Originally posted by: TheFamilyMan
Hey asshat, I'm far from uneducated. I, in no way, have a frail or uninformed mind. Your reading comprehension does lack some skills though. I never once said a homosexual couldn't reproduce with a heterosexual. I said that homosexuals claim they were born that way so they should just deal the fuck with it. You claim to be a completely different biological off-shoot of homo-sapien then deal the fuck with all the pros (whatever they may be) with all the cons (one being NO NATURAL REPRODUCTION). Why is it so hard for you (and others apparently) to understand. You say you were born gay, then accept the fact you were born without the ability to have children if you adhere to your homosexual design. Stop comparing yourselves to straight couples who have infertility problems because you are in no way comparable. Their infertility comes from many documented medical reasons and yours comes from a kink in your genetic make-up. They are attempting to have children through medical assistance to overcome a medical or biological issue and you are trying to circumvent your so-called born design. Yes, my opinion is that homosexuals shouldn't be given adoption privileges nor should they be given surrogacy options either but that is my opinion and I don't need your approval of it.
I'm no fundamentalist asshat as you have so duly thought to note and I wouldn't want a pantywaist such as yourself around mine, that is for sure.
:thumbsdown:4U 4 U R A DUMBASS
Who the fuck are you to decide what the "Pros and Cons" to being homosexual are? Every person on this planet has a basic human right to procreate, regardless of gender, race, or sexual preference.
Your posts are littered with countless assumptions but let me at least point out the ones in your latest post:
1) When you compare heterosexuals who are born INFERTILE (or become INFERTILE from other genetic defects) with homosexuals that are perfectly CAPABLE of sexual reproduction, you somehow come to the conclusion that although INFERTILE, a hetero couple still has more of a right to have children then a perfectly healthy gay couple???? It would seem that your logic is severely flawed. For one, you're calling homosexuality a "genetic defect" which it's NOT, but you're dismissing any possibility that the INFERTILE straight couple has any GENETIC DEFECTS of their own!!! Out of the two couples, wouldn't you say maybe "God" didn't want the straight couple to have kids since they can't NATURALLY PROCREATE? And if gay couples REALLY weren't meant to be able to procreate, wouldn't you think that evolutionarily speaking, the FERTILITY GENE would become forever linked to the SEXUALITY GENE (which you're of course assuming there is one) ???????? Meaning: If "God" really wanted us fags to not be able to have kids, then we genetically would not be able to do so.
And please don't give me the reasoning, "Well if the sexuality gene and fertility gene were linked, that means gay people wouldn't exist since they would be infertile and not be able to pass down their genes" This of course would be GREAT for bigots like you. So anyway, if there really were a SEXUALITY GENE, the genotype for "homosexual" would most definitely be carried by recessive alleles (due to such a small percentage of gays in the world) and if gays were TRULY meant to not procreate, then a GAY PHENOTYPE should result in an INFERTILE PHENOTYPE, but it somehow DOES NOT..... so STFU, "FamilyMan".
2) Your posts reek of the false assumption that homosexuality is 100% genetic. There is no proof of this, and it is commonly believed to be a result of a number of factors. So, anyway, your basing 100% of your arguments on the fact that all people who define themselves as "homosexual" have some kind of "GENETIC DEFECT" which is like saying that people with red hair or attached ear lobes have GENETIC DEFECTS. So what I'm trying to say is that your ENTIRE ARGUMENT for "why homosexuals CANNOT procreate" is severely flawed and BASELESS.
I'll grace you with an example from my personal life (although you definitely don't deserve it):
I was raised by a lesbian couple, and *GASP* my mom gave birth to me NATURALLY. Eat that shit up, "FamilyMan". I had a decent upbringing, and was completely oblivious to the fact that anything was wrong with said upbring until high school. I never once thought that anything was wrong with it, but fuckers like you seem to disagree. So here's the kicker: I'm not heterosexual!!! *GASPOMGWTFBBQAOLFCC* And let me tell you a little bit about my experiences with sexuality. I liked several girls in HS, got pretty hot and heavy with one. Went to college, got hot and heavy with a boy, then a girl, then some more boys. So what am I???? Homosexual??? I was birthed and raised by a lesbian, so I must have the gay gene, and I must not be allowed to procreate, right?? ALL which is something that you have taken upon yourself to decide. I don't think I've EVER heard an argument as unique as yours. To go as far as to deny our physical and emotional RIGHTS as human beings to want to have children is pretty low, and pretty disgusting, and I'll be sure to think of you whenever I need a good laugh.
If someone thinks I deserve a vacation for this, then be sure to permanently ban the people who made the abortion/post-birth abortion comments, ALSO. Whether or not they meant it that way, those are personal attacks aimed at people like ME... since they ARE saying out loud that if I was their kid they'd like to abort me. And if anyone should be banned in this thread, it's FamilyMan. He's done nothing but deny our basic human rights, which is an attack on an entire culture, not to mention flamebait for posts like this.
I don't plan on replying to anything you have to say FamilyMan, FYI. You weren't worth my time even during THIS post, but reading 24 pages of BS got me all riled up.
Facebook
Twitter