Parent of Choice inspired by Orangeandblueblooded's Pwnfest Thread - Page 11 - The Orange Mane

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etruth18

So if you have to pick one couple assuming both couples are identical in every way except their sexual orientation that would you prefer the kid be raised by?

It's still a loaded question. Do you know what that is?

underrated29 · 03-22-2011, 02:57 PM

This thread is still going?

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cmac821

Male and Female, I think it would be confusing to have a child to be raised by homosexuals

Why?

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 03:28 PM

I don't quite understand the point of all the verbiage spilled by IEI, oabb et.al.

What were y'all trying to show?

That the bigotry and prejudice suffered by the kids of gay parents means that kids should have heterosexual parents, because of that prejudice and bigotry.

Right?

DenverBrit · 03-22-2011, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronco Vixen

If truly identical in every way it seems most logical to me that you would want your child to face the least amount of prejudice (right or wrong) growing up.

Now, that said, if identicality in the mental health realm was not ensured, and I had to chose between leaving my beloved little maniac with one of the many insanely douchey heterosexual parents I was exposed to on vacation this past week or my dear friends Patti and Nancy, I would chose the latter every time because they are smarter, funnier, and going to try a hell of a lot harder than the douche crew present in Beaver Creek last week. Huh, huh, huh, how's that for unintentional irony - Beaver Creek.

You are hitting the nail on the head. Each situation is different and dependent upon the individuals involved.

As to which couples would be better for the child, that may well depend upon the amount of homophobia they are subjected to.
A child raised by a gay couple in Oklahoma City will have a different experience to one raised in San Francisco.

There are many complex variables involved, which makes the poll too simplistic.

TheReverend · 03-22-2011, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

I don't quite understand the point of all the verbiage spilled by IEI, oabb et.al.

What were y'all trying to show?

That the bigotry and prejudice suffered by the kids of gay parents means that kids should have heterosexual parents, because of that prejudice and bigotry.

Right?

A LARGE part of being a parent is protecting your kids.

What other kids say and do, you don't have any control over.

Needlessly exposing children to negative experiences is the difference in this discussion.

I'm sorry you can't see that from your ivory tower.

If it makes you feel any better, I've done nothing but treat you with respect over the years, but now I think you're a ****ing idiot.

Inquisitive Encyclopedic Insomniac · 03-22-2011, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DenverBrit

You are hitting the nail on the head. Each situation is different and dependent upon the individuals involved.

As to which couples would be better for the child, that may well depend upon the amount of homophobia they are subjected to.
A child raised by a gay couple in Oklahoma City will have a different experience to one raised in San Francisco.

There are many complex variables involved, which makes the poll too simplistic.

I will admit the poll is far too simplistic.

I think you make a great point about the difference between Oklahoma City (no offense to people who live there I have little knowledge) copared to SF.

It was simplified on purpose to generate debate and discussion. Most of it has been good. W*gs of course doesn't even come in and make near the point you did but is obviously dying for the attention

That One Guy · 03-22-2011, 04:05 PM

Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven.

Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Needlessly exposing children to negative experiences is the difference in this discussion.

And what's the source of those negative experiences?

Why, it's the bigotry and prejudice against the fitness of gay parents!

So, to make sure the kids of gay parents don't suffer those negative experiences, we should make sure gays aren't parents!

Problem solved.

Y'all are too effing dense.

Inquisitive Encyclopedic Insomniac · 03-22-2011, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That One Guy

Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven.

Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

I get the scenarios. I'm fine with a little square dancing if you asnwer the question. If you discuss your views not just blindly hate on others.

The question is brief and fair. It is as it is and that's why it's Private!!!

OABB · 03-22-2011, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That One Guy

Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven.

Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

QUOTED FOR TRUTH!!!!!

OABB · 03-22-2011, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That One Guy

Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven.

Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

**** YOU WAGS!!!!!

Inquisitive Encyclopedic Insomniac · 03-22-2011, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

And what's the source of those negative experiences?

Why, it's the bigotry and prejudice against the fitness of gay parents!

So, to make sure the kids of gay parents don't suffer those negative experiences, we should make sure gays aren't parents!

Problem solved.

Y'all are too effing dense.

For the sake of the room I will field this one.

I haven't never said or seen anyone for the record state that gays should not be parents. In fact I've seen everyone except for you actually come out and say that they can be good parents. (For the 400th time)

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That One Guy

Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven.

Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...&postcount=259

OABB · 03-22-2011, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That One Guy

Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven.

Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

ANSWER THE QUESTION BUTT****ER!!!!!!!!!!!

OABB · 03-22-2011, 04:13 PM

GOD HATES WAGS!

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inquisitive Encyclopedic Insomniac

For the sake of the room I will field this one.

I haven't never said or seen anyone for the record state that gays should not be parents. In fact I've seen everyone except for you actually come out and say that they can be good parents. (For the 400th time)

Oh, but their children may get bullied because they have two dads or two moms, and we want to shield children from bullys.

Ergo, it's best if gays aren't parents. Heterosexual parents won't have kids that suffer from the bullying the kids of gay parents will get from the kids of heterosexual parents.

Y'all can't even realize that is exactly what you are arguing.

It's the same argument racial purists use against interracial marriages. It's the same bigotry, too.

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:16 PM

oabb, you're funny.

Why are you doing the 'Net equivalent of hysterical screaming?

OABB · 03-22-2011, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

oabb, you're funny.

Why are you doing the 'Net equivalent of hysterical screaming?

why are you doing the net equivalent of bukake?

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OABB

why are you doing the net equivalent of bukake?

You've lost it.

You're the one going crazy.

Just as I intended.

I own you, son.

TheReverend · 03-22-2011, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

And what's the source of those negative experiences?

Why, it's the bigotry and prejudice against the fitness of gay parents!

So, to make sure the kids of gay parents don't suffer those negative experiences, we should make sure gays aren't parents!

Problem solved.

Y'all are too effing dense.

Do you realize that NOT ONCE did I say that?

Why are you the ONLY one having trouble following the discussion?

Changing the world is great, and I hope we one day DO live in a world like that.

For now we DONT, so my answer to the vacuum that is the THREAD TOPIC is very simple.

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Do you realize that NOT ONCE did I say that?

You don't have to say it. It's the logical outcome of your prejudice.

Why would kids of gay parents face taunting and bullies if kids didn't learn from their parents the bigotry that says gays have maladjusted kids and/or are lousy parents?

Geezus. Do I have to spell it out for y'all step by step as if you're idiots?

Apparently so.

TheReverend · 03-22-2011, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

You don't have to say it. It's the logical outcome of your prejudice.

Why would kids of gay parents face taunting and bullies if kids didn't learn from their parents the bigotry that says gays have maladjusted kids and/or are lousy parents?

Geezus. Do I have to spell it out for y'all step by step as if you're idiots?

Apparently so.

More **** that NO ONE said.

Also, not sure if you remember being a kid, but kids pick on other kids for ANYTHING whether it's right or wrong.

Anyway, good job dude, you're way off the ****ing hyper sensitive deep end.

Can you post a pic so we can try and guess your mental handicap? Would be a fun game.

Bronco Vixen · 03-22-2011, 04:37 PM

For the record, I posed this question to my friend Steven, who is gay, and he said "I wouldn't leave my pet ferret in the care of most of the fags I know, much less my child." BTW he is also stealing "rectum rooter" from you and claiming it as his own. But then again, he has a sense of humor.

W*GS · 03-22-2011, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Also, not sure if you remember being a kid, but kids pick on other kids for ANYTHING whether it's right or wrong.

So it doesn't matter if you raise your kids to pick on the kids of gay parents?

You guys can rationalize your bigotry as much as you want, but I'll keep calling you on it.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-22-2011, 02:57 PM	#252
underrated29 10-6 baby. Cutler doesnt suck Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,851 Adopt-a-Bronco: None	This thread is still going?

03-22-2011, 03:28 PM	#254
W*GS Ring of Famer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Earth Posts: 19,511	I don't quite understand the point of all the verbiage spilled by IEI, oabb et.al. What were y'all trying to show? That the bigotry and prejudice suffered by the kids of gay parents means that kids should have heterosexual parents, because of that prejudice and bigotry. Right?

03-22-2011, 04:05 PM	#258
That One Guy Producer of Nonsense Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Sun and Beachville Posts: 14,042 Adopt-a-Bronco: None	Take the variables out and leaving it just about the principle at hand makes you recognize the point and not concern yourself with anecdotes and absurd claims that can't be proven. Simplistic concepts make you face the fact under generally accepted conditions. The problem comes when SOME PEOPLE decide they'll dance around the question and throw what if scenarios at it claiming the overall point to be invalid.

03-22-2011, 04:13 PM	#266
OABB Master of Karate aaahaaaaaaaaah Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Los angeles Posts: 7,132 Adopt-a-Bronco: tgnsmyb****	GOD HATES WAGS!

03-22-2011, 04:16 PM	#268
W*GS Ring of Famer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Earth Posts: 19,511	oabb, you're funny. Why are you doing the 'Net equivalent of hysterical screaming?

03-22-2011, 04:37 PM	#274
Bronco Vixen Pro Bowler Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 597	For the record, I posed this question to my friend Steven, who is gay, and he said "I wouldn't leave my pet ferret in the care of most of the fags I know, much less my child." BTW he is also stealing "rectum rooter" from you and claiming it as his own. But then again, he has a sense of humor.