaged in deviant behavior.

The difference is again that what's done on the down-low is disapproved of as a general cutlural trend in the hetero group. Whereas open sex acts in front of kids at "pride" parades are encouraged and condoned...again...as a matter of "pride".

The respetive group's value systems are what's in question here, not rebuked individuals deviating from the norm.

Again, you have to understand the premise that LGBTs are behaviors, and ergo, a de facto cult. Then understanding what I'm saying is the essence of simplicity.

^ the essence of stupidity

The only cult is that of hetero-fascism

Marriage equality is no threat to children.

 

[bodecea]

Words from the 10th Circuit appeals court in favor of it's alleged "support" of the gay marriage position [while it stopped gay marriages from happening/the esseence of its OWN decision before the ink was dry: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...gay-marriage-then-stays-its-own-decision.html

“Rather than being mutually exclusive of the procreative potential of marriage, these freedoms – to choose one’s spouse, to decide whether to conceive or adopt a child, to publicly proclaim an enduring commitment to remain together through thick and thin – reinforce the childrearing family structure,” the judge wrote.

“Such freedoms support the dignity of each person,” he said. Utah ban on same-sex marriage violates fundamental right, appeals court rules (+video) - CSMonitor.com

Um....there's one section of the population whose freedoms and dignities are being completely ignored: CHILDREN. Specifically, orphaned children and what their civil rights are to be protected from placement in homes that can be predicted to be abusive to them.

And to that, the topic of this thread "Should States Be Forced To Adopt Orphans To These People"?

Just view the picture below, and vote. Simple as that. If you were an adoption agent and saw any one of these people walk in your office the next day after you saw them in this parade in the scene [or any similar to it] would you adopt orphans to them?

Bear in mind that this is a crucial question since in Utah, only married people can adopt. And LGBT cult penchants for lawsuits means that once they're married they will sue to force the state to adopt to "their sexual orientation". ie their behaviors. Because LGBTs are not a race. They are an incomplete grouping of deviant sexual behaviors: http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...wins-gay-legal-challenges-simple-as-that.html

And they soberly display these behaviors as a matter of "pride" down mainstreet, usually without much advertisement, in full expectation that children are there and passing by..

Here are photos of some folks in Paris France last year who DISAGREE that the people above should be allowed to adopt children or even raise children at all in what they do not recognize as so-called "gay marriage'.

Paris, France. France, the stronghold of liberalism if there ever was. And even they have thought about the forgotten demographic...

So...you are calling all gay people child abusers. Nice.