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…4243454748…218

Comments

  • #1322
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    Actor wrote: »
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Are you ok with the morning after pill being available over the counter?

    No. Killing babies is never ok; no matter how inconvenient.

    The morning after pill isn't an abortifacient.

    I'm not sure what any of this has to do with homosexuality,let?


  • #1323
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Oh, I agree. But the people putting forward the "Gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt" have shown they aren't adept at logical, rational thought, so my reply is in keeping with their way of thinking.

    Persons of homosexual inclination should be allowed to adopt - as a last resort. There's a queue of willing normal couples who wish to adopt. They trump homosexual pairs I'm afraid. No reputable adoption agency would take the risk. Should the Blood Transfusion Service take the risk just to appease pro-homosexual activists? I'd rather they didn't.


  • #1324
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Actor wrote: »
    Persons of homosexual inclination should be allowed to adopt - as a last resort. There's a queue of willing normal couples who wish to adopt. They trump homosexual pairs I'm afraid. No reputable adoption agency would take the risk. Should the Blood Transfusion Service take the risk just to appease pro-homosexual activists? I'd rather they didn't.

    At least, the Blood Transfusion Service put forward scientific data as to why they don't think gay men should be allowed to donate blood.

    The basis of your objection is "mickey mickey touch touch".


  • #1325
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    At least, the Blood Transfusion Service put forward scientific data as to why they don't think gay men should be allowed to donate blood.

    The basis of your objection is "mickey mickey touch touch".

    At the end of the day, it's up to the biological mother to decide how her child is to be reared. Any mother with a heart would rather not experiment with their child's upbringing.

    I've yet to see any compelling scientific evidence that natural parenting and sexual complementarity in parenting is of no significance.


  • #1326
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Actor wrote: »
    Persons of homosexual inclination should be allowed to adopt - as a last resort. There's a queue of willing normal couples who wish to adopt. They trump homosexual pairs I'm afraid. No reputable adoption agency would take the risk. Should the Blood Transfusion Service take the risk just to appease pro-homosexual activists? I'd rather they didn't.

    Erm..... I know this is news to you but homosexual couples are as normal as any other. Reputable adoption agencies outside of Ireland are allowing gay people to adopt and the world still hasn't imploded. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #1327
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    Erm..... I know this is news to you but homosexual couples are as normal as any other. Reputable adoption agencies outside of Ireland are allowing gay people to adopt and the world still hasn't imploded. :pac:

    It's the kids I feel sorry for. They're being denied the best opportunities available and genuine couples are being passed over so as to appease militant homosexual activists.

    Do you think "positive discrimination" is ok? Do you think it's ok to deny a loving couple their chance at rearing a child because two homosexuals (or three, or four?) want their inclinations blessed by the State?


  • #1328
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Actor wrote: »
    Persons of homosexual inclination should be allowed to adopt - as a last resort. There's a queue of willing normal couples who wish to adopt. They trump homosexual pairs I'm afraid. No reputable adoption agency would take the risk. Should the Blood Transfusion Service take the risk just to appease pro-homosexual activists? I'd rather they didn't.

    Take what risk ?


  • #1329
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Actor wrote: »
    At the end of the day, it's up to the biological mother to decide how her child is to be reared. Any mother with a heart would rather not experiment with their child's upbringing.

    When a mother gives up a child for adoption, she transfers the power to make that decision, on how the child is to be reared, to the adoption authority. It's their decision.

    And they will make their decision on the basis of what is best for the child. Not nonsense like mickey-mickey-touch-touch.


  • #1330
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    When a mother gives up a child for adoption, she transfers the power to make that decision, on how the child is to be reared, to the adoption authority. It's their decision.

    And they will make their decision on the basis of what is best for the child. Not nonsense like mickey-mickey-touch-touch.

    The mother still has a say. Any reputable adoption agency would take this into account. No Catholic adoption agency will ever entrust a child to a couple that engage in sodomy.


  • #1331
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Actor wrote: »
    The mother still has a say. Any reputable adoption agency would take this into account. No Catholic adoption agency will ever entrust a child to a couple that engage in sodomy.

    Plenty of married couples engage in sodomy and catholic ones at that . By the way if the gay couple did not engage in sodomy ( quite a few don't) would that be more acceptable to you ?


  • Advertisement
  • #1332
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Actor wrote: »
    The mother still has a say. Any reputable adoption agency would take this into account. No Catholic adoption agency will ever entrust a child to a couple that engage in sodomy.

    Well, Bannisidhe will be delighted to know that she and her partner are in with a shot... :rolleyes:

    (I was wondering how long you'd go without mentioning the S-word.)


  • #1333
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    marienbad wrote: »
    Plenty of married couples engage in sodomy and catholic ones at that . By the way if the gay couple did not engage in sodomy ( quite a few don't) would that be more acceptable to you ?

    More acceptable. But it's a bit like saying that you'd prefer a robber to use a hammer rather than a gun if he's going to rob a bank. Remember Pope Benedict's recent remarks about the use of condoms?

    I understand that many normal couples engage in sodomy. Such sexual behaviours are the norm in modern society (indeed glorified) and lead to all kinds of psychological disorders. I blame the culture of contraception - sex has been demoted to an act of pleasure rather than an act of reproduction. Pleasure is a by-product of procreative acts. Nowadays babies are a by-product of sex and are to be aborted at will. Gay "sex", by its very nature, is self-gratuitous (use of the sexual organs contrary to their design) and designed solely for the sexual gratification of the participants. It is not only disgusting, but more importantly; sinful (a word which has been conveniently air-brushed out of liberal society's lexicon). Adoption agencies should not encourage such behaviour in society by affirming unions such as gay couples/triples/etc.


  • #1334
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Actor wrote: »
    More acceptable. But it's a bit like saying that you'd prefer a robber to use a hammer rather than a gun if he's going to rob a bank. Remember Pope Benedict's recent remarks about the use of condoms?

    I understand that many normal couples engage in sodomy. Such sexual behaviours are the norm in modern society (indeed glorified) and lead to all kinds of psychological disorders. I blame the culture of contraception - sex has been demoted to an act of pleasure rather than an act of reproduction. Pleasure is a by-product of procreative acts. Nowadays babies are a by-product of sex and are to be aborted at will. Gay "sex", by its very nature, is self-gratuitous (use of the sexual organs contrary to their design) and designed solely for the sexual gratification of the participants. It is not only disgusting, but more importantly; sinful (a word which has been conveniently air-brushed out of liberal society's lexicon). Adoption agencies should not encourage such behaviour in society by affirming unions such as gay couples/triples/etc.

    I can understand why you would view such activities as a sin, in the context of your religious beliefs. But sinful behaviour is not a sufficient reason to deny civil, legal rights.

    And to be clear, in the context of the discussion on adoption, the right being sought is to be considered on a equal basis as all other couples. No one is looking for gay couples to be put to the top of the list because they're gay. But similarly, they can't be put to the bottom of the list either.


  • #1335
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Actor wrote: »
    More acceptable. But it's a bit like saying that you'd prefer a robber to use a hammer rather than a gun if he's going to rob a bank. Remember Pope Benedict's recent remarks about the use of condoms?

    I understand that many normal couples engage in sodomy. Such sexual behaviours are the norm in modern society (indeed glorified) and lead to all kinds of psychological disorders. I blame the culture of contraception - sex has been demoted to an act of pleasure rather than an act of reproduction. Pleasure is a by-product of procreative acts. Nowadays babies are a by-product of sex and are to be aborted at will. Gay "sex", by its very nature, is self-gratuitous (use of the sexual organs contrary to their design) and designed solely for the sexual gratification of the participants. It is not only disgusting, but more importantly; sinful (a word which has been conveniently air-brushed out of liberal society's lexicon). Adoption agencies should not encourage such behaviour in society by affirming unions such as gay couples/triples/etc.

    I am afraid you have lost me here, what has any of this to do with gay adoption ?


  • #1336
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Actor wrote: »
    I asked *you* to pick one. The study you find most compelling is fine - some quotes wouldn't go astray either. Let me know so I can read over it.

    Time for wonderfulname's all time most linked pdf in the Christianity forum! Seriously, you guys are way too interested in same sex parents.

    Seen as this is a special megathread and all I'll throw you a few quotes, but you should give it a read yourself.
    Because many beliefs about lesbian and gay parents and their children are open to empirical testing, psychological research can evaluate their accuracy...

    ...Case reports on children of lesbian and gay parents began to appear in the psychiatric literature in the early 1970s (e.g., Osman, 1972;Weeks, Derdeyn, & Langman, 1975) and have continued to appear (e.g., Agbayewa, 1984). Starting with the pioneering work of Martin and Lyon (1972), first-person and fictionalized descriptions of life in lesbian mother families (e.g., Alpert, 1988; Clausen, 1985; Howey & Samuels, 2000; Jullion, 1985; Mager, 1975; Perreault, 1975; Pollock & Vaughn, 1987; Rafkin, 1990;Wells, 1997) and gay father families (e.g., Galluccio, Galluccio, & Groff, 2002; Green, 1999; Morgen, 1995; Savage, 2000) have also become available. Systematic research on the children of lesbian and gay parents began to appear in major professional journals in the late 1970s and has grown into a considerable body of research only in recent years (Allen & Demo, 1995; Patterson, 1992, 2000)...

    ...the results of existing research comparing lesbian and gay parents to heterosexual parents and children of lesbian and gay parents to children of heterosexual parents are quite clear: Common stereotypes are not supported by the data.
    Beliefs that lesbian and gay adults are not fit parents likewise have no empirical foundation (Anderssen, Amlie, & Ytteroy, 2002; Brewaeys & van Hall, 1997; Parks, 1998; Patterson, 2000; Patterson & Chan, 1996; Perrin, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001; Tasker, 1999; Victor & Fish, 1995).

    For funsies:
    The results of some studies suggest that lesbian mothers' and gay fathers' parenting skills may be superior to those of matched heterosexual couples. For instance, Flaks, Fischer,Masterpasqua, and Joseph (1995) reported that lesbian couples' parenting awareness skills were stronger than those of heterosexual couples.
    ...there is no evidence to suggest that lesbian women or gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of lesbian women or gay men is compromised relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth.

    That report includes a vast bibliography of studies, reviews of studies, legal reviews and 'popular works', abstracts are given, I could copy and paste one to cover your wish for a single study but to be fair the review of this body of work as a whole as quoted from above counts for more than plucking one or two at random.

    By the way, that would be a textbook example of "verifiable proof", "my pharmacist said" however, is not.


  • #1337
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Great, now the kids are in bed - can we talk about the mickey mickey touch touch?

    Actor wrote: »
    I understand that many normal couples engage in sodomy.

    'Normal' couples? Are you just being offensive deliberately now?
    Such sexual behaviours are the norm in modern society (indeed glorified) and lead to all kinds of psychological disorders.

    Such as? Can you find me one serious study that shows psychological disorders as a result of anal sex between consenting adults?
    I blame the culture of contraception - sex has been demoted to an act of pleasure rather than an act of reproduction.
    Yes, that culture of contraception that in your mind goes back to the swinging sixties, but in the real world stretches back to the Egyptians and beyond.
    http://www.cracked.com/article_16039_historys-10-most-terrifying-contraceptives.html
    Pleasure is a by-product of procreative acts. Nowadays babies are a by-product of sex and are to be aborted at will.
    Woman have always sought abortions, nothing modern about that. In what I call the enlightened nowadays they can do so safely without risking their lives or imprisonment. In Ireland, they even get to take a little holiday overseas.
    Gay "sex", by its very nature, is self-gratuitous (use of the sexual organs contrary to their design) and designed solely for the sexual gratification of the participants. It is not only disgusting, but more importantly; sinful (a word which has been conveniently air-brushed out of liberal society's lexicon).
    So by your definition then heterosexual couples who engage in Anal, Oral, and all the various menu of sexual pleasures (I'll spare your blushes by not describing what some God-fearing married straight couples get up to when left to left with their own devices) Those couples, the straight married ones, are committing sin. Sometimes more than once a night.
    Adoption agencies should not encourage such behaviour in society by affirming unions such as gay couples/triples/etc.

    So don't Adoption agencies have a duty of care to ensure that heterosexual couples who adopt sign a pledge to be celibate? After all they are not able to have children and so are using "the sexual organs contrary to their design and designed solely for the sexual gratification of the participants. It is not only disgusting, but more importantly; sinful"

    Awful thing, sex, really isn't it Actor? Don't you wish those awful people would stop rubbing their bits together? More cold showers and whipping needed. Oh, wait...where is my hair shirt. And whip (ahhh) whip (ahhhh) whip (oohhhh sooooo goooooood)


  • #1338
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    Time for wonderfulname's all time most linked pdf in the Christianity forum! Seriously, you guys are way too interested in same sex parents.

    Seen as this is a special megathread and all I'll throw you a few quotes, but you should give it a read yourself.





    For funsies:



    That report includes a vast bibliography of studies, reviews of studies, legal reviews and 'popular works', abstracts are given, I could copy and paste one to cover your wish for a single study but to be fair the review of this body of work as a whole as quoted from above counts for more than plucking one or two at random.

    By the way, that would be a textbook example of "verifiable proof", "my pharmacist said" however, is not.

    The problem with the study you've given me is that there isn't enough evidence to suggest that there is no difference between homosexual parents and normal parents.

    "It should be acknowledged that research on lesbian and gay parents and their children, though no longer new, is still limited in extent. Although stud- ies of gay fathers and their children have been con- ducted (Patterson, 2004), less is known about chil- dren of gay fathers than about children of lesbian mothers. Although studies of adolescent and young adult offspring of lesbian and gay parents are avail- able (e.g., Gershon et al., 1999; Tasker & Golombok, 1997; Wainright et al., 2004), relatively few studies have focused on the offspring of lesbian or gay par- ents during adolescence or adulthood. Although more diverse samples have been included in recent studies (e.g., Golombok et al., 2003; Wainright et al., 2004), many sources of heterogeneity have yet to be systematically investigated."

    I'd like to see more data (God help the poor kids) before any conclusions can be made.


  • #1339
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    I'd like to see more data (God help the poor kids)

    Or you could talk to the people here who have lived it.

    I see you didn't respond to my post. Too close to the bone? I'm just wondering who will protect the kids from these straight Christian parents who are just wicked in the bedroom department. Sexual surveys before adoption perhaps?


  • #1340
    jill_valentine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    Just checking, Actor's still completely obsessed with the topic of sodomy beyond all possible reason, right?

    Amazing! Yes. Yes he is.

    Still no word on the aul' lesbians though I take it?


  • #1341
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    jill_valentine wrote: »
    Just checking, Actor's still completely obsessed with the topic of sodomy beyond all possible reason, right?

    We are waiting for confirmation if it is ok if you are married and straight. Oral, I reckon, will get through the Actor seal of approval, not sure about Anal.


  • Advertisement
  • #1342
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    MadsL wrote: »
    We are waiting for confirmation if it is ok if you are married and straight. Oral, I reckon, will get through the Actor seal of approval, not sure about Anal.

    Sodomy is sodomy. I wouldn't degrade my wife by engaging in oral "sex".


  • #1343
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Actor wrote: »
    Sodomy is sodomy. I wouldn't degrade my wife by engaging in oral "sex".
    You should, it's awesome.


  • #1344
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    You should, it's awesome.

    I'm sure taking recreational drugs is "awesome" too.

    But if you're happy to degrade your wife, then I feel sorry for you. I feel you've been watching an unhealthy amount of pornography and such behaviours have been normalised for you.


  • #1345
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    Actor wrote: »
    I'm sure taking recreational drugs is "awesome" too.

    But if you're happy to degrade your wife, then I feel sorry for you. I feel you've been watching an unhealthy amount of pornography and such behaviours have been normalised for you.
    Multiple surveys would suggest that oral sex can be a very effective (indeed, the most effective) method for a woman to achieve orgasm. You should try it, your wife might thank you for it ;)


  • #1346
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    doctoremma wrote: »
    Multiple surveys would suggest that oral sex can be a very effective (indeed, the most effective) method for a woman to achieve orgasm. You should try it, your wife might thank you for it ;)
    You're assuming Actor's goal is to make his wife climax.

    I wouldn't be so sure about this.


  • #1347
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    You're assuming Actor's goal is to make his wife climax.

    I wouldn't be so sure about this.

    Ha, I'll head them up, you can nod them in.

    My original finished with 'Your wife achieving orgasm is a good thing, no?'


  • #1348
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    Actor wrote: »
    I'm sure taking recreational drugs is "awesome" too.

    But if you're happy to degrade your wife, then I feel sorry for you. I feel you've been watching an unhealthy amount of pornography and such behaviours have been normalised for you.

    Song of Solomon 2:3
    Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest, So is my beloved among the young men. In his shade I took great delight and sat down, And his fruit was sweet to my taste.

    Why on earth should a married couple not engage in oral sex if they so desire?


  • #1349
    Sin City
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭Sin City


    This thread is getting even more ridiculous now , its bad enough that people think that the gays shouldnt have sex if they cant reproduce (Havent heard whether its ok for straight married couples who are barren or sterile but have sex)

    Now its degrading to have anything but straight vanilla sex ?



    Actor I hope your wife shares your views on sex etiquette


  • #1350
    Sin City
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭Sin City


    Actor wrote: »
    I'm sure taking recreational drugs is "awesome" too.

    But if you're happy to degrade your wife, then I feel sorry for you. I feel you've been watching an unhealthy amount of pornography and such behaviours have been normalised for you.


    These acts have been around long before pornography became mainstream commerical or smut really

    Look at the likes of the Karma Sutra and youll see all sorts of "degrading" acts long before the internet came online with porn sites and movies


  • Advertisement
  • #1351
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Actor wrote: »
    I'm sure taking recreational drugs is "awesome" too.

    But if you're happy to degrade your wife, then I feel sorry for you. I feel you've been watching an unhealthy amount of pornography and such behaviours have been normalised for you.

    I'm not even married, there's nothing more pleasurable than a bit of oral outside of wedlock.


Advertisement