Should gays be allowed to adopted kids?

"What should these people do with their lives, without their holier-than-thou, you-burn-in-hell-if-you-disagree attitudes towards homosexuals, abortions, free sex and other assorted stuff of life?"

They should shut their mouths and stop trying to force their bullshit prejudice on others by using the excuse "the bible said so and I'm completely full of shit, thus my statements have no validity because I'm using a book that cannot be proven as factual as my sole basis for my misinformation and idiocy". Okay, some of that is exaggerated, but not by very much, unfortunately.

"Maybe we should open a thread “Should right-wing Christian extremist rednecks be allowed to breed?”
Having been on these forums for a while now, and having had heated debates with a few who belongs to this group, I can see many reasons why members of this group shouldn't’t be al-lowed to procreate!"

I have a theory as to why some of these people continue to be mind numbingly stupid over the course of generations....incest, it's a stereotype of "rednecks" that makes perfect sense. Heck, it's about the only reason I can think of as to why these people still have such an outdated and laughably stupid mindset ("Gays shouldn't't have the same rights as everyone else I'm a moron" etc). I believe this happens because their wonderful god knows that if they began to breed outside of their own gene-pool that they would contaminate the rest of the world who has some common sense and over the course of a few generations more of their bullshit would expand too others and as a society would retard back to the early 1900's mentality where everything is bad except eating and sleeping. So, god makes them have sex with their sisters and brothers in hopes of keeping the idiocy quarantined to their immediate family.

^ Grow up.

No, you grow up. Or grow some wit, perhaps. Possibly learn to give out a valid retort every now and then. "Grow up" is just silly.

No, it is not silly when you are being immature. I'm not going to lower myself to a flamefest with you because you want me to give out a "valid retort". Tell you what--give a valid argument and I'll give a valid retort.

I did, the bible is full of shit and anyone who uses it as the basis for their source of information during an argument (which many morons actually do) is also full of shit and don't have a valid argument, ever. Because their basing their argument on something that can't be proven as factual.

Also, I said that rednecks are the way they are because of incest, which is no more immature then the christians or other retards who say "well if you allow gay marriage then what's to stop people from marrying animals, or tree's, or a broom?" I'm sure these people will also begin using the same faulty logic on the topic of gay adoption, I can just see it now. "Well, if you allow gays to adopt then what's going to stop animals from adopting children, or tree's or brooms from addopting children?" Ah, good times.

The point is that you are insulting those with whom you disagree. Insulting people doesn't give you any leverage when arguing--it makes you sound immature, like a child who doesn't get his way and calls his mother or father a poopiehead.

You are obviously angry with these people, but you still should not say they are stupid or that what they base their beliefs on is stupid. You can say illogical, but to insult someone only causes tempers to flair, which causes further problems. I am certain that EVERYONE on this board is capable of forming a coherent argument without insulting anyone.

I only insulted those who deserved to be insulted. I insulted no particular person, merely pointed out the stupidity of the beliefs and arguments of some people. I have no problem with people who disagree wtih my beliefs. As long as they don't let said beliefs bring upon prejudice then I don't care.

However, I'm angry with anyone who try's to take rights away from a group of people without reason, to me, that's stupid and to sugar coat it by saying it's "illogical" would be acting as though they're opinion is worthy of some kind of respect by not giving them my honest opinion on what I think of their beliefs, and thus, them for having said beliefs. These people deserve no such respect for having such stupid, prejudice beliefs. (any idea that is prejudice is also by default stupid).

Saying their ideas of prejudice is stupid is not the same as calling them a name such as "poopiehead". There is a blatant difference in saying a broad statement based on someones beliefs rather then an individual person, and calling someone a name.

Originally posted by Pablo G
No but seriously, queens shouldn't adopt kids.

You rock

Originally posted by Napalm
You rock

What does he "rock" exactly, the edge of ignorance cliff?

Apparently.

Afro Cheese asks - "What makes you think all gays have the same personality?"

I knew commenting on that might lead to this, but I will reiterate my view - I don't think sexuality should have any part of saying whether a person should or should not be allowed to have children, nor that sexuality will probably affect the way they care for them, however I said I could kind of see the point of view given by some that the emotional temperament of a gay person could be a benefit. Do I agree? Not really, I would have to see proof first, all I was saying was "I understand your point of view", not "I agree totally". In fact the only thing I have said in a certain way is that I believe they should be allowed to adopt and there is no reason they should be stopped from doing so. Will they make better parents? Only time will tell.

And as an aside, since when has the world started calling gay people queens again? Tch, tch. ❌ A disappointing view I feel.

You can see their point of view.. I can't. Saying that homosexuals could make better parents is no different from saying heterosexuals make better parents.. it's the exact same thing. It's arguing that sexual preference IS a factor in parental skills, and in that case, homosexuals may not be capable of raising a child. Since people feel it's possible homosexuals as a group would make better parents.. that also means it's possible homosexuals as a group would make much worse parents. I totally disagree with this logic.. it all depends on the personality and responsibility of the individual, has nothing to do with who they are attracted to.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
What does he "rock" exactly, the edge of ignorance cliff?

Why dont you go bother some one else?

Why don't you come back when you have a point.

Originally posted by Napalm
Why dont you go bother some one else?

The same could be asked of you. Perhaps you should take Silver Stardust's suggestion and wait to post until you actually have something worthwhile to contribute.

agreed.....I guess it's safe to say that it's too early to judge gay parents but i think gay parents are are just as good of parents as heterosexual parents... "IF NOT" better because of their gentle personality but like I said it's still too early....I'm a straight person i just think gay people should be respected as much as straight people....

Here here.

I only insulted those who deserved to be insulted.

These people deserve no such respect for having such stupid, prejudice beliefs. (any idea that is prejudice is also by default stupid).

Saying their ideas of prejudice is stupid is not the same as calling them a name such as "poopiehead".

Originally posted by AdventChild
agreed.....I guess it's safe to say that it's too early to judge gay parents but i think gay parents are are just as good of parents as heterosexual parents... "IF NOT" better because of their gentle personality but like I said it's still too early....I'm a straight person i just think gay people should be respected as much as straight people....

Plus.. you can't say homosexuals have a "gentle personality." Saying a group of people have a certain type of personality is crazy.. personality varies from person to person.

point taken.....