The Homosexuals Of Alderaan Want Your Children

[Me Myself]

If you think it's appropriate for her guardian to make his exploits at bathhouses dinnertime conversation in addition to hosting regular visits in his home from new sexual partners then that doesn't say much about your judgement... IMO of course. The point has been that studies have shown that these types of behaviors occur much more frequently in gay households.

No reliable study has shown that to be the case in today´s couples.

You are speaking from a hunch.

 

[9Westy9]

If you think it's appropriate for her guardian to make his exploits at bathhouses dinnertime conversation in addition to hosting regular visits in his home from new sexual partners then that doesn't say much about your judgement... IMO of course. The point has been that studies have shown that these types of behaviors occur much more frequently in gay households.

Me Myself has refuted all these 'studies' you've posted. Even if your studies were correct there are still some monogamous homosexual couples. Should these be denied the right to adopt a child just because most homosexual couples aren't? Also what about children with divorced parents? Should they have their children taken away because both mother and father aren't able to take care of the child?

 

[no-body]

If you think it's appropriate for her guardian to make his exploits at bathhouses dinnertime conversation in addition to hosting regular visits in his home from new sexual partners then that doesn't say much about your judgement... IMO of course. The point has been that studies have shown that these types of behaviors occur much more frequently in gay households.

Do the studies show that they happen more in gay households that are married and go through the troubles and loopholes to adopt a child?

Because there are a lot of straight couples that have kinky and bizarre sex lives too. The homosexual population is also obviously much smaller so your argument is pretty retarded along with being just plain stereotypical and bigoted.

 

[Me Myself]

Sounds like a good mini-game concept

Imagine: you are a good guy but your baby is in the dark side of the force!

Or the other way around!

 

[9Westy9]

Imagine: you are a good guy but your baby is in the dark side of the force!

Or the other way around!

you could have a second mini game where you try to win them over. These developers need us. Anyone got their number?

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Me Myself has refuted all these 'studies' you've posted. Even if your studies were correct there are still some monogamous homosexual couples. Should these be denied the right to adopt a child just because most homosexual couples aren't? Also what about children with divorced parents? Should they have their children taken away because both mother and father aren't able to take care of the child?

You know how "debunked" them? He looked at the dates and decided that because the modal range of the studies quoted in a 2003 article was the mid 90s, they were somehow invalid. Mind you, there were more than 60 secular/medical studies quoted, several of which were pro-gay, and he might've spent about 10 minutes total verifying anything. His lack of attentiveness was confirmed by the fact he didn't even understand that the few studies he spent more than two seconds looking at were attempting to support a paticular main point of the argument as opposed to the whole thesis. And guess what? The only thing that makes a study invalid is if it isn't true.



Here's more studies: We can play this game all day. Believe whatever you want to believe

The 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census surveyed the lifestyles of 7,862 homosexuals. Of those involved in a "current relationship," only 15 percent describe their current relationship as having lasted twelve years or longer, with five percent lasting more than twenty years.[4] While this "snapshot in time" is not an absolute predictor of the length of homosexual relationships, it does indicate that few homosexual relationships achieve the longevity common in marriages


In The Sexual Organization of the City, University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann argues that "typical gay city inhabitants spend most of their adult lives in 'transactional' relationships, or short-term commitments of less than six months."[5]

"5. Adrian Brune, "City Gays Skip Long-term Relationships: Study Says," Washington Blade (February 27, 04): 12"

"· A study of homosexual men in the Netherlands published in the journal AIDS found that the "duration of steady partnerships" was 1.5 years.[6]

6. Maria Xiridou, et al, "The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam," AIDS 17 (2003):"

 

[no-body]

You know how "debunked" them? He looked at the dates and decided that because the modal range of the studies quoted in a 2003 article was the mid 90s, they were somehow invalid. Mind you, there were more than 60 secular/medical studies quoted and he might've spent about 10 minutes total verifying anything. His lack of attentiveness was confirmed by the fact he didn't even understand that the few studies he spent more than two seconds looking at were attempting to support a paticular main point of the argument as opposed to the whole thesis. And guess what? The only thing that makes a study invalid is if it isn't true.



Here's more studies: We can play this game all day. Believe whatever you want to believe

The 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census surveyed the lifestyles of 7,862 homosexuals. Of those involved in a "current relationship," only 15 percent describe their current relationship as having lasted twelve years or longer, with five percent lasting more than twenty years.[4] While this "snapshot in time" is not an absolute predictor of the length of homosexual relationships, it does indicate that few homosexual relationships achieve the longevity common in marriages


In The Sexual Organization of the City, University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann argues that "typical gay city inhabitants spend most of their adult lives in 'transactional' relationships, or short-term commitments of less than six months."[5]

"5. Adrian Brune, "City Gays Skip Long-term Relationships: Study Says," Washington Blade (February 27, 04): 12"

"· A study of homosexual men in the Netherlands published in the journal AIDS found that the "duration of steady partnerships" was 1.5 years.[6]

6. Maria Xiridou, et al, "The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam," AIDS 17 (2003):"

When in even the most gay friendly cities in the world it is just becoming common for homosexual relationships to be OK how shocking that it is reported that homosexuals have trouble staying in relationships. Come back in 50 years when society evolves and tell me if the studies are the same.

I also guarantee you that if heterosexual men could get away with having quick sexual encounters instead of relationships they would too.

 

[9Westy9]

You know how he did it? He looked at the dates and decided that because the modal range of the studies quoted in a 2003 article was the mid 90s, they were somehow invalid. Mind you, there were more than 60 secular/medical studies quoted and he might've spent about 10 minutes total verifying anything. And guess what? The only thing that makes a study invalid is if it isn't true.



Here's more studies: We can play this game all day. Believe whatever you want to believe

The 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census surveyed the lifestyles of 7,862 homosexuals. Of those involved in a "current relationship," only 15 percent describe their current relationship as having lasted twelve years or longer, with five percent lasting more than twenty years.[4] While this "snapshot in time" is not an absolute predictor of the length of homosexual relationships, it does indicate that few homosexual relationships achieve the longevity common in marriages


In The Sexual Organization of the City, University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann argues that "typical gay city inhabitants spend most of their adult lives in 'transactional' relationships, or short-term commitments of less than six months."[5]

"5. Adrian Brune, "City Gays Skip Long-term Relationships: Study Says," Washington Blade (February 27, 04): 12"

"· A study of homosexual men in the Netherlands published in the journal AIDS found that the "duration of steady partnerships" was 1.5 years.[6]

6. Maria Xiridou, et al, "The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam," AIDS 17 (2003):"

The first study doesn't appear to exist anymore.

Second study - Adrian Brune is a writer not a psychologist. Spot.us - Member Profile

Third Study - The study wasn't looking at how long homosexual relationships lasted, but rather was focused on HIV in homosexual relationships

 

[-Peacemaker-]

The first study doesn't appear to exist anymore.

Second study - Adrian Brune is a writer not a psychologist. Spot.us - Member Profile

Third Study - The study wasn't looking at how long homosexual relationships lasted, but rather was focused on HIV in homosexual relationships

Do you even realize that the Blade is a LGBT newspaper?

 

[9Westy9]

Do you even realize that the Blade is a LGBT newspaper?

No I didn't. Although I can't find the article that your source referenced. Still, a newspaper is not a study. A newspaper reports news, it doesn't make findings.

 

[Me Myself]

You know how "debunked" them? He looked at the dates and decided that because the modal range of the studies quoted in a 2003 article was the mid 90s, they were somehow invalid.

Actually, they were before the 90s. We are talking more than two decades in the past. Do you think nothing about gay society has changed so far?

The ones tyhat were 90 and up only tried to invalidate the studies about homosexuality not being harmful. They didn´t prove it harmful at all, just said it hasn´t been proved to be unharmful.

Mind you, there were more than 60 secular/medical studies quoted and he might've spent about 10 minutes total verifying anything.

That´s because I just saw the section that said why the homosexuals were harmful. I didn´t care about any other parts because if they haven´t been proved harmful all the rest of the parts don´t matter.

And guess what? The only thing that makes a study invalid is if it isn't true.

That false. Actualy your source quoted a lot of examples of studies of homosexuality not harming the chldren being invalid not for being "untrue" but because they were badly done. The fact that their own sources sucked was an insult to people like you that don´t even do a quick search on them. The fact that my quick search was enough to debunk them just proves that most people wont do that. The theologian knew this, that´s why he had the balls to put it anyways.

Here's more studies: We can play this game all day. Believe whatever you want to believe

The 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census surveyed the lifestyles of 7,862 homosexuals. Of those involved in a "current relationship," only 15 percent describe their current relationship as having lasted twelve years or longer, with five percent lasting more than twenty years.[4] While this "snapshot in time" is not an absolute predictor of the length of homosexual relationships, it does indicate that few homosexual relationships achieve the longevity common in marriages "

1-Not only married couples are awarded custody of children.

2-So what? let´s say they are 40 years old and have had a relationship for 12 years, then they had it since they were 28... and still have it. What I read now doesn´t say they have broken up, it just says how long they´ve been together so far.

Just by point 1 this study is worthless. By point 2 it´s pathetic already.

In The Sexual Organization of the City, University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann argues that "typical gay city inhabitants spend most of their adult lives in 'transactional' relationships, or short-term commitments of less than six months."[5]

"5. Adrian Brune, "City Gays Skip Long-term Relationships: Study Says," Washington Blade (February 27, 04): 12"

"· A study of homosexual men in the Netherlands published in the journal AIDS found that the "duration of steady partnerships" was 1.5 years.[6]

6. Maria Xiridou, et al, "The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam," AIDS 17 (2003):"

Health checks are part of the adoption process, and what makes you think that the gays that don´t have steady relationships are the ones wanting the boys?

Emotional checks ar part of the process the same as through examination of the person´s life. Do you think they go to the agency purchase a kid and then leave? It takes months to adopt. In which you are undr probation. Then it takes I think 8 weeks (may be wrong about time) with the kid in probation with a social worker visiting you and the kid every week.

I mean, I am all for deeper study of the adoptive parents, be themm straight or homosexual, the studies are important.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Actually, they were before the 90s. We are talking more than two decades in the past. Do you think nothing about gay society has changed so far?

The ones tyhat were 90 and up only tried to invalidate the studies about homosexuality not being harmful. They didn´t prove it harmful at all, just said it hasn´t been proved to be unharmful.



That´s because I just saw the section that said why the homosexuals were harmful. I didn´t care about any other parts because if they haven´t been proved harmful all the rest of the parts don´t matter.

.

Translation: "I read about 10-15% of the whole article".

 

[Me Myself]

Translation: "I read about 10-15% of the whole article".

Yeah, the part that mattered.

The argument was:

homosexual parents are harmful. The studies saying this is false were inadequately done, and here are studies telling me that they are harmful. Here are studies of heterosexual couples being compared to the studies of the homosexual ones bing harmful and you see heterosexual couples being better.

Now, what I´ve found out is:

Homosexual parents are harmful. The studies saying this is false are inadequately done, and my studies saying that this is true are also inadequately done. This results of the studies of heterosexual couples that may be as false as those of homosexual couples I provided to you prove to you that they are better than the homosexuals when you compare them with my untrustable homosexual studies.

Is that trustable to you?

 

[McBell]

I also guarantee you that if heterosexual men could get away with having quick sexual encounters instead of relationships they would too.

One look at the divorce rate shows that...

Of course, the thread isn't about how bad heterosexual parents are, it is supposed to be how homosexuals are so much worse as parents than heterosexuals.

With all the problems he is having presenting legit research on how bad homosexual parents are in the first place, I don't give a nickel for his chances on showing how homosexuals are so much worse than heterosexuals.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Let's be reasonable here. It makes perfect sense that homosexuals make inferior parents if you're a raging homophobe.

 

[McBell]

Is that trustable to you?

Based on his "I will only accept what I want to hear" presentations, I have to say that yes, I honestly believe that he actually feels it is trustable.

 

[Me Myself]

Based on his "I will only accept what I want to hear" presentations, I have to say that yes, I honestly believe that he actually feels it is trustable.

I think he is in denial know and kinda desperate.

When you are this blind it is willful.

 

[McBell]

Let's be reasonable here. It makes perfect sense that homosexuals make inferior parents if you're a raging homophobe.

I often wonder why it is that those against same sex couples adopting never seem to understand that it is the breeders putting all those children in the system to begin with.

How is it that the fact that there are children needing adopted in the first place is never something that is brought up against heterosexuals?

 

[9Westy9]

Me Myself has refuted all these 'studies' you've posted. Even if your studies were correct there are still some monogamous homosexual couples. Should these be denied the right to adopt a child just because most homosexual couples aren't? Also what about children with divorced parents? Should they have their children taken away because both mother and father aren't able to take care of the child?

Jungle, could you answer this please?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I often wonder why it is that those against same sex couples adopting never seem to understand that it is the breeders putting all those children in the system to begin with.

How is it that the fact that there are children needing adopted in the first place is never something that is brought up against heterosexuals?

Hate has never been very compatible with honesty or rationality.