Are you against gay marriage?

[Namikun]

Are you serious?

Before any of these religions like Christianity and Islam, there was one mass religion living until now. And that was Judaism. Taking over half of the world in terms of religion.

Are you really serious?

This is false, where's your proof?

 

[Turson]

It's not just me. I know plenty of others.

I will be blunt with you: if I was lets say 10, and found out that Im going to be adopted by gay couple I would probably kill myself. What is more, Im sure that there are a looot of people with similar opinion.

 

[Bubbles The Powerpuff Girl]

...Sexual orientation does NOT work like magnets. A real-world experiment has already been done to disprove your weightless statement.

North magnet is (A) (Man)
South magnet is (B) (Woman)

Your theory is that since A is attracted to B, then Man is attracted to woman.
Since there is no variation in the magnetic attractions, that means, if any magnet A is attracted to any magnet B, then magnet A will always be attracted to magnet B, which, in fact, is the case for MAGNETS. NOT HUMAN BEINGS.

In comparison, all men must be attracted to all women, which, isn't the case, as clearly, we have men who are attracted to men, and women who are attracted to women.

So, therefore, magnets don't work as a good example. Clearly, in reality, we have magnet (A) (man) attracted to another magnet (A) (man).

Your logic doesn't make sense. So you're saying, because a man (N) is attracted to a man (N), he rules of physics are broken down therefore not being able to compare them?

Wrong. You are thinking different. A man indeed can become attracted to another, however it is not destined.

Why is there a woman? Why is there a man? Do they not belong to each other, even though a man is supposed to live with another woman?

I never said ''it cannot be''. I said ''it is wrong''. Which it is.

 

[Opiuchus05]

I believe in equality in marriage; a man and a woman make it equal
The whole point of *** is reproduction not pleasure

 

[Scorpio0Pharaoh0Titan]

Looks like I have to repeat the same thing over and over again.

"Event/sample space

Event is what you want, whereas sample space is all the events related to that.

To see if some factor has a lot of impact or not in some behavior, we check that %. We can get all the % with many events related to that, and we'll have arround 100% when we put them all together(arround because of the lack of some information, or the lack of some numbers because of the research).

With this, you would see how much impact does "being raised by gay parents" account for. And with the same %, getting the way we calculate probability, we would use that % as well.

If the other factors are just as important, then we would get closer % of them, as they would have more impact, and therefore, more numbers.
Why do you think that the % of kids raised by straigth parents is lower? Because of how the parents act, and what they teach the kids. The numbers show how much impact these factors have.

Now think: why is it increasing? Because now, kids see it in the TV as well, because now, parents tell them it's ok. And now, some parents act that way as well.

It's called being logical. If that's a problem or not, it's up for society to decide, as I said."

Try reading this.
As I said, the probability is not a "for sure" thing. Just becaus the numebrs are higher, it doesn't mean it will happen everytime.
However, we can see the impact of the factors based on those numbers. The factors, you mentioned, the bold part, obviously has it's weight. However, that weight can be seen if you get the numbers.
Of course it wouldn't the 100% accurate, as the only way to achieve this, would be making the experiece you mentioned. The "segregation". But as you said, that it's impossible.

However, we call still account for some accurance with the above. And let's not foget about the psicollogic works as well. Many psicologists are sure that at younger ages, kids copy many things they see. As their closest exemple is their parents, they would repeat their actions a lot. And this would have an impact on the kid's behavior for all his life.
It will also depend on what the parents teach them, as some parents do some stuff (throwing trash in the street, for exemple) but still teach the kids that it is wrong.

All of this, plus the numbers, can't be ignored.

Again, you fail to see the point. You just copy and pasted what I already countered... but here goes nothing... again:

No matter how (and I place emphasis on how because that is ultimately what matters in scientific data - how accurate is this?) you get the data, you will NEVER be able to mirror the real-life scenario because there is...wait for it... an infinite amount of variables involved in the outcome of a child being gay or not.

One of these variables could be if he or she has same-*** parents, however, in order for you to be able to explicitly state that same-*** parents can have a factor on a child's orientation, you must conduct an experiment involving a HUGE amount of same-*** couples with children who have not already been exposed to media, or anything from the outside world. Same thing towards children who were raised by heterosexual couples.

It's called bias... and you would have an AWFUL lot of bias in your data, which thus, even though, could be precise in saying "It has been found that there are more children who are gay that have same-*** parents" you would NEVER be able to say "It is BECAUSE of these same-*** parents that these children are gay"

TWO VERY DIFFERENT STATEMENTS.

An example:

It may so be that same-*** couples like to expose their kids to adult material at a young age. Does that mean that the same-*** couples are what CAUSE the children to be gay or the adult material is what CAUSES the children to be gay?

That's just an example to show the difference between CORRELATION and CAUSATION.


You, sir, are riding the carriage of correlation, not causation.

 

[Bubbles The Powerpuff Girl]

Because it's used as a negative word by teenagers all over the world. It's because they've been taught by their parents, and they by their parents, and so on, that homosexuality is a wrong. They have been taught.

Okay?

What's your point then?

This is false, where's your proof?

Holy ****ing shit, are you people actually serious?

What the ****. Are you saying that Judaism was not the dominating religion before Christianity?

Holy...

I believe in equality in marriage; a man and a woman make it equal
The whole point of *** is reproduction not pleasure

This guy is legendary just now.

 

[NarutoIndra]

I am against gay marriage and I will not change such an opinion. Realising the fact that Gay's can't reproduce alone is enough to realise it was never meant to be.. Furthermore, Gay's becoming more and more accepted will lead to more and more people becoming gay themselves due to wanting to be different without the feeling of being accepted anymore. That would result in a slow but eventual eradication of the human race.

 

[Namikun]

Okay?

What's your point then?



Holy ****ing shit, are you people actually serious?

What the ****. Are you saying that Judaism was not the dominating religion before Christianity?

Holy...

You must be crazy, one can NOT become Jewish, it has always been a small and pure race.

 

[scorezor]

Because it always comes down to religion....and boobs.

why did you mentioned boobs? lol... nothing comes down to religion , that's what ppl do to justify their "means" or mid-terms lol.

 

[Europa]

Okay?

What's your point then?



Holy ****ing shit, are you people actually serious?

What the ****. Are you saying that Judaism was not the dominating religion before Christianity?

Holy...



This guy is legendary just now.

It was not. It was big in its area, but the religion of the Greeks and Romans covered more land and people than Judaism. And that's just in Southern Europe and Northern Africa. Can't forget about the Celts to the North, and then the Chinese, Indians, and all others across the world.

 

[Skylar Knight]

Are you serious?

Before any of these religions like Christianity and Islam, there was one mass religion living until now. And that was Judaism. Taking over half of the world in terms of religion.

Are you really serious?

I think you need to learn the definiton of ruling. There were lots of jews back in the days, yes, but they didn't rule over things like the pope did ages ago. And half of the world? Get your facts straight.

Okay?

What's your point then?



Holy ****ing shit, are you people actually serious?

What the ****. Are you saying that Judaism was not the dominating religion before Christianity?

Holy...

We know it was one of the dominating religions out there, but for God's sake, half of the world's population wasn't jewish. That's what we're talking about here.

I'm out of here.

 

[Scorpio0Pharaoh0Titan]

Your logic doesn't make sense. So you're saying, because a man (N) is attracted to a man (N), he rules of physics are broken down therefore not being able to compare them?

Wrong. You are thinking different. A man indeed can become attracted to another, however it is not destined.

Why is there a woman? Why is there a man? Do they not belong to each other, even though a man is supposed to live with another woman?

I never said ''it cannot be''. I said ''it is wrong''. Which it is.

My logic makes perfect sense. Are you unable to connect the dots?

Here, let me connect them for you: YOU (not me) stated that sexual orientation is like magnets. I rebutted your statement by saying that IF X WERE TRUE, THEN Y MUST BE TRUE ALSO. SINCE Y IS NOT TRUE, THEN X CANNOT BE TRUE.

I actually have a specialist degree in medical physics and a double major in logic and greek culture...which is funny really... considering you found a way to intertwine all three areas of expertise.

 

[Cruciatus]

I believe in equal civil rights for gays, yeah. I think they should be allowed to be legally married.

But you can't really force the Church to approve of gay marriage when they believe that *** is for reproduction, and not pleasure or love. So while I would like to see the Church broaden their minds, I don't believe it will happen.

 

[Umari Senju]

I will be blunt with you: if I was lets say 10, and found out that Im going to be adopted by gay couple I would probably kill myself. What is more, Im sure that there are a looot of people with similar opinion.

Because that is the way you were taught. No one is born hating another for anything. These are notions taught by your parents, peers, mentors, and society as a whole. From birth you and everyone else was taught that homosexuality is wrong. Yet homosexuality isn't something that has sprung up over night. Homosexuality has been around as long as the human race. Yet this small percentage of the human race is somehow a danger to the speicies as a whole?

You offend me and my dads with such a negative and bigoted comment. Who are you to judge? Tell me, how does the homosexual lifestyle impede you and your life? Nevermind don't answer that. I know more hate will spill from your mouth. Your entitled to your opinion but let me leave you with this.

Hating and fearing something you don't understand is the natural defense of the human species.

 

[Wolfus]

Again, you fail to see the point. You just copy and pasted what I already countered... but here goes nothing... again:

No matter how (and I place emphasis on how because that is ultimately what matters in scientific data - how accurate is this?) you get the data, you will NEVER be able to mirror the real-life scenario because there is...wait for it... an infinite amount of variables involved in the outcome of a child being gay or not.

One of these variables could be if he or she has same-*** parents, however, in order for you to be able to explicitly state that same-*** parents can have a factor on a child's orientation, you must conduct an experiment involving a HUGE amount of same-*** couples with children who have not already been exposed to media, or anything from the outside world. Same thing towards children who were raised by heterosexual couples.

It's called bias... and you would have an AWFUL lot of bias in your data, which thus, even though, could be precise in saying "It has been found that there are more children who are gay that have same-*** parents" you would NEVER be able to say "It is BECAUSE of these same-*** parents that these children are gay"

TWO VERY DIFFERENT STATEMENTS.

An example:

It may so be that same-*** couples like to expose their kids to adult material at a young age. Does that mean that the same-*** couples are what CAUSE the children to be gay or the adult material is what CAUSES the children to be gay?

That's just an example to show the difference between CORRELATION and CAUSATION.


You, sir, are riding the carriage of correlation, not causation.

You're not getting the point. You're just applying the an infinite amount of variables involved to one group, and only the group of the gay parents. Kids raised by straigth parents are also subject to all the other events as well. All the kids are.

However, if these events had the impact you're trying to give them, then we would get a much more higher % of people that turn gay,
I'm NOT saying they don't matter, they matter, they matter a lot. But not as a much as you're saying.

You''re forgeting one single thing: the world, with all of it's events, are already part of the system being considered. I'm already considering these. And like I said, if all of them together had such weigtj, then they would easily overcome or at least get close to the % related to the parents event only.

Not only that, but if they had such impact, then the % of kids raised by straigth that turned gay parents and the % of kids raised by gay parents that turned gay, these %, they would be almost equal.

However, that's not what happens in reality. And with this "and the psicologic researches I mentioned), the weight that having gay parents has is very high, and must be considered,as it's quite obvious that this weigth is high, not only high, but higher than the others.

And your exemple: Would straigth parents play that kind of thing to kids? Wouldn't the impact of the adult material be a indirect consequence of having gay parents?

 

[Roby]

Only problem I see is gays making a big number of their sexuality.. Naturally it draws others to detest it..
No one gives a flying potato on what you do in the bedroom or on your free time..

But growing gay population might be the doom of humanity on a long run with reduced birth rates. People do get old, and with reduced birth rates it will fall. (This is obviously not going to happen for at least 1000 years). So that doesn't really matter to me, I'll be long gone before any kind of side effect can take place.
I doubt they will get surgically fertilized just to give kids to another gay couple, not to mention that it costs a lot.

So in short, I don't care as long as they respect me not being gay, that's all.

 

[Hypemaster]

Yeah I'm against it.

 

[NarutoIndra]

Because that is the way you were taught. No one is born hating another for anything. These are notions taught by your parents, peers, mentors, and society as a whole. From birth you and everyone else was taught that homosexuality is wrong. Yet homosexuality isn't something that has sprung up over night. Homosexuality has been around as long as the human race. Yet this small percentage of the human race is somehow a danger to the speicies as a whole?

You offend me and my dads with such a negative and bigoted comment. Who are you to judge? Tell me, how does the homosexual lifestyle impede you and your life? Nevermind don't answer that. I know more hate will spill from your mouth. Your entitled to your opinion but let me leave you with this.

Hating and fearing something you don't understand is the natural defense of the human species.

It is genetical. People are born to crawl and then to walk, they don't have to be taught. Gay's being disliked and looked down upon is also genetical, to an extent.

This small percentage is becoming more and more accepted as time is passing by, at an exponential rate may I add. The more they are accepted, the more people will be influenced by gay's. The more people that are influenced by gay's, the more people will see gay's walking around. This will simply create a chain reaction in gay's being accepted by children, thus making it genetically accepted. Hence, our population begins dying out due to the overflow of homosexuals. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying this will happen over night, but by a hundred years or two, it should be at an exceptionally close percentage ration of homosexuals to heterosexuals.

 

[UchihaNagashi]

It was not. It was big in its area, but the religion of the Greeks and Romans covered more land and people than Judaism. And that's just in Southern Europe and Northern Africa. Can't forget about the Celts to the North, and then the Chinese, Indians, and all others across the world.

I think you need to learn the definiton of ruling. There were lots of jews back in the days, yes, but they didn't rule over things like the pope did ages ago. And half of the world? Get your facts straight.



We know it was one of the dominating religions out there, but for God's sake, half of the world's population wasn't jewish. That's what we're talking about here.

I'm out of here.

Why are you jumping off the topic now? As far as I know, Jewish aren't related to homosexuality at all.

OT:

• Depends on me. I agree with @Cruciatus - although everybody deserve civil rights, you do not shove them at the pope and demand a legal marriage, when the purpose of intercourse is reproduction and not that much pleasure, even though you feel it (wouldn't think anyone would do it if they didn't).
  
  
• And as a gay couple, if you get a child, the child always loses either a mother or a father. That greatly affects the child psychologically straight in the mental health and may want to rush to girls for attention . which is not cool in anyway.
  
  
• Also as this guy MuhiSaid stated, if the world was full of homosexuals, there would be almost zero birth rates. But of coure, just because there is a permission for gay couple to get married, it doesn't mean all people turn gay - but more likely.
  
  
• As far as I know, homosexuality doesn't give almost no benefit to the human race, but shouldn't be that much discriminated either. I contradict myself, yes, however some things I say I believe have point.

 

[Child Of The Great Empire]

Nope. Love is love, and people need to realize it.