should same sex couples be allowed to adopt children?
yes
74.6%
188
no
19.4%
49
i don't know
6.0%
15
252 votes
| there's nothing that pisses me off more than sitting down in a church listening to bunch of retards talking about some retarded myth that was writing centuries ago the comment I made on homosexuality is my own personal belief |
silverdevil said: there's nothing that pisses me off more than sitting down in a church listening to bunch of retards talking about some retarded myth that was writing centuries ago the comment I made on homosexuality is my own personal belief You put your belief out there. I want you to back it up with evidence. If you don't want to, then don't post on the forum. So: Back it up with evidence. Even if the evidence is shitty, at least you're willing to defend it and you might have a leg to stand on. If you refuse to, then your opinion and belief are worthless, thus you should have kept it to yourself. So is your belief worth something or nothing? |
silverdevil said: there's nothing that pisses me off more than sitting down in a church listening to bunch of retards talking about some retarded myth that was writing centuries ago the comment I made on homosexuality is my own personal belief Alright, then I believe all christians are secretly gay. There's no evidence; just my personal belief. |
Karpman said: I sincerely hope that is the only part you agree on with him. It could, what I meant with it is that it is incorrect that you and me are going to die of it. Now I am no expert on this area, but what you said there: "today's technology" is probably key. Technology evolves every day, it has sped up so much these last decades. So if it were to hit in lets say 120 years, I bet those awesome spaceships like in Star Trek won't be fiction any more. Well like you said you're not an expert, and neither am I. This is getting off-topic anyway, but personally I don't think that what you see in Star Trek will be reality any time this millennium. It can be hard to actually conceive of how vast the universe actually is, and how the distances are only becoming greater with each passing second. |
| Come visit my town // I apologize in advance for my second-rate English Join my fan club // Improve the transport network |
silverdevil said: there 75% chance that kids who have gay parents will be gay AND u risk to catch that damn disease if u start hanging out with them AND I tink tat gay is wrong I can hardly do the difference between male and female anymore What? No, just no |
| Come visit my town // I apologize in advance for my second-rate English Join my fan club // Improve the transport network |
| Alright, then I believe all christians are secretly gay. There's no evidence; just my personal belief. I'm k with that I'm an atheist i dont care what u tink of christians |
| I think whether or not having gay parents makes a child more likely to be gay (or more likely to feel comfortable expressing their true sexuality) is irrelevant for any other purpose than sheer curiosity. The only reason it would otherwise matter is if you believe more gay people is a bad thing. If that's one of your arguments against gays adopting, then your opinion is obsolete anyway. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
| of course |
 |
Singateru said: NO . That is unfair for kid , kid will not have a normal life imagine yourself adopted by homos everyday you come back at home they touch each others , kissing etc ... like in yaoi mangas I don't think any kid wants to see their parents all over each other, regardless of their gender. |
| Come visit my town // I apologize in advance for my second-rate English Join my fan club // Improve the transport network |
Karpman said: Well, first we need to live past Doomsday. Yeah, February 14 2016. But that's in another 3 years so I'll have time to worry later |
| Come visit my town // I apologize in advance for my second-rate English Join my fan club // Improve the transport network |
| They should! Period! Lock the thread. |
 |
| This thread's still alive? |
| As a child, I was told that society is a melting pot of talents; knowledge and experience combined to form important alloys that will contribute to mankind. When I got to highschool, however, I thought that it's more like a river in which the water represents our peers while we ourselves are the stones in the river. Constant erosion by mindless majority sheeping has made us lose our unique edge. After I hit the age of 18, I realized that I've been wrong all along. Society is no melting pot. Society is no river. Society is a person, a very skilled rapist, and he has fucked us all. |
akutasame94 said: They should! Period! Lock the thread. If you don't want people talking about this, it means you consider the pro-adoption stance so weak that it cannot survive a debate. Which, of course, is exactly the case. |
akutasame94 said: They should! Period! Lock the thread. I thought the point of a discussion thread was to start a discussion. It's not as simple as you make it seem |
| Come visit my town // I apologize in advance for my second-rate English Join my fan club // Improve the transport network |
TheHandOfShame said: akutasame94 said: They should! Period! Lock the thread. If you don't want people talking about this, it means you consider the pro-adoption stance so weak that it cannot survive a debate. Which, of course, is exactly the case. It's actually the anti-adoption stance that's unable to survive |
| So many kids these days grow up in single parent families and grow up perfectly happy and healthy, having two parents to love and support you, whatever their gender or sexual orientation, is surely very slightly better than one. Thus, growing up happy and healthy. |
 |
professor-salt said: It's actually the anti-adoption stance that's unable to survive Yet here we a pro-adoption person wanting to shut down the thread. |
Karpman said: What you said is quite silly according to the poll. View Poll Results: should same sex couples be allowed to adopt children? yes (your vote) 166 74.77% What do the poll results have to do with this? Something isn't true merely because many people say it is. |
Karpman said: No, it isn't true, it can't be. And vice versa. Because it is a subjective matter, and about 3/4 of the people here prove the contrary to what you said. How do the poll results contradict anything I said? |
Karpman said: TheHandOfShame said: it means you consider the pro-adoption stance so weak that it cannot survive a debate. Because you said this, which isn't true. As proof in the poll results and the discussions that happened. You are not making any sense. |
TheHandOfShame said: Karpman said: TheHandOfShame said: it means you consider the pro-adoption stance so weak that it cannot survive a debate. Because you said this, which isn't true. As proof in the poll results and the discussions that happened. You are not making any sense. He's right, you're not making any sense. Exactly what does the poll confirm other than the fact that the majority of people here support letting same-sex couples adopt? |
| Come visit my town // I apologize in advance for my second-rate English Join my fan club // Improve the transport network |
Karpman said: You said the pro-adoption stance wasn't strong enough to survive a debate, the test was this topic. And if you look at the poll results, which has been won by the pro adoption by quite a large margin. Anyone looking to shut down the discussion inevitably believes that his position is too weak to survive the discussion. |
TheHandOfShame said: akutasame94 said: They should! Period! Lock the thread. If you don't want people talking about this, it means you consider the pro-adoption stance so weak that it cannot survive a debate. Which, of course, is exactly the case. Utter nonsense sir, there are plenty of reasons to close this thread which have nothing to do with the strength of either argument. The topic is now hitting twenty eight pages, or more than 500 posts. The vast majority of these posts are just bashing the other side without any attempt to provide valid arguments, repeating the same fallacious arguments again and again or even just people stating their opinions as if that in itself is sufficient to justify it. It's absolute nonsense! I believe that I made a pretty solid criticism of the anti-adoption argument way back on page 9, and as far as I am aware no-one has responded to it. Though I made my argument in a satirical way (which in my view is befitting of a topic like this) I am confident the two points that I made are solidly grounded. In particular the second point, which cuts straight to the problem: what exactly is wrong with homosexuality, and why do we need to take active steps to prevent it? As far as I can tell the main argument being made by those against homosexual adoption is that it will somehow cause the children to be raised homosexual themselves. Now putting aside for the moment that any evidence to suggest that is the case is spurious at best, as well as that impirical observation alone verifies at the very least that the reverse is definitely not true (ie. that straight people only produce/raise straight children) which would make your position doubtful, the point remains- what is wrong with homosexuality that we need to actively prevent it from happening? I think you will struggle to find an argument to support this which is not either based on religious grounds (in which case it contradicts the freedom of religion) or which is based on the notion that homosexuals conduct some sort of activity which children should not be exposed to- in which case you are not addressing the real problem. So I ask you squire, why have you been dodging this question? Could it be that you are unable to provide a response to it and were simply hoping I had forgotten about it... or were you simply unaware of it? |
| Losing an Argument online? Simply post a webpage full of links, and refuse to continue until your opponents have read every last one of them! WORKS EVERY TIME! "I was debating with someone who believed in climate change, when he linked me to a graph showing evidence to that effect. So I sent him a 10k word essay on the origins of Conservatism, and escaped with my dignity intact." "THANK YOU VERBOSE WEBPAGES OF QUESTIONABLE RELEVANCE!" |
| I am not sure if people are intentionally missing the point or if it's somehow too complicated for them to understand. |
TheHandOfShame said: I am not sure if people are intentionally missing the point or if it's somehow too complicated for them to understand. I don't see how your question has not been answered already, or are you just being awkward for the hell of it? |
TheHandOfShame said: I am not sure if people are intentionally missing the point or if it's somehow too complicated for them to understand. I've yet to see you make any claims about the actual issue at hand. You just called out one person who happened to support the issue, yet wanted the thread to be closed. You're acting as if that one person wanting the thread to be closed means that we who support adoption are grasping at straws. Maybe we'd "understand" if you actually went into detail instead of posting one sentence at a time and saying something besides "your argument is weak". |
كنت تهدر وقتك عن طريق ترجمة هذه. mattbenz99 said: Christians and Satanists are technically the same thing |
Goryo said: I've yet to see you make any claims about the actual issue at hand. You just called out one person who happened to support the issue, yet wanted the thread to be closed. I never announced that I plan to make claims about the issue, and it doesn't say anywhere that I have to do so. |
TheHandOfShame said: Goryo said: I've yet to see you make any claims about the actual issue at hand. You just called out one person who happened to support the issue, yet wanted the thread to be closed. I never announced that I plan to make claims about the issue, and it doesn't say anywhere that I have to do so. So, let me get this straight, you came onto the thread, saw someone who wanted the thread to be closed and who supported gay adoption, and claimed that that they were saying it because the argument for it was weak, but never had any intention of posting anything other than that? Fuck off. |
InfiniteRyvius said: TheHandOfShame said: Goryo said: I've yet to see you make any claims about the actual issue at hand. You just called out one person who happened to support the issue, yet wanted the thread to be closed. I never announced that I plan to make claims about the issue, and it doesn't say anywhere that I have to do so. So, let me get this straight, you came onto the thread, saw someone who wanted the thread to be closed and who supported gay adoption, and claimed that that they were saying it because the argument for it was weak, but never had any intention of posting anything other than that? Fuck off. Why should I have to post any more than that? You're just looking for an excuse to get mad. |
TheHandOfShame said: InfiniteRyvius said: TheHandOfShame said: Goryo said: I've yet to see you make any claims about the actual issue at hand. You just called out one person who happened to support the issue, yet wanted the thread to be closed. I never announced that I plan to make claims about the issue, and it doesn't say anywhere that I have to do so. So, let me get this straight, you came onto the thread, saw someone who wanted the thread to be closed and who supported gay adoption, and claimed that that they were saying it because the argument for it was weak, but never had any intention of posting anything other than that? Fuck off. Why should I have to post any more than that? You're just looking for an excuse to get mad. I don't need the excuse when it comes to my pet hate of people coming to conclusions without backing them up with a decent reason or argument. Tell me, don't you find it strange that you're just assigning a motive to a random person that suits your opinion? You do not know why he wanted the thread locked, and judging from what you've said, I don't think you even cared if his reason was different from the one you said. What's the point? People are obviously going to reply to that saying that their argument is not weak (you'd have to be a total dumbass to not know that), and you have no reason for this, so in the end you're going to just avoid questions and have no answers like an idiot, in fact you will appear a moron. Not being prepared to back up what you've said when you post an opinion is laughable. |
InfiniteRyvius said: I don't need the excuse when it comes to my pet hate of people coming to conclusions without backing them up with a decent reason or argument. People want to shut down the discussion when they know it's compromising their position. I know this from many years of experience. |
| You're discussing why the thread should be closed for nearly 2 pages now, and you don't see why it should be closed? Holy fuck. |
TheHandOfShame said: InfiniteRyvius said: I don't need the excuse when it comes to my pet hate of people coming to conclusions without backing them up with a decent reason or argument. People want to shut down the discussion when they know it's compromising their position. I know this from many years of experience. Okay, I won't deny that you may have experience because I have no reason to. However, what you are doing is making a generalization, whilst it made me true of people in general that does not mean that it is true of everyone. You cannot make a conclusion based on this alone, especially when people have provided evidence suggesting they can argue their view just fine. That is why your argument is still invalid even after that dull attempt at backing it up. |
InfiniteRyvius said: Okay, I won't deny that you may have experience because I have no reason to. However, what you are doing is making a generalization, whilst it made me true of people in general that does not mean that it is true of everyone. You cannot make a conclusion based on this alone, especially when people have provided evidence suggesting they can argue their view just fine. That is why your argument is still invalid even after that dull attempt at backing it up. I have no idea what you're talking about now. |
TheHandOfShame said: InfiniteRyvius said: Okay, I won't deny that you may have experience because I have no reason to. However, what you are doing is making a generalization, whilst it made me true of people in general that does not mean that it is true of everyone. You cannot make a conclusion based on this alone, especially when people have provided evidence suggesting they can argue their view just fine. That is why your argument is still invalid even after that dull attempt at backing it up. I have no idea what you're talking about now. You're relying on generalizations, and not drawing conclusions from specific examples. |
 Just this once, I'll fulfill whatever your wish is. |
TheHandOfShame said: I am not sure if people are intentionally missing the point or if it's somehow too complicated for them to understand. The point you are trying to make is that the only possible motivation one could have for wanting to cease discussion is that one has run out of arguments to defend their position. Something not unlike refusing to make any arguments to defend your position at all: TheHandOfShame said: I never announced that I plan to make claims about the issue, and it doesn't say anywhere that I have to do so. I'm not sure why you are so cocky in your reasoning abilities, but it seems to me that you don't really understand what you are saying. I mean, at least not on the level that you are able to apply it consistently. In any case I have provided an argument which the anti-adoption side can attempt to provide an answer for, so your concerns no longer apply; and since you don't seem to wish to contribute to the discussion further, there is no need for you to continue posting in this topic. Have a nice day! |
AnnoKanoDec 2, 2012 5:42 PM
| Losing an Argument online? Simply post a webpage full of links, and refuse to continue until your opponents have read every last one of them! WORKS EVERY TIME! "I was debating with someone who believed in climate change, when he linked me to a graph showing evidence to that effect. So I sent him a 10k word essay on the origins of Conservatism, and escaped with my dignity intact." "THANK YOU VERBOSE WEBPAGES OF QUESTIONABLE RELEVANCE!" |
| At least TheHandOfShame has the correct avatar for spouting nonsensical pretentious bullshit en masse. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
TheHandOfShame said: InfiniteRyvius said: Okay, I won't deny that you may have experience because I have no reason to. However, what you are doing is making a generalization, whilst it made me true of people in general that does not mean that it is true of everyone. You cannot make a conclusion based on this alone, especially when people have provided evidence suggesting they can argue their view just fine. That is why your argument is still invalid even after that dull attempt at backing it up. I have no idea what you're talking about now. In that case I must come to the sad conclusion that you are in fact retarded. Don't worry, from now on when I see something you post I will know you have no ability to back it up, thus asking you to do so would be pointless, so I will simply disregard your post and hope that others do the same. In the unlikely event you do ever try to justify an opinion, well, we'll talk then. |
TheHandOfShame said: People want to shut down the discussion when they know it's compromising their position. I know this from many years of experience. Like I said before, just because one person wants the thread to be closed, doesn't mean that the arguments of everyone who agrees with that person on adoption are "compromised" Besides, the fact that he/she wanted the thread to be closed, and the fact that he/she supports gay adoption are two completely separate issues. |
كنت تهدر وقتك عن طريق ترجمة هذه. mattbenz99 said: Christians and Satanists are technically the same thing |
| @InfiniteRyvius: I bow to you. ;) |
|
Tavor said: You're relying on generalizations, and not drawing conclusions from specific examples. And this means... what, exactly? AnnoKano said: The point you are trying to make is that the only possible motivation one could have for wanting to cease discussion is that one has run out of arguments to defend their position. It is by far the most probable and common motivation. Something not unlike refusing to make any arguments to defend your position at all: I have no obligation to elaborate. I'm not sure why you are so cocky in your reasoning abilities from, but it seems to me that you don't really understand what you are doing in the first place. I understand perfectly. In any case I have provided an argument which the anti-adoption side can attempt to provide an answer for, so your argument has been rendered void anyway. The two are unrelated. And since you don't seem to wish to contribute to the discussion further, there is no need for you to continue posting in this topic. People continue to engage me in discussion, therefore there is obviously a need for me to continue. |
More topics from this board
» Are you a slow or fast typier on a computer???DesuMaiden - 34 minutes ago |
5 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» Do you post your own original artwork onto social media?DesuMaiden - Apr 10 |
26 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
14 minutes ago |
|
» Is English your native language? ( 1 2 )DesuMaiden - Apr 16 |
56 |
by MalchikRepaid
»»
15 minutes ago |
|
» Manga piracy website operator ordered to pay ¥1.7 billion to publishersMeusnier - 5 hours ago |
8 |
by TibetanJazz666
»»
19 minutes ago |
|
» How do you know other people actually exist?purple_rayn - 11 hours ago |
9 |
by Hikinekomori
»»
1 hour ago |