Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

1…3435373940…218

Comments

  • #1082
    muppeteer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭muppeteer


    Plowman wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    "Gayhood" Opposite to the once popular "priesthood", gayhood is achieved by deciding to be gay despite the social and legal disadvantages, entering a life of converting others to the gayhood, preaching at pride marches and leading a life of anti-celibacy.:)


  • #1083
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Sarky wrote: »
    You can't even apologise for your bigotry. That's just sad.

    I'm still waiting to be shown how believing that a mother and a father is important to a child is bigotry, but I suppose weasels love using weasel words.


  • #1084
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    JimiTime wrote: »
    I'm still waiting to be shown how believing that a mother and a father is important to a child is bigotry,

    Okay, one more, final, time...

    It's not that you believe that an adopted child having male and female parents is important. It's that you believe an adopted child having male and female parents is the "ideal" (i.e. better than all other possibilities), without ever observing the alternatives, AND you are unwilling/unable to give any objective reasons for your belief, AND you dismiss out of hand anyone who provides experiences that contradict what you believe/"observe".

    Whether you mean it or not, your behaviour in the thread is the very definition of bigotry.


  • #1085
    yawha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭yawha


    JimiTime wrote: »
    I'm still waiting to be shown how believing that a mother and a father is important to a child is bigotry, but I suppose weasels love using weasel words.
    You are entrenched in the belief that there are core behaviours essential to parenting that are inherent in men and women and cannot be replicated by the other gender.

    You say you base this on your own observations of the opposite sex parents. You don't seem to be at all conscious of any biases you may have when you look at the world. You have also not observed any same sex parents, and thus make assumptions about how they would parent.

    Ultimately, it all makes sense to you based on your cultural background, upbringing, social circles you've been in, life experiences and your religion, which has shaped your worldview.

    What you dismiss completely is that other people have valid different experiences of the world. Instead you assume that anyone thinking differently to you is brainwashed.

    And guess what the definition of "bigotry" is?


  • #1086
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    yawha wrote: »
    You are entrenched in the belief that there are core behaviours essential to parenting that are inherent in men and women and cannot be replicated by the other gender.

    Ok, not bigotry.
    You say you base this on your own observations of the opposite sex parents. You don't seem to be at all conscious of any biases you may have when you look at the world. You have also not observed any same sex parents, and thus make assumptions about how they would parent.

    As I keep saying, samesex whatever is nothing to do with anything. Its you guys who love that hobby horse. Observing men and women, mothers and fathers will lead any rational person to a conclusion that they are not inconsequential.
    Ultimately, it all makes sense to you based on your cultural background, upbringing, social circles you've been in, life experiences and your religion, which has shaped your worldview.

    It makes sense to anyone with half a braincell, and no agenda or political ideology on the matter.
    What you dismiss completely is that other people have valid different experiences of the world.

    No I don't. Not in the slightest.
    Instead you assume that anyone thinking differently to you is brainwashed.

    Again, no I don't. there are many factors involved in this.
    So again, weasel words from the lazy minded. Bravo. Now when you can present the bigotry, I'm still waiting.


  • Advertisement
  • #1087
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Okay, one more, final, time...

    It's not that you believe that an adopted child having male and female parents is important. It's that you believe an adopted child having male and female parents is the "ideal" (i.e. better than all other possibilities), without ever observing the alternatives, AND you are unwilling/unable to give any objective reasons for your belief, AND you dismiss out of hand anyone who provides experiences that contradict what you believe/"observe".

    Whether you mean it or not, your behaviour in the thread is the very definition of bigotry.

    If a mother and father are important, then of course its the bloody ideal that a child have both. So yeah, still waiting for the bigotry.


  • #1088
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    JimiTime wrote: »
    If a mother and father are important, then of course its the bloody ideal that a child have both. The way yee are going on, you'd swear its just common knowledge that they are just inconsequential. Yet in reality, you are informed by nothing but your political ideologies backed up by studies yee probably haven't even read or studied yourselves, based on samples that are statistically irrelevant.

    Your definition of bigotry is dishonest as it is moronic. 'You have an opinion we don't like, and it wasn't cleared by the lab'. Lazy.

    But that is not what is being said and you refuse to engage with any discussion that dos'fit your view.

    I could equally say you are informed by nothing but your prejudice and your constant haunting of any thread with a gay presence is just prurient and malicious.


  • #1089
    yawha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭yawha


    JimiTime wrote: »
    As I keep saying, samesex whatever is nothing to do with anything. Its you guys who love that hobby horse. Observing men and women, mothers and fathers will lead any rational person to a conclusion that they are not the same.
    But it won't. That's what this all hinges upon. An assumption that there are rigid commonalities among fathers and among mothers, an assumption that all of these commonalities are essential to parenting the perfect child, and an assumption that any commonalities you observe are inherent in biological gender differences.
    JimiTime wrote: »
    No I don't. Not in the slightest.
    You just did, in your previous sentence:
    JimiTime wrote: »
    It makes sense to anyone with half a braincell, and no agenda or political ideology on the matter.
    People with differing experiences, beliefs and worldviews to you on this issue apparently do not have half a braincell, or are brainwashed by some "agenda" or ideology?


  • #1090
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    yawha wrote: »
    But it won't. That's what this all hinges upon. An assumption that there are rigid commonalities among fathers and among mothers,

    So your position is that fathers and mothers are the same. That there exists no common parental traits found in fathers and others in mothers. No natural reactions in men more than women and vice versa and anyone who believes otherwise is being a bigot unless they have a lab confirm their observations. Got it.
    an assumption that all of these commonalities are essential to parenting the perfect child,

    No. this is nothing to do with parenting 'the perfect child'. This is everything to do with giving a child a chance to have a male and female role model. To experience the important play patterns that so differ in fathers and mothers, to have someone to turn to in pubescent times that empathises with the feelings and behaviours associated with it. And also, to not let children, who have no voice in this, become guinea pigs in a social experiment. And why? Because of the desires and political agenda's of 3 % of the population.
    and an assumption that any commonalities you observe are inherent in biological gender differences.

    Mothers and fathers are different and important. Again, where is the bigotry?


  • #1091
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    So just to be clear.

    Mothers and fathers are inconsequential.
    Mothers and fathers parent the same.
    And for those that think they don't parent the same, the differences are not important.
    Male and female role models raising you is completely inconsequential.

    two men is the same as two women is the same as two transgenders is the same as two bisexuals in raising kids.

    The studies that have looked at same sex parenting leave no doubt that this is the case.

    Disagree with the above, based on your common sense and what you witness on a daily basis, means that you are a bigot. To some, its even laughable. 'LOL, you think mums and dads are important. You deluded idiot.'


    'tell me, do you think mothers and fathers are intrinsically important?'
    'Yes, Of course'
    'hate crime alert. Get him, he's anti equality hateful bigot'.


  • Advertisement
  • #1092
    G.K.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭G.K.


    JimiTime wrote: »
    So just to be clear.
    And for those that think they don't parent the same, the differences are not important.

    Yes.
    JimiTime wrote: »
    Male and female role models raising you is completely inconsequential.

    Yes, and I say this as a child currently being raised by a married, straight, couple.
    JimiTime wrote: »
    two men is the same as two women is the same as two transgenders is the same as two bisexuals in raising kids.

    No - but the differences don't negatively impact the child's upbringing.

    And leave trans out of this thread, trans doesn't equate to gay.
    JimiTime wrote: »
    The studies that have looked at same sex parenting leave no doubt that this is the case.

    No, based on what I have just said. They conclude that the differences are inconsequential, not that all the child-rearings will be identical.
    JimiTime wrote: »
    Disagree with the above, based on your common sense and what you witness on a daily basis, means that you are a bigot. To some, its even laughable. 'LOL, you think mums and dads are important. You deluded idiot.'

    'tell me, do you think mothers and fathers are intrinsically important?'
    'Yes, Of course'
    'hate crime alert. Get him, he's anti equality hateful bigot'.

    No - you have been called bigoted by some here because you have ignored scientific evidence and dismissed the experiences of others that contradict your own as those people having 'half a braincell, an agenda or political ideology on the matter,' while sticking obstinately to your own opinion and 'what you witness on a daily basis'.


  • #1093
    newmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,571 ✭✭✭newmug


    Plowman wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    We all know what the Christian view is. Other views on it can be discussed in other fora, surely!

    Gayhood, gayism, gayness, mickey-mickey-touch-touch. Its all the same.


  • #1094
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    G.K. wrote: »

    No - you have been called bigoted by some here because you have ignored scientific evidence

    Firstly, its important to point out, that its SOCIAL science. Secondly, its statistically meaningless, and thirdly, its really just about lesbian women and not all the other forms an 'alternative family' can be made up of. To allow same sex adoption, is essentially allowing children to be guinea pigs.

    Also, you have an issue with transgenders adopting kids?


  • #1095
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    JimiTime wrote: »
    If a mother and father are important, then of course its the bloody ideal that a child have both. So yeah, still waiting for the bigotry.

    There's an irony in the man refusing to back up his assertions then expecting others back up theirs...


  • #1096
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    There's an irony in the man refusing to back up his assertions then expecting others back up theirs...

    Ok, so you see some irony. Wonderful. Still waiting.....


  • #1097
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    newmug wrote: »
    We all know what the Christian view is. Other views on it can be discussed in other fora, surely!

    Gayhood, gayism, gayness, mickey-mickey-touch-touch. Its all the same.

    Intriguing how the views of some Christians on homosexuality can only be expressed in the context of sexual acts. You'd swear all we did all day was engage in "mickey-mickey-touch-touch".

    Anyways, this isn't just about the Christian views. It's about how those views impact on the civil and legal rights of gay men and women in Ireland. Don't you think there's merit in discussing that?


  • #1098
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Ok, so you see some irony. Wonderful. Still waiting.....

    It's already been shown to you. But once again, you don't like what you see, so you ignore it. Short of completely rewriting the English language, I really don't think there's any way to give you an answer you'll like.


  • #1099
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Anyways, this isn't just about the Christian views. It's about how those views impact on the civil and legal rights of gay men and women in Ireland. Don't you think there's merit in discussing that?

    Just to be clear. Thats YOUR angle. My angle has absolutely nothing to do with your rights or if your gay or straight. If two straight women or men, or one straight woman or man wanted to adopt, my stand would be the same.This issue is not about LGBT. Its about a childs right to a mother and father if such an option is available. The LGBT factor enters the fray due to their lobbyists pushing for something that is a great injustice on a child. Namely, that a political ideology will make them lose out on having a mother and a father.


  • #1100
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    It's already been shown to you.

    News to me. Some rather lame and dishonest attempts, but still nothing. So yeah, Still waiting....


  • #1101
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Just to be clear. Thats YOUR angle. My angle has absolutely nothing to do with your rights or if your gay or straight. If two straight women or men, or one straight woman or man wanted to adopt, my stand would be the same.This issue is not about LGBT. Its about a childs right to a mother and father if such an option is available. The LGBT factor enters the fray due to their lobbyists pushing for something that is a great injustice on a child. Namely, that a political ideology will make them lose out on having a mother and a father.

    You know what's an even greater injustice? Claiming to know why heterosexual couples should be given preference, but staying quiet.


  • Advertisement
  • #1102
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Firstly, its important to point out, that its SOCIAL science. Secondly, its statistically meaningless, and thirdly, its really just about lesbian women and not all the other forms an 'alternative family' can be made up of. To allow same sex adoption, is essentially allowing children to be guinea pigs.
    Social science is a science whether you like it or not. It have have issues with the methodology or the conclusions, please point these out it the studies you have been provided.
    And all of these studies contain a wide selection of subjects and have passed peer review, which means that their sample size is adequate. If this is not the cause, please explain and show how this is the case with something other than your biased, ill-informed and uneducated opinion.
    And thrid, all of the studies you have been provided cover a wider variety of same sex couples. Claiming they only cover lesbians is another one of your lies.

    The studies have already been done and the answer is already clear, so allowing gay adoption would not be making anyone a guinea pig. It would just be giving everyone the same rights.

    However if you have actual objections to the science, provide it. Otherwise you are rejecting out of hand because it just disagrees with you.
    Unfortunately that's not what people just genuinely concerned with teh safety of children would do.
    That's what a bigot does.


  • #1103
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Mod Warning
    Just a reminder, this thread is still subject to the Forum Charter.

    That means that insulting other posters is not considered part and parcel of reasonable debate.

    So, just because someone disagrees with you on something, you don't label them as 'homophobes' 'bigots' 'liars' 'morons' or 'weasels'.

    Address the post rather than attacking the poster.

    Those who continue to insult others will be infracted or banned if they continue.


  • #1104
    newmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,571 ✭✭✭newmug


    Mod Edit: Leave the moderating to the mods please.


  • #1105
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Mod Edit
    Once again, let's leave it to the mods to decide which threads should be in which forum.


  • #1106
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    newmug wrote: »
    I wonder how many people on here are the parents of gays, angry that their boy turned out not quite a man, but definately not a woman either, and they're turning that anger towards the Church, an easy scapegoat? Quite a few I'd say.

    That must be the most offensive statement I have read in a long time.


  • #1107
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    newmug wrote: »
    I wonder how many people on here are the parents of gays, angry that their boy turned out not quite a man, but definately not a woman either, and they're turning that anger towards the Church, an easy scapegoat? Quite a few I'd say.

    wat


  • #1108
    newmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,571 ✭✭✭newmug


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    That must be the most offensive statement I have read in a long time.


    Why? I'm only being factual. I honestly cannot get my head around why you would take offence to that. Its much the same way you cant understand how I find gayness offensive I suppose.


  • #1109
    newmug
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,571 ✭✭✭newmug


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    That must be the most offensive statement I have read in a long time.

    Explain why its offensive. Break it down for me. And list for me, point-by-point, what it has to do with the Church or why its the Church's fault.


  • #1110
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    newmug wrote: »
    Why? I'm only being factual. I honestly cannot get my head around why you would take offence to that. Its much the same way you cant understand how I find gayness offensive I suppose.

    Because it's a complete and utter nonsense.

    Not all gay men are the effeminate stereotype you like to think about. Just stop talking now newmug.


  • Advertisement
  • #1111
    e_e
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,464 ✭✭✭e_e


    newmug wrote: »
    Explain why its offensive.
    Because it's a crass stereotype, for one thing.


Advertisement