Gay Marriage

[THE ENFORCER]

foster care and adoption are two entirely different things.

Adoption just involves an added step. But for this forum i didnt think it was neccessary to make the distinction since they are basically the same.


so was verthanthi. currently there are three parties involved in the campaigning process for the presidential race 2004: Democrat, Repug, and Green. same as last election for president. and if you expand the criteria beyond the parties actually involved in the presidential election, there are many more parties than those three in the US.

John Kerry (democrats) George Bush (republician) i havent heard anything else from any other party.Lets face it the greens? when have they made a sound economic desicion which was what we are talking about.Thats the whole reason why no-one includes them in these debates. The fact that you mentioned them for this debate is sad. When it comes to environmental issues then mention them but not in economics, hello?


(*i edited "surveys" to "studies" because that was the original word in sarien's post you quoted, and it makes a relevant difference.) funny that you would rather have no information, than some information. what is even funnier is that you disregard the concept of studies entirely instead of reading the study, evaluating the controls, researching who sponsored it, and making a personal evaluation based on (to coin your favorite phrase) common sense to decide if it's biased or not. way to be proud of ignorance.

What are you going on about? I was referring to Azhran not Sarien and Azhran did orginally state survey and futhermore i dont think Sarien even mentioned the word study so i dont know what forum you are looking at.Futhermore yes misinfomation is worse than having no infomation.
btw, the more you resort to name calling, the more you undermine your own position. and when you combine that with a few examples of your fallacies i included above, it suggests that you have a difficult time understanding complex social issues.

i've only named called Sarien, cause he consistently throughout every forum i place a message in, points out stupid comments that twist my comments with supposedly "facts" that he makes up all the time, even though i prove to him that i didnt say it. Just like what you are doing now. Your whole argument now is completely void cause you made up quotes that arent real. I think your mixing up your subconscious thoughts with my statements which is unfair to me cause your making up things that you think i stated which you base your whole argument on which turns out to be wrong and i think thats really unfair. Futhermore Sarien has used insults way more than me in this forum.

[THE ENFORCER]

I know i stated this above but i want to state it again, pulling quotes out that arent true (Jesus=Terrorist) or stating arguments that arent relevant (Sarien) undermines your argument and is unfair to me. If your gonna discuss then you have to make sure (read through it twice) that the facts you state are relevant and accurate. Its just getting annoying, i shouldnt have to clear up your mistakes!

So Jesus=Terrorist and Sarien your whole argument has become void therefore is a waste of space and my time. Thats why i get pissed off, not with your views but the method you express them.

[Subjugation]

I know i stated this above but i want to state it again, pulling quotes out that arent true (Jesus=Terrorist) or stating arguments that arent relevant (Sarien) undermines your argument and is unfair to me. If your gonna discuss then you have to make sure (read through it twice) that the facts you state are relevant and accurate. Its just getting annoying, i shouldnt have to clear up your mistakes!

So Jesus=Terrorist and Sarien your whole argument has become void therefore is a waste of space and my time. Thats why i get pissed off, not with your views but the method you express them.

i quoted your own posts. denying that the quotes aren't true is not only ludicrous, but a flat out LIE. my only error was saying that you quoted sarien, when it was azhran. go back to post #101. that was where you replied to azhran's post about the link to STUDY (not survey) on the socialization of children raised by gay parents.

PS: sticking your head in the sand does not unring the bell of truth.

[Azhran]

STUDY

mb if I said survey instead of study

[THE ENFORCER]

mb if I said survey instead of study

You never said the link was a study nor survey, but from past quotes i just assumed it was a survey.

I never said anything about a study, i dont know where you pulled that from. Azhran nor me said that the link he provided was a study. So you did get your facts wrong.

[THE ENFORCER]

PS: sticking your head in the sand does not unring the bell of truth.

LOL! note:even if i did say is was a study what i said before still holds true you have to look at the sources, writer etc of the study to see if it accurately portrays the issue in general. There are professors out there that have conducted 'studies' to prove that the holocaust didnt happen would you believe that just because they conducted a study? ofcourse not. Thats my point studies, surveys and other forms of the machinery of persuasion can be misleading.

And we are getting off the topic.......

[Zeta-burn]

don't you have some synagogues to burn and black people to drag from your truck?

i have no time to do that, im too busy lining up gays and gunning them down....

[THE ENFORCER]

i have no time to do that, im too busy lining up gays and gunning them down....

Thats not very nice :eek:

[Subjugation]

mb if I said survey instead of study

no, that's the point, you posted a research study, enforcer misquoted you as saying survey. see post #101.

[THE ENFORCER]

no, that's the point, you posted a research study, enforcer misquoted you as saying survey. see post #101.

Exactly so who said anything about a study? No-one so why did you say it was a quote when no-one stated it! Just admit it you got your facts wrong!

[Verthanthi]

ummm Im refering to America if you didnt realize.

So am I.

[THE ENFORCER]

So am I.

So if your not voting for republicans or democrats who are you voting for?

[Subjugation]

Dear En-farce-er,

it's pretty obvious that no matter what is said, you're still going to lie to cover up your verbal fuck ups. just like when you when you fucked up about the difference between foster care and adoption, or when you fucked up about whether or not conc is going to vote dem or repug, or when you fucked up and said, "surveys (meaning studies) don't mean shit".

and if i actually cared, i'm sure i could go further back than 2 pages or even other threads and find dumpsters full of your verbal garbage.


i'll tell you what. i'm going to make this my last post to you in this thread, because frankly, we both sound like a couple of little bitches. its like arguing with a fencepost dressed up like a person. eventually you are bound to realize: "wow, i just realized i've been talking to a fencepost this whole time." and yes, i do feel stupid for having taken so long to realize it, but at least i'm not the fencepost. you clearly like to argue for the sake of argument, not for the sake of intellectual growth.

go ahead and bathe in your ignorance like a pig in shit. i'm done talking to you about it.

your pal,

j=t

[THE ENFORCER]

Dear En-farce-er,

it's pretty obvious that no matter what is said, you're still going to lie to cover up your verbal fuck ups. just like when you when you fucked up about the difference between foster care and adoption, or when you fucked up about whether or not conc is going to vote dem or repug, or when you fucked up and said, "surveys (meaning studies) don't mean shit".

and if i actually cared, i'm sure i could go further back than 2 pages or even other threads and find dumpsters full of your verbal garbage.


i'll tell you what. i'm going to make this my last post to you in this thread, because frankly, we both sound like a couple of little bitches. its like arguing with a fencepost dressed up like a person. eventually you are bound to realize: "wow, i just realized i've been talking to a fencepost this whole time." and yes, i do feel stupid for having taken so long to realize it, but at least i'm not the fencepost. you clearly like to argue for the sake of argument, not for the sake of intellectual growth.

go ahead and bathe in your ignorance like a pig in shit. i'm done talking to you about it.

your pal,

j=t

im glad this has finally come to an end, but i have not made a fuck up the only thing ive been doing mainly is going along one point and clearing up all the mistakes you, Sarien and others have made, about what you think my ideas are. What you think my idea and what my idea is are probably two different things because you misread my statements which i thought i made pretty clear. If you just read over my posts more than twice we would of saved alot of time and you would either agree or agree to disagree.

I guess the fact that you resorted to insulting me, probably means you have run out of ideas......

btw i think you should change your nick i dont find it funny!

[TelC@t]

As usual, I don't have the patience to read the whole thread, but I did read the majority of the posts in the last 2 pages.

1st I disagree with the argument that marriage is a religious thing. Almost all civilizations today recognize marriage - regardless of the religion they believe in, or whether they even believe in any religion.

To answer the question 'should gay marriage be allowed by law', I am going to follow a very scientifical way of prove my argument:I will 1st look at the purposes of marriage, then I will discuss whether these purposes apply to the union of a homosexual couple.

In my personal opinion, marriage is device created by the human society to protect the weaker side of the family, more specifically the children, and for some instances, the women (especially house wives). It creates stability for the growth of the offsprings in a union between a man and a women. This is a more traditional role of the marriage. Nowadays, there are many other aspects of the marriage, for example, tax purposes.

Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with homosexual marriage. But I have to admit that the traditional role of marriage does not apply to a homosexual couple, that is, homosexual couple can't naturally conceive a baby.

I am against homosexual couple's rights to adopt kids. Call me conservtive by all means, but there aren't any research I know of proved the mental healthness of children in a homosexuality enviornment. If all we care about is the rights of homosexual couple, who is going to protect the rights of those adopted children?

But of course if thorough researches show that children in homosexual enviornment differ in no ways from those raised in heterosexual family, then by all means allow those gay couples to adopt kids.