JimiTime wrote: » So tell us the things that WERE done by your dad, but not mum in their dealings with you that you say COULD have been done by either of them.
doctoremma wrote: » Jimi, you're not thinking of gender-specific physical differences, are you? Like two Dads not being able to breast-feed? Please say no.
Sonics2k wrote: » And that has been disproven.
You are ignoring posts, studies, personal statements and outright facts because you simply do not want to change your mind.
You are openly allowing your personal opinions on homosexuality to influence your decision on whether or not they are suitable to raise children.
Well here's a nice little closing statement. Homosexuals are perfectly suitable to raise a child, as much as any heterosexual child.
I can only hope that I can raise my own two children half as well as my lesbian mother raised me. Because she really did give, provide and teach me everything I needed.
JimiTime wrote: » I'd object to single parents being given equal footing with the nuclear family also. Children are the issue here, and that they are going to be the guinea pigs in this social experiment, for the sake of a political agenda pains me.
doctoremma wrote: » Quite possibly the most patronising pile of cack I have ever seen on this forum.
JimiTime wrote: » No it hasn't. I agree that I give my own affirmation a lot more weight than studies etc. I trust myself I suppose. You are also right that I wont change my mind, as my morality is objectively based on God, and even if I couldn't see a difference, his ordinance would still trump the mob opinion. As for 'outright facts', I don't know what you are referring to? Actually, I haven't let homosexuality into this at all. the homosexuality factor is there in terms of adoption, because they are the ones wanting the right to undermine the nuclear family. If it was a group of hetero's, the argument would be no different. I'd object to single parents being given equal footing with the nuclear family also. Children are the issue here, and that they are going to be the guinea pigs in this social experiment, for the sake of a political agenda pains me. The issue, is what is the best for a child, not if homosexuals can be good parents. And to be perfectly honest with you, I'm delighted that you honour your mother in this way. I don't doubt she done a good job. Thats not the issue is though.
JimiTime wrote: » I agree that I give my own affirmation a lot more weight than studies etc. I trust myself I suppose.
doctoremma wrote: » Herein lies the problem. I am nothing but fallible. What I think and what I feel bears no necessary link to what is true or what is right.
MrPudding wrote: » And what evidence do you have to support this assertion? MrP
Corkfeen wrote: » I have a sudden urge to post Dr Evil talking about his parents....
JimiTime wrote: » TBH, you don't need to put your hand in a fire to know its going to burn.
JimiTime wrote: » I'd rather encourage those on your side of the argument, who have experience of a good mum and dad explain the differences I pointed out.
JimiTime wrote: » You see, I could post a study etc (Which I did quite a while back to my shame ), but I don't think that would be right in answering the question, because that has nothing to do with how I arrived at my conclusion. Again, those raised by a mother and a father, I truly believe know the answer as to how a father and a mother differ. Now maybe they underestimate the differences and their effect on a child, but I hope the differences are at least acknowledged soon even if not here publicly.
NuMarvel wrote: » Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure knowing that fire burns is a learned behaviour. You either learn directly, by putting your hand into the fire, or indirectly, by someone else telling you it hurts, or through the reactions of other to fire, etc.
NuMarvel wrote: » Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure knowing that fire burns is a learned behaviour. You either learn directly, by putting your hand into the fire, or indirectly, by someone else telling you it hurts, or through the reactions of other to fire, etc. And even if it's not learned behaviour, if someone asks you to back up the statement that fire will burn your hand, it can be done. This has been pointed out to you already, but that's not how discussions work. You make the assertion, it's up to YOU to support it. Otherwise, it's going to become the message board equivalent of playing Guess Who in the dark.
JimiTime wrote: » I'm not asking people what I think, but rather to think about their circumstances and observations as to the differences.
ShooterSF wrote: » Wow that's a new low! "Your studies and personal experience that contradicts my point of view are all wrong because I have proof from personal experience and on top of all that I'm not going to tell you. You have to guess! Trolololol." If that's what amounts for debate on this issue I can't understand how gay marriage isn't legal today. Imagine if you were around 50 years ago making the same argument about inter racial marriage "Oh parents of the same race make for a better environment for their children just look to your own experiences and you'll see the proof. What? You can't see any difference. You're not looking hard enough. No I can't just give you the reasons. You'll make fun of them and twist them. For your wicked liberal popularist ways".
Bannasidhe wrote: » No - you are demanding that people ignore the evidence, dismiss their own experiences, circumstances and observations and conform to what you want them to believe.
JimiTime wrote: » No, I'm asking them to think about their experiences and observe others in light of what I've said.
King Mob wrote: » Either post a study or withdraw the claim.
Simply stating you know it is from experience is not acceptable or convincing, which you apparently know since you don't seem to be accepting testimonials from gay parents and people raised by gay parents. If you aren't accepting peoples opinions as fact, why should anyone accept yours?
JimiTime wrote: » I'm not asking for people to accept my opinions as fact, I'm asking them to look and observe the differences I set out earlier. Going forward, that can easily be done.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Face it Jimi - the consensus is against you - no matter what you feel.