Gays having kids?

[MAP2010.wireless]

I do not hate Gays nor do I wish Harm on any Gay People.
But I want to protect our kids, their Rights are what I care about.

"Yes, boys can be the victims of sexual violence also and it's against the law.

Sexual violence can and does happen to males. In Virginia 1 in 8 men have been sexually assaulted in their lifetime (Virginia Department of Health, 2003).

Most of the offenders who exploit young men are male. And, most men who abuse boys define their sexual orientation as heterosexual. A male who is sexually coerced or assaulted by another male does not mean the young man is automatically gay. It means he was a victim of sexual assault."

Dems say its ok for Gay Men and Women to teach our kids how to become Men and Women, but its a FACT that people who Role Play that they are something they are not are sick. Men wanting to act as if they are Women, Women wanting to act as if they are Men.

This type of Role playing is where some one wishies to be something they are not, Its their way the world should be. If Men were really born Gay why do they dess up as women? Who do they feel the need to role play? This is something that they know is wrong. People will take drugs or brake the law so they can get turned on. Its people who like acting this way, not because they were born that way.

VOTE!!!!

[underdawg]

Most of the offenders who exploit young women are male. And, most men who abuse young women define their sexual orientation as heterosexual. So should we try to keep all heterosexual men from being around girls?

It is a myth that gays want to act like women. Most of the gay men I know, as well as myself, have no desire to dress or act like a woman. There are people who like to do this and they are either cross dressers or transexuals. A lot of cross dressers are actually straight men. They are totally attracted to women, but have a fetish for wearing womens clothes. cross dressers can be both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I don't think that cross dressing has anything to do specifically with homosexuality. The only reason they hang out together is that the straight cross dresser will not be ridiculed by gay people.

Well being a transsexual is something completely different. The transsexual is a person who thinks they are trapped in the wrong body. With them it is not who they are attracted to, but what sex they see themselves as.

[firefox]

Wireless, how would you feel if someone from the majority in a situation where you were the minority told you that you can't do something because you are an alleged "danger to children"? What if it was entirely unfounded? What would you do?

[MAP2010.wireless]

Most of the offenders who exploit young women are male. And, most men who abuse young women define their sexual orientation as heterosexual. So should we try to keep all heterosexual men from being around girls?

It is a myth that gays want to act like women. Most of the gay men I know, as well as myself, have no desire to dress or act like a woman. There are people who like to do this and they are either cross dressers or transexuals. A lot of cross dressers are actually straight men. They are totally attracted to women, but have a fetish for wearing womens clothes. cross dressers can be both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I don't think that cross dressing has anything to do specifically with homosexuality. The only reason they hang out together is thatÂ*Â*the straight cross dresser will not be ridiculed by gay people.

Well being a transsexual is something completely different. The transsexual is a person who thinks they are trapped in the wrong body. With them it is not who they are attracted to, but what sex they see themselves as.


"Yes, boys can be the victims of sexual violence also and it's against the law.

Sexual violence can and does happen to males. In Virginia 1 in 8 men have been sexually assaulted in their lifetime (Virginia Department of Health, 2003).

Most of the offenders who exploit young men are male. And, most men who abuse boys define their sexual orientation as heterosexual. A male who is sexually coerced or assaulted by another male does not mean the young man is automatically gay. It means he was a victim of sexual assault."


Ok now about the Men who Rape young women: Perverted People who acts in away that would included a child then that person should not be around kids.

So if it Gays or Perverted Men or Women, Kids have rights too.

[Elrathin]

Ok now about the Men who Rape young women: Perverted People who acts in away that would included a child then that person should not be around kids.

Rapists always rape (hence the name), gays and heterosexuals do not always rape. Do you get that point yet?

And you have yet to prove why homosexuality is a perversion. You have only given your OPINION that it is. I listed several things in another thread that people think are perverted. That doesn't mean they are.

It used to be perverted for blacks and whites to have sex and marry. That isn't the case anymore.


So if it Gays or Perverted Men or Women, Kids have rights too.


Rapists are not the same as gays. There is a reason why being gay is not illegal and being a rapist is.

And the "Dem" comment at the end of the poll only shows that this poll is biased and ridiculous. How about putting a option for neo/cons "No, because my fairy tale religion tells me it's bad".

[MAP2010.wireless]

Ok now about the Men who Rape young women: Perverted People who acts in away that would included a child then that person should not be around kids.

Rapists always rape (hence the name), gays and heterosexuals do not always rape.Â*Â*Do you get that point yet?

And you have yet to prove why homosexuality is a perversion.Â*Â*You have only given your OPINION that it is.Â*Â*I listed several things in another thread that people think are perverted.Â*Â*That doesn't mean they are.

It used to be perverted for blacks and whites to have sex and marry.Â*Â*That isn't the case anymore.


So if it Gays or Perverted Men or Women, Kids have rights too.


Rapists are not the same as gays. There is a reason why being gay is not illegal and being a rapist is.

And the "Dem" comment at the end of the poll only shows that this poll is biased and ridiculous.Â*Â*How about putting a option for neo/cons "No, because my fairy tale religion tells me it's bad".


Ok, Have sex with your sister or brother or the same sex is Perverted, but that don't mean you don't have that right.

[Elrathin]

Ok, Have sex with your sister or brother or the same sex is Perverted, but that don't mean you don't have that right.


Again, where does it say homosexuality is a perversion? Who is saying this? The only evidence it is a perversion comes from religion and NO RELIGION has been proven right.

As I pointed out, some people think sex should only be for procreation. Should they be able to tell you that you cannot have sex? What is your right to your perversion of sex for anything other than procreation?

[MAP2010.wireless]

Ok, Have sex with your sister or brother or the same sex is Perverted, but that don't mean you don't have that right.


Again, where does it say homosexuality is a perversion?Â*Â*Who is saying this?Â*Â*The only evidence it is a perversion comes from religion and NO RELIGION has been proven right.

As I pointed out, some people think sex should only be for procreation.Â*Â*Should they be able to tell you that you cannot have sex?Â*Â*What is your right to your perversion of sex for anything other than procreation?


I feel the same way if a Men had sex with a Women in the But.
Thats perversion as well.

[Elrathin]

I feel the same way if a Men had sex with a Women in the But.
Thats perversion as well.


And that is your opinion, not fact. It sounds like you want to legislate morality as long as it is your morality being dictated. However, if someone were to say you can't have sex unless it is for procreation, I think you would have a problem with that wouldn't you?

Or if Islam morality was being dictated that you have to follow, you would also have a problem with that.

so if you don't want to have your morality dictated to you by the state, why would you want to dictate that to someone else?

Noone is asking you to think gay marriage is moral, just make it a choice. I know serveral people that think justice of the peace weddings are immoral or that interracial marriage is immoral, however those choices are still legal.

Gay marriage being legal does not mean the state is saying it is moral, only that it is a choice. Being an alcoholic is actually legal, but it isn't moral to some.

[MAP2010.wireless]

I feel the same way if a Men had sex with a Women in the But.
Thats perversion as well.


And that is your opinion, not fact.Â*Â*It sounds like you want to legislate morality as long as it is your morality being dictated.Â*Â*However, if someone were to say you can't have sex unless it is for procreation, I think you would have a problem with that wouldn't you?Â*Â*

Or if Islam morality was being dictated that you have to follow, you would also have a problem with that.

so if you don't want to have your morality dictated to you by the state, why would you want to dictate that to someone else?

Noone is asking you to think gay marriage is moral, just make it a choice.Â*Â*I know serveral people that think justice of the peace weddingsÂ*Â*are immoral or that interracial marriage is immoral, however those choices are still legal.

Gay marriage being legal does not mean the state is saying it is moral, only that it is a choice.Â*Â*Being an alcoholic is actually legal, but it isn't moral to some.


Well lets talk about me, I don't have Sex just for Fun.
When I'm with a women I love I do, but its because I love her and would love to have kids. Thats me.

[askates]

[/quote]
Well lets talk about me, I don't have Sex just for Fun.
When I'm with a women I love I do, but its because I love her and would love to have kids. Thats me.
[/quote]

Oh My God....If this is what straight sex is like..THANK GOD I'm gay

[NortheastCynic]

Yes, I believe that homosexuals should not be excluded in the adoption process. There is no evidence that proves homosexuals would be A: Worse parents then heterosexuals B: Damaging to their children or C: A perversion.

In fact, there is evidence to the contrary in that animals of a variety of species have been known to engage in homosexual behavior, leading one to believe that it is, in fact, natural to a degree.

I cannot imagine that a loving homosexual relationship is not better than moving from foster home to foster home.

-NC

[MAP2010.wireless]

Yes, I believe that homosexuals should not be excluded in the adoption process.Â*Â*There is no evidence that proves homosexuals would be A: Worse parents then heterosexuals B: Damaging to their children or C: A perversion.

In fact, there is evidence to the contrary in that animals of a variety of species have been known to engage in homosexual behavior, leading one to believe that it is, in fact, natural to a degree.Â*Â*

I cannot imagine that a loving homosexual relationship is not better than moving from foster home to foster home.

-NC


It would be about the same. Foster Homes and Gay Homes.
Foster Homes has a lot of Dems who are Gay so its about the same.

Dems are the Gay Party and Rep are not, So if your Gay then Dems have an opening for you.


This is not the Gay gene, its the Democrat Gene.

[NortheastCynic]

It would be about the same. Foster Homes and Gay Homes.
Foster Homes has a lot of Dems who are Gay so its about the same.

Dems are the Gay Party and Rep are not, So if your Gay then Dems have an opening for you.


This is not the Gay gene, its the Democrat Gene. I don't suppose you have any facts to back up your statement that gay homes are comparable to foster homes?Â*Â*As to your statement about "Dems" and "gays", I'm not really sure how that pertains to the discussion at hand.

-NC

[MAP2010.wireless]

It would be about the same. Foster Homes and Gay Homes.
Foster Homes has a lot of Dems who are Gay so its about the same.

Dems are the Gay Party and Rep are not, So if your Gay then Dems have an opening for you.


This is not the Gay gene, its the Democrat Gene. I don't suppose you have any facts to back up your statement that gay homes are comparable to foster homes?Â*Â*As to your statement about "Dems" and "gays", I'm not really sure how that pertains to the discussion at hand.

-NC


Well Most Gays are Dems and I think it might just a a Dems Gene..

[NortheastCynic]

That wasn't my question, my question was what do you have to back up the statement that gay homes and foster homes are comparable in terms of the love/welfare they provide for a child.

-NC

[MAP2010.wireless]

That wasn't my question, my question was what do you have to back up the statement that gay homes and foster homes are comparable in terms of the love/welfare they provide for a child.

-NC



I would not call that love:

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_02_11.html

When a 16 year-old foster son was molested and raped by two gay foster parents in Vermont, Tom Moore, Deputy of the State’s Social and Rehabilitation Services, told me on June 25, 2002 that neither he nor the Commissioner knew of any evidence about the molestation rates of children by homosexual foster parents.

Really? Traditional common sense holds that married parents are likely to be the best foster placement, and homosexuals among the worst, in part because of the risks of sexual molestation. But tradition holds almost no weight for these bureaucrats. How can this be? Can the traditions that worked to build arguably the world’s most successful culture be ignored without injuring society? What kind of belief-system is so much better that it should be followed instead?

It turns out that the natural parents of the boy who was victimized strenuously objected to the placement of their hard-to-control son with these two gays. Yet, following a policy laid down 15 years ago, their objections were ignored. Additionally, when the boy complained to the Department that his new foster parents had asked him whether he had engaged in anal intercourse with his brother, the Department, through David Stanley, its Case Worker, concluded that the boy had been ‘coached’ to say this by his natural parents. Stanley said the gay foster parents denied saying such a thing and he believed them. So as far as the case worker was concerned, the boy had lied, so he was forced to stay with the ‘male couple.’

Soon thereafter, the men gave the boy a magazine containing depictions of scantily clad men. They told the boy to ‘masturbate to these pictures.’ The boy complied, and hid the magazine under his bed.

"The boy was with these homosexuals only two more weeks before they began to rape him!"

Think of it. The investigation had already put these two gays ‘on notice,’ and yet this warning kept them from acting upon their temptation for only two weeks. Then, both men, who were in a ‘committed relationship’ with one another, had their way sexually with the boy. Sometimes, just one of them raped the boy alone, sometimes it happened when they were together. The boy managed to escape only by pretending that the sex was OK, and then fleeing to a hospital when the ‘family’ went to town to shop.

As it turned out, the men’s magazine was the ‘clincher’ when the boy fingered his foster ‘parents.’ Because the magazine was where the boy said it was, the police were able to get the men to confess.

Notice what happened here. Vermont’s child protective agency, without evidence of any sort, adopted a new policy 15 years ago that discarded tradition. Why? Because traditional common sense relegated homosexuals as ‘not suitable for foster-placement’ status. The child protective agency thought it had a ‘better way.’

What was this ‘better way?’ What is this belief system that is so much better than traditional thought?

I filed a Freedom of Information request regarding this case and the policy changes that had been instituted by the agency, asking 17 specific questions. Some of these included: how many foster parents or foster parent pairs who have been involved in foster parenting a child or children were homosexual? Did your department conclude that the 16 year-old boy’s claim was false that his foster parents had asked him whether he performed anal intercourse with his brother?



Read more
Here (http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_02_11.html)

[MAP2010.wireless]

That wasn't my question, my question was what do you have to back up the statement that gay homes and foster homes are comparable in terms of the love/welfare they provide for a child.

-NC



I would not call that love:

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_02_11.html

When a 16 year-old foster son was molested and raped by two gay foster parents in Vermont, Tom Moore, Deputy of the State’s Social and Rehabilitation Services, told me on June 25, 2002 that neither he nor the Commissioner knew of any evidence about the molestation rates of children by homosexual foster parents.

Really? Traditional common sense holds that married parents are likely to be the best foster placement, and homosexuals among the worst, in part because of the risks of sexual molestation. But tradition holds almost no weight for these bureaucrats. How can this be? Can the traditions that worked to build arguably the world’s most successful culture be ignored without injuring society? What kind of belief-system is so much better that it should be followed instead?

It turns out that the natural parents of the boy who was victimized strenuously objected to the placement of their hard-to-control son with these two gays. Yet, following a policy laid down 15 years ago, their objections were ignored. Additionally, when the boy complained to the Department that his new foster parents had asked him whether he had engaged in anal intercourse with his brother, the Department, through David Stanley, its Case Worker, concluded that the boy had been ‘coached’ to say this by his natural parents. Stanley said the gay foster parents denied saying such a thing and he believed them. So as far as the case worker was concerned, the boy had lied, so he was forced to stay with the ‘male couple.’

Soon thereafter, the men gave the boy a magazine containing depictions of scantily clad men. They told the boy to ‘masturbate to these pictures.’ The boy complied, and hid the magazine under his bed.

"The boy was with these homosexuals only two more weeks before they began to rape him!"

Think of it. The investigation had already put these two gays ‘on notice,’ and yet this warning kept them from acting upon their temptation for only two weeks. Then, both men, who were in a ‘committed relationship’ with one another, had their way sexually with the boy. Sometimes, just one of them raped the boy alone, sometimes it happened when they were together. The boy managed to escape only by pretending that the sex was OK, and then fleeing to a hospital when the ‘family’ went to town to shop.

As it turned out, the men’s magazine was the ‘clincher’ when the boy fingered his foster ‘parents.’ Because the magazine was where the boy said it was, the police were able to get the men to confess.

Notice what happened here. Vermont’s child protective agency, without evidence of any sort, adopted a new policy 15 years ago that discarded tradition. Why? Because traditional common sense relegated homosexuals as ‘not suitable for foster-placement’ status. The child protective agency thought it had a ‘better way.’

What was this ‘better way?’ What is this belief system that is so much better than traditional thought?

I filed a Freedom of Information request regarding this case and the policy changes that had been instituted by the agency, asking 17 specific questions. Some of these included: how many foster parents or foster parent pairs who have been involved in foster parenting a child or children were homosexual? Did your department conclude that the 16 year-old boy’s claim was false that his foster parents had asked him whether he performed anal intercourse with his brother?



Read more
Here (http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_02_11.html)


http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_02_11_fig1a.JPG
Figure 1. Foster Parent Perpetrators by Type of Moestation(%)

[MAP2010.wireless]

Result #1. In 22 stories, the perpetrator(s) molested foster children:
1. Arlington, VA (3/2/89): An unmarried man, who had had boys placed in his home for 10 years, was charged with having sex with one of the foster boys (this was counted as one homosexual male perpetrator, one victim).
2. San Diego (3/1/89): A mother (who was married to an oft-absent husband in the military) and son lost their foster day care license when charges of possible molestation of two children were filed against her (counted as a female perpetrator and two victims of unknown sex).
4. Los Angeles (6/6/90): A man and wife lost their license when the man was accused of molesting two foster daughters (counted as a heterosexual male perpetrator and two girl victims).
7. St. Louis (10/21/90): An unmarried man, both a foster parent to one boy and the supervisor of a unit at a children’s home, was convicted of molesting his foster son as well as 4 other boys at the home (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and one boy victim).
8. British Columbia, Canada (3/26/92): A man (marital status not provided) was released from prison for molesting a 14 year old foster daughter (counted as a male heterosexual perpetrator and one girl victim).
10. Los Angeles (7/8/93): A man and wife lost their foster care license when the man was charged with molesting 2 of his foster daughters (counted as a male heterosexual perpetrator and 2 girl victims).
11. St. Petersburg, FL (1/11/94): An unmarried man was convicted of molesting his 12 year-old foster son (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and one boy victim).
12. Maryland (4/16/94): An unmarried judge was charged with molesting his 17 year-old foster son (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and one boy victim).
13. San Francisco (12/13/94): A married man was convicted of molesting boys and girls, including 3 foster children (counted as one homosexual male perpetrator and 3 victims of unknown sex).
15. Atlanta (1/30/97): A married man molested his 12 year-old foster son (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and one boy victim).
17. Connecticut (3/22/97): A man and wife lost their foster care license when he was accused of molesting his foster son (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and a boy victim).
18. New York (6/29/97): An apparently unmarried foster mother sexually molested her foster daughter from the time she was age 5 until she was 17 (counted as a homosexual female perpetrator and a female victim).
19. Seattle (12/3/97): An unmarried couple molested an 8 year-old foster daughter (counted as a homosexual female perpetrator and a male heterosexual perpetrator and a female victim).
21. England (12/5/98): An unmarried foster parent was convicted of molesting his 12 year-old foster son (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and a boy victim).
22. Atlanta (2/27/99): An unmarried foster parent was convicted of molesting his 3 foster children, a girl and two boys (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and a girl and two boy victims).
23. Boston (11/3/99): A married foster parent was convicted of molesting “foster children� (counted as a male perpetrator with 2 victims of unknown sex).
24. Toronto (4/3/00): A married foster parent was convicted of molesting a foster daughter (counted as a heterosexual male perpetrator and a girl victim).
25. San Diego (4/25/00): A married foster parent was convicted of molesting two twin 9 year-old foster daughters (counted as a heterosexual male perpetrator and two girl victims).
26. San Diego (6/23/00): A unmarried foster father was charged with sexual improprieties with his foster son, 11, and hiring him out for sex with other men (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and a boy victim).
28. San Diego (9/24/00): An unmarried openly homosexual male, living with a partner who was a convicted homosexual child molester (the partner had sexually abused his own son and daughter), was given custody of an 11 year-old foster son. He then raped him. Over the years the foster father also offered his foster son to others who were sexually interested in the boy. At least three individuals accepted the foster-father’s offer (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and a boy victim).
29. Los Angeles (7/10/01): An unmarried woman pled no contest to the accusation of sexually abusing her 12 year-old foster daughter, and then lost her foster-care license (counted as a homosexual female perpetrator and a female victim).
30. St. Louis (12/31/01): An unmarried foster father was charged with molesting 2 foster sons, both 13 years old (counted as a homosexual male perpetrator and two boy victims).
Comment: It is noteworthy that in two of the 12 stories involving gays, the homosexual not only molested his foster son, but prostituted him as well. Something seems to be morally ‘wrong’ with homosexuals.

[NortheastCynic]

Sorry, MAP, but you're going to have to give me something from a source more reputable and non-partisan than the Family Research Institute.Â*Â*It is a clearly biased, culturally conservative "institution" that uses terms like "liberal wacko" [direct quote] to describe people who disagree with some of its theories.Â*Â*I'm not one to dismiss fact, but again, I'm going to need to see something from a more legitimate source than the FRI before I can go much further.

-NC

[MAP2010.wireless]

Sorry, MAP, but you're going to have to give me something from a source more reputable and non-partisan than the Family Research Institute.Â*Â*It is a clearly biased, culturally conservative "institution" that uses terms like "liberal wacko" [direct quote] to describe people who disagree with some of their theories.Â*Â*I'm not one to dismiss fact, but again, I'm going to need to see something from a more legitimate source than the FRI before I can go much further.

-NC


I will say you will not have any one from the Dems side saying it is wrong so its hard to find one who is not in that mind set.

Without GOD not the other gods, I'm talking about GOD is why we don't think it right ok rape kids and women. Dems are not the Side of God so anything is open too them. Why would I ask a person who thinks there is no GOD about something GOD has said.

There are places in the world thats its ok for people to have sex with young kids, Thats why Reps are here to stop it.

Dems want to think Gays are not raping our kids, but they are.
Not all Gays do this so if your Gay and don't rape kids, I'm not talking about you. You can do what ever you want in your bedroom, just don't tell me about it.

If your Gay and think there is no GOD thats your right, you can do whatever you want.

But don't tell me that Dems would tell the truth about Gays raping little kids, they are blind and want to act as if it don't happen.


Last Note:
Any person who wishies to talk on a child should be reviewed, if that person is noted of anything wrong to that child that person should not
have the right to have any kids.

All we feel is right and wrong is because GOD said it is or is not.

[NortheastCynic]

I have NO idea what you're talking about. Somehow you've meandered away from the topic and are now talking about pedophilia. As I said, I have no idea what you're talking about.

-NC

[Elrathin]

Without GOD not the other gods, I'm talking about GOD is why we don't think it right ok rape kids and women.

You can't even prove god exists.Â*Â*So how can you state it is because of god?


Dems are not the Side of God so anything is open too them.

I know plenty of Christians who are dems, that is a ridiculous comment.Â*Â*That is what we call rhetoric.


There are places in the world thats its ok for people to have sex with young kids, Thats why Reps are here to stop it.

Yeah right, now your being silly.Â*Â*Are you actually saying that Dems are FOR rape now?Â*Â*If you are, I am no longer even going to take you serisouly as that is an idiotic comment.


Dems want to think Gays are not raping our kids, but they are.

So are heterosxuals, so what is your point?


Not all Gays do this so if your Gay and don't rape kids, I'm not talking about you. You can do what ever you want in your bedroom, just don't tell me about it.

ah but many Christians feel the need to get on their soapboxes and preach to people out on the street.Â*Â*Why don't you guys keep it in the Church, I don't want to here about it.


But don't tell me that Dems would tell the truth about Gays raping little kids, they are blind and want to act as if it don't happen.

Noone is saying that there haven't been gays that have raped children, we're saying that NOT ALL gays do this, not even a majority.Â*Â*You are yet again trying to make a connection with rape and homosexuality. We already went through this. Heterosexuals rape as well, do you blame heterosexuality for it? No. Do you get that through your head yet?


Last Note:
Any person who wishies to talk on a child should be reviewed, if that person is noted of anything wrong to that child that person should not
have the right to have any kids.

You make no sense here whatsoever, please explain.


All we feel is right and wrong is because GOD said it is or is not.


Again, you cannot prove that god exists, so how can you state this as fact?Â*Â*Again, this is rhetoric.

[Waffletush]

Again, you cannot prove that god exists, so how can you state this as fact?Â*Â*Again, this is rhetoric.

Can you prove your mother loved you? Can you prove Jimmy Hoffa existed? No. No.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Sorry, MAP, but you're going to have to give me something from a source more reputable and non-partisan than the Family Research Institute.Â*Â*It is a clearly biased, culturally conservative "institution" that uses terms like "liberal wacko" [direct quote] to describe people who disagree with some of its theories.Â*Â*I'm not one to dismiss fact, but again, I'm going to need to see something from a more legitimate source than the FRI before I can go much further.

-NC


For the info he's looking for, they don't get any more reputable.

[Elrathin]

Can you prove your mother loved you? Can you prove Jimmy Hoffa existed? No. No.


I'm not the one saying something should be illegal because my god says so.

The burden to prove a god is on MAP since he is the one saying that something should be illegal because his god says it is wrong.

[lily]

Again, you cannot prove that god exists, so how can you state this as fact?Â*Â*Again, this is rhetoric.

Can you prove your mother loved you?Â*Â*Can you prove Jimmy Hoffa existed?Â*Â*No.Â*Â*No.



Well, actually I can prove that Jimmy Hoffa existed.....but that's not what this thread is about.

[lily]

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_02_11.html

When a 16 year-old foster son was molested and raped by two gay foster parents in Vermont, Tom Moore, Deputy of the State’s Social and Rehabilitation Services, told me on June 25, 2002 that neither he nor the Commissioner knew of any evidence about the molestation rates of children by homosexual foster parents.


Map.......you're all over the map on this thread, so I'll just address this one post.
The attorney for the distraught mother of a 19 month old boy who died 5 days after he was taken into state custody said the child would still be alive had he been left with the mother. (http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2004/feb/18/mother_foster_care/)

Edgar, a former foster child, suffocated after his adoptive parents bound him with duct tape and stuffed a sock in his mouth. Don't see anything about homosexuals here. Just adoptive. (http://6news.ljworld.com/section/socialservices/story/187707)

Or maybe gun owners shouldn't have foster kids? (http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050710/COLUMNISTS17/507100368)


Or maybe just hetrosexual married couples shouldn't be able to adopt at all. (http://adoption.about.com/od/adoptionrights/p/russiancases.htm)

[MAP2010.wireless]

Without GOD not the other gods, I'm talking about GOD is why we don't think it right ok rape kids and women.

You can't even prove god exists.Â*Â*So how can you state it is because of god?


Dems are not the Side of God so anything is open too them.

I know plenty of Christians who are dems, that is a ridiculous comment.Â*Â*That is what we call rhetoric.


There are places in the world thats its ok for people to have sex with young kids, Thats why Reps are here to stop it.

Yeah right, now your being silly.Â*Â*Are you actually saying that Dems are FOR rape now?Â*Â*If you are, I am no longer even going to take you serisouly as that is an idiotic comment.


Dems want to think Gays are not raping our kids, but they are.

So are heterosxuals, so what is your point?


Not all Gays do this so if your Gay and don't rape kids, I'm not talking about you. You can do what ever you want in your bedroom, just don't tell me about it.

ah but many Christians feel the need to get on their soapboxes and preach to people out on the street.Â*Â*Why don't you guys keep it in the Church, I don't want to here about it.


But don't tell me that Dems would tell the truth about Gays raping little kids, they are blind and want to act as if it don't happen.

Noone is saying that there haven't been gays that have raped children, we're saying that NOT ALL gays do this, not even a majority.Â*Â*You are yet again trying to make a connection with rape and homosexuality.Â*Â*We already went through this.Â*Â*Heterosexuals rape as well, do you blame heterosexuality for it?Â*Â*No.Â*Â*Do you get that through your head yet?


Last Note:
Any person who wishies to talk on a child should be reviewed, if that person is noted of anything wrong to that child that person should not
have the right to have any kids.

You make no sense here whatsoever, please explain.


All we feel is right and wrong is because GOD said it is or is not.


Again, you cannot prove that god exists, so how can you state this as fact?Â*Â*Again, this is rhetoric.


Any person who wishies to "(talk)=Take" on a child should be reviewed, if that person is noted of anything wrong to that child that person should not
have the right to have any kids.[/quote]

And you have GOD and gods so you must be taking about one of the gods when you say "god".

And Dems look the other way, Reps don't.

When we find FAKE Reps who do something wrong, we kick them out.

You say some Dems Christians and there maybe some, but they are not the ones who let babies die just because the mother changed her mind. Christians love kids, Christians know ever life counts and has rights.

So when you say Christians and Dems, Do they feel its ok to kill babies? if so how can you say you are trying to be (Christ Like)?
Christ never said its ok to kill kids, and life to us has meaning.

You are not Christian so this means nothing to you but it should too your friends, if not they should ask "Am I a Christian"?

Mark

[Elrathin]

And you have GOD and gods so you must be taking about one of the gods when you say "god".

No, I meant god as in the Christian god. If you don't like the way I spell it tough.


And Dems look the other way, Reps don't.

When we find FAKE Reps who do something wrong, we kick them out.

And what does this have to do with gays having children? You are all over the map in this thread.


You say some Dems Christians and there maybe some, but they are not the ones who let babies die just because the mother changed her mind. Christians love kids, Christians know ever life counts and has rights.

Hmmm adultry is a sin too however, you repubs don't seem to have a problem with that one do you?


So when you say Christians and Dems, Do they feel its ok to kill babies? if so how can you say you are trying to be (Christ Like)?
Christ never said its ok to kill kids, and life to us has meaning.

Yeah and so does the sanctiity of marriage, however, MANY republicans have affairs. Many republicans cheat and steal as well. Yeah that's Christ like isn't it?


You are not Christian so this means nothing to you but it should too your friends, if not they should ask "Am I a Christian"?


Maybe you should ask yourself if you are a real Christian. Because it is not for you to judge others, yet you do.

Bottom line, you claim something should be illegal because your bible tells you so. Since you can't prove that god is real, you can't prove that the bible is fact either. So stop trying to force laws based on your bible that you cannot even PROVE as factual.

[MAP2010.wireless]

And you have GOD and gods so you must be taking about one of the gods when you say "god".

No, I meant god as in the Christian god.Â*Â*If you don't like the way I spell it tough.


And Dems look the other way, Reps don't.

When we find FAKE Reps who do something wrong, we kick them out.

And what does this have to do with gays having children?Â*Â*You are all over the map in this thread.


You say some Dems Christians and there maybe some, but they are not the ones who let babies die just because the mother changed her mind. Christians love kids, Christians know ever life counts and has rights.

Hmmm adultry is a sin too however, you repubs don't seem to have a problem with that one do you?


So when you say Christians and Dems, Do they feel its ok to kill babies? if so how can you say you are trying to be (Christ Like)?
Christ never said its ok to kill kids, and life to us has meaning.

Yeah and so does the sanctiity of marriage, however, MANY republicans have affairs.Â*Â*Many republicans cheat and steal as well.Â*Â*Yeah that's Christ like isn't it?


You are not Christian so this means nothing to you but it should too your friends, if not they should ask "Am I a Christian"?


Maybe you should ask yourself if you are a real Christian.Â*Â*Because it is not for you to judge others, yet you do.

Bottom line, you claim something should be illegal because your bible tells you so.Â*Â*Since you can't prove that god is real, you can't prove that the bible is fact either.Â*Â*So stop trying to force laws based on your bible that you cannot even PROVE as factual.


Gays can't have kids on their own. But if you can get two Gays People to make a kid then hey they have all the right to have that kid.

Well its God when we are talking about the real God.
I am not trying to judge, but I'm trying to protect Kids.

[Elrathin]

Gays can't have kids on their own. But if you can get two Gays People to make a kid then hey they have all the right to have that kid.

And again, you have that opinion, but you haven't proved evidence of why gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt.

You have provided articles where some sicko gay did something with a child, and there are articles where straight parents have done the same. NONE of your articles points to homosexuality as being the problem.

Being a pedophile has nothing to do with sexual preference because if it did, then ALL pedophiles would be gay and that isn't the case. There are NUMEROUS HETEROSEXUAL predators out there as well. SExual preference is NOT the problem.


Well its God when we are talking about the real God.
I am not trying to judge, but I'm trying to protect Kids.


You can call him God, GOD, GoD, GAWD, I don't give a damn because if you are Christian I know which one you are talking about and regardless of how I spell it, I think you are intelligent enough to know what I am referring to.

As for protecting kids, I'd put a kid in a gay home over a Christian one anyday of the week and twice on Sundays. I don't like the fact that many Christians breed intolrence and hate towards those that are different from them. You have your preference, I have mine.

[MAP2010.wireless]

Gays can't have kids on their own. But if you can get two Gays People to make a kid then hey they have all the right to have that kid.

And again, you have that opinion, but you haven't proved evidence of why gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt.Â*Â*

You have provided articles where some sicko gay did something with a child, and there are articles where straight parents have done the same.Â*Â*NONE of your articles points to homosexuality as being the problem.Â*Â*

Being a pedophile has nothing to do with sexual preference because if it did, then ALL pedophiles would be gay and that isn't the case.Â*Â*There are NUMEROUS HETEROSEXUAL predators out there as well.Â*Â*SExual preference is NOT the problem.


Well its God when we are talking about the real God.
I am not trying to judge, but I'm trying to protect Kids.


You can call him God, GOD, GoD, GAWD, I don't give a damn because if you are Christian I know which one you are talking about and regardless of how I spell it, I think you are intelligent enough to know what I am referring to.

As for protecting kids, I'd put a kid in a gay home over a Christian one anyday of the week and twice on Sundays.Â*Â*I don't like the fact that many Christians breed intolrence and hate towards those that are different from them.Â*Â*You have your preference, I have mine.


Yes you do, and its your right.