Oh god, I have a feeling Mehmet is going to go into his whole "changing tradition is bad because tradition" half-assed argument that he takes super fucking seriously.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:15 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: Being a homophobe doesn't give you special knowledge or powers. You still have to state your argument like a reasonable human being.

Really, that is not working on me. I really don't feel any different with you calling me a homophobe or a bigot.
I simply state that being a good or bad parents isn't really relevant.
With homosexuals, it really isn't, for whether they are good or bad, they will never constitute the type of family that society prefers.
So I'd say that we ought to leave parenting to the people that constitute the desired candidates for parenthood, meaning, married heterosexual couples, who were blessed by nature with the ability to procreate, and have naturally been given the task of parenthood.

---

(November 19, 2013 at 10:20 pm)Psykhronic Wrote: Oh god, I have a feeling Mehmet is going to go into his whole "changing tradition is bad because tradition" half-assed argument that he takes super fucking seriously.

Well, no tradition is without basis. And as such, the tradition of parenthood and family has a basis. It simply comes down on your ability to accept it.
It is due to the fact that you don't accept, nor respect these traditions that a significant portion of society opposes you, and the people you support.

I don't care how you feel about it I think you're a dumbass. I think everyone on the other side of this argument's a dumbass, I'm usually quite nice about these things but seriously you guys have to know where to draw the line.

Yea good or bad parents isn't relevant, it's all about how it looks. Because who gives a shit about the kids. Bad parents, go right ahead, anything but homosexuals, cos they make me uncomfortable and the entire world has to take care of how I feel. Fuck everyone else.

Blessed by nature my ass.

@Mehmet

It has a basis, therefore that basis is completely legitimate and should not be questioned in any way. Or something. Kay, I'll get around to taking your viewpoint as valid when you actually bother presenting anything worthwhile.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:27 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: I don't care how you feel about it I think you're a dumbass. I think everyone on the other side of this argument's a dumbass, I'm usually quite nice about these things but seriously you guys have to know where to draw the line.

Yea good or bad parents isn't relevant, it's all about how it looks. Because who gives a shit about the kids. Bad parents, go right ahead, anything but homosexuals, cos they make me uncomfortable and the entire world has to take care of how I feel. Fuck everyone else.

Blessed by nature my ass.

Alright, and I think that you're a rootless cosmopolitan.
And rootless cosmopolitans really don't have arguments, because they have no basis for their arguments besides something they call "equality", though equality is always between equals. On one side, you have the typical family that we know, the traditional family, that has been based on tradition, on the other side, you have this "new" type of family, which has its basis on nothing, really.
Besides, if you really gave a shit about the kids, you'd object to their use as guinea pigs in your schemes to grant homosexuals social acceptance, for since they lack this acceptance, their kids will face the confusion and stigma of having such "parents". You're sacrificing the children in order to make gays feel more normal about themselves. You're pure evil.

Having a biological two parent family is optimal, certainly.

However, children raised in a nuclear family can still turn out to be troublemakers. There is absolutely no guarantee that the child/ren will turn out fine just because he has a biological mother and father.

Studies also indicate that children raised in single parent, same sex, or any other type of non-traditional household grow up to be happy, productive citizens of society.

There is no single correct way to raise children. As long as the children are surrounded by loving individuals, that is all that matters.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:29 pm)Psykhronic Wrote: @Mehmet

It has a basis, therefore that basis is completely legitimate and should not be questioned in any way. Or something. Kay, I'll get around to taking your viewpoint as valid when you actually bother presenting anything worthwhile.

Well, you do question it, and don't think I did not. With questioning, I came to the conclusion that this is the type of family which is beneficial for society, while the "other type" is nothing more than a useless, unsustainable and unhealthy form of family that mocks the type of family that is beneficial for society.
And to be honest, that is its only use, and only purpose.

---

(November 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm)Kitanetos Wrote: Having a biological two parent family is optimal, certainly.

However, children raised in a nuclear family can still turn out to be troublemakers. There is absolutely no guarantee that the child/ren will turn out fine just because he has a biological mother and father.

Studies also indicate that children raised in single parent, same sex, or any other type of non-traditional household grow up to be happy, productive citizens of society.

True, very true. But we did have set a standard, do we not?
I'm sure that they coud grow up to be happy and productive members of society in a society that is compromised entirely of gays. But in a society where we state that the biological two parent family is the optimal one, it will only breed confusion and hardships for the child.
So I profess here and now that the whole idea of this gay parenting is to challenge and mock the standards that have been set for the ideal family.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm)Kitanetos Wrote: Having a biological two parent family is optimal, certainly.

Agreed.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:46 pm)Lion IRC Wrote:

(November 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm)Kitanetos Wrote: Having a biological two parent family is optimal, certainly.

Agreed.

Strongly disagree. I've seen many "biological families" fall apart to not fall for this illusion of the perfect family. Such things are rare if they exist at all. Biological or not parents are susceptible to the same mistakes.

@ mehmet, the mere fact that you think people go through the trouble of having a family just to mock your "model" really reveals how mature you are. Are you saying that the only reason heteros deserve to marry and have a family is because they have a basis in tradition? Wow. Uhm, everyone has a right to have a family as long as everything's consensual, I especially like how you tried to make equality sound like a dirty word and a crazy concept.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: But in a society where we state that the biological two parent family is the optimal one, it will only breed confusion and hardships for the child.

To think that we can protect our children from the realities of life is simply unrealistic. Children will always encounter some form of hardships concerning something or another, whether it be their weight, the acne on their faces, the glasses they wear, the clothes they wear, etc.

If we lived in a perfect world, children would not get picked on for anything because there would be no ignorance that would breed the type of bigotry to get them picked on by others.

(November 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: So I profess here and now that the whole idea of this gay parenting is to challenge and mock the standards that have been set for the ideal family.

And this kind of thinking is only the mere perpetuation of the problems that need to be eradicated.