|
Post by awhina on Feb 20, 2017 8:09:09 GMT
f Sigh.I volunteered no information as you already knew that I was married and when he died, you learned that on the other board. You are just trolling. I had forgotten that he had died but I could not have learned that information on the other board it you had not volunteered it. False. I "volunteered' it correct Supes' lie that I had been divorced three times.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Feb 20, 2017 8:14:20 GMT
Yes we do the breeding and you depend on us for your recruitment. Sorry about that but not even the pink $ has been able to come up with a way to get children without women. As I say, sorry about that - but not really. I know all your opinions depend on your utter ignorance, but just once, try to educate yourself. There's been plenty of news about being able to create egg or sperm cells from stem cells, following on earlier tech which swapped out the nucleii of egg and/or sperm cells, all of which allows for children with two biological parents of the same sex. Of course, two women can only have girls this way as there'd be no Y chromosome. Two men producing a child without a woman is never going to happen and money spent on it could be better spent on curing malaria or cholera something that actually helps.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Feb 20, 2017 8:22:09 GMT
Homosexual relationships are solely about sex not romance - ever. How did you become such an expert? It happens. Sometimes male homosexual couples will arrange something with female homosexual couples. So why would a woman hand over a child she would never be allowed to see ever again? Being a lesbian presumably doesn't mean hating children.
|
|
londonbird
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@londonbird
Posts: 250
Likes: 82
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by londonbird on Feb 20, 2017 8:26:31 GMT
What a shocker, Ada has another anecdote which just so happens to back up the point she's trying to make. There's no one called Ada here and anecdote does not mean false. The plural of Anecdote is not 'Data
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Feb 20, 2017 8:32:34 GMT
There's no one called Ada here and anecdote does not mean false. The plural of Anecdote is not 'Data So? That was not my point.
|
|
londonbird
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@londonbird
Posts: 250
Likes: 82
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by londonbird on Feb 20, 2017 8:33:53 GMT
My husband and I play bridge with another couple every Wednesday. This other couple says lots of disparaging things about gay people. Today they went over the top. They often talk about gay marriage and how it should not be allowed, this time the husband went on about pedophilia and how 'Almost all gay men are pedophiles'. How does one deal with such people while still trying to keep love in your heart? Is gay people getting married something that bothers you? If so.... why? No it doesn't bother me at all. Marriage is a legal entity not a religious one this is why certain lines MUST be spoken during the church service, are spoken during a celebrant service, and nothing is legally binding until you sign the register. I am religious but you have to remove religion from this legally binding Union. As as long as two people love, cherish and respect each other I have no problem with it. Why should I, it's really none of my business in the end?
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Feb 20, 2017 8:51:26 GMT
How did you become such an expert? It happens. Sometimes male homosexual couples will arrange something with female homosexual couples. So why would a woman hand over a child she would never be allowed to see ever again? Being a lesbian presumably doesn't mean hating children. So you don't think surrogacy ever happens? And you ignored my question: How did you become such an expert on why gay people marry?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 8:59:02 GMT
I had forgotten that he had died but I could not have learned that information on the other board it you had not volunteered it. False. I "volunteered' it correct Supes' lie that I had been divorced three times. Vicky32 Unsurprisingly you are lying about what I said and being divorced.
From the above top secrect board posted under your vicky32 account you posted this:
So a new board same old Ada,trying to talk about other peoples marriages when your own failed,and then lying about it.
So proof given your lie refuted by your own words.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 9:19:50 GMT
Straight, gay, bisexual, asexual... I make that four already. How bizarre! Male and female arw real, all else is habit or taste. Troll much?
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Feb 20, 2017 9:26:18 GMT
So why would a woman hand over a child she would never be allowed to see ever again? Being a lesbian presumably doesn't mean hating children. So you don't think surrogacy ever happens? And you ignored my question: How did you become such an expert on why gay people marry? Sigh. I never said surrogacy does not happen. (Even though it is actually illegal because it is exploitation ).That is happens because of some species of self-hate /altruism where a woman sacrifices her child on the altar of political correctness is what I can't accept.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by j2 on Feb 20, 2017 9:31:16 GMT
RE: The asexual discussion a couple of pages. The term used in current popular use is an umbrella term and exists on a spectrum linkYou do realize it's an 'umbrella term' strongly enforced since around the 1990's by politics, right? And before that, the word is said to have been formed around the 1830's and in no way for its present "redefinition", how about it.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by j2 on Feb 20, 2017 9:39:16 GMT
It's not about how I define it or redefine it; I don't try to and its real definition remains clear. Karl, why don't you ask the fellas who formed the word back in the day (1800's)? It's not about my opinion; it's about the truth of the fact that the word 'asexual' was NOT formed to describe behavior but instead a real biological condition of nature (no sex organs in sight). That a bunch of people with their choices and agendas in positions of power decided to take that word quite recently, mind you (1990's), and use it to (try to) make them all feel better and confuse things around is not my problem or my doing. It's just how things are.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Feb 20, 2017 10:04:01 GMT
Karl, why don't you ask the fellas who formed the word back in the day (1800's)? Why would that be remotely relevant? I'm asking your opinion. That makes it about your opinion. Words evolve. Case in point: The word "truth" was not first formed to mean what you think it means today. It only assumed that meaning in the 14th century. Besides, the definition of "asexual" which you suggest above is one of the ones you dismissed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 10:23:42 GMT
RE: The asexual discussion a couple of pages. The term used in current popular use is an umbrella term and exists on a spectrum linkYou do realize it's an 'umbrella term' strongly enforced since around the 1990's by politics, right? And before that, the word is said to have been formed around the 1830's and in no way for its present "redefinition", how about it. I thought it would be more recent than the 90s (the sources in the article are from the mid 2000s). Anyway the meaning of a word is determined holistically by its use in a sentence and the person using it. Its etymological and historical roots do not have exclusive control over its meaning. To see it otherwise seems like it would be a fallacy of irrelevance since all language in public use is in flux. If it was used in a science lab to a specific organism then that would be different since it's a different (& more fixed) social setting although those terms may alter overtime too. What matters is how a person uses it to define their social identity. There are degrees of asexuality so whether they elaborate further (eg: demisexual) is up to the person who uses it.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by j2 on Feb 20, 2017 10:34:09 GMT
Two men producing a child without a woman is never going to happen and money spent on it could be better spent on curing malaria or cholera something that actually helps. How about money being spent on something to cure the ignorance and homophobic bigotry of dense dolts like you? That might help. In other words, forced indoctrination ("treatment").
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 10:34:10 GMT
Can you make an argument against gay marriage that also can't be made against straight marriage? So far you've said "it's not romantic". I know plenty of straight marriages that are not romantic. You've said the child might be robbed of its mother. Plenty of straight marriages do that. You've said the other partner might not stick around. Plenty of straight marriages do that. Is there ANY argument that doesn't apply equally? Homosexual relationships are solely about sex not romance - ever. No, this is not true. Plenty of homosexual marriages are all about romance. Plenty of heterosexual marriages are not. But again, plenty of heterosexual marriages wind up with the mother leaving. So again : is there a fault in homosexual marriages that is not present in heterosexual ones?
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Feb 20, 2017 10:41:48 GMT
Homosexual relationships are solely about sex not romance - ever. No, this is not true. Plenty of homosexual marriages are all about romance. Plenty of heterosexual marriages are not. But again, plenty of heterosexual marriages wind up with the mother leaving. So again : is there a fault in homosexual marriages that is not present in heterosexual ones? No. I don't care about what happens on Coronation St, in real life women don't voluntarily leave their children. You're missing the point though. Homosexual "marriage" and parenting excludes the mother by design and from the start. Homosexual "marriage" is just a parody of the real thing.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by j2 on Feb 20, 2017 10:42:37 GMT
Any number of ways. For example, they may not be 'ignorant' and they may not feel threatened at all, yes or no? But they are ignorant and they do feel threatened, so yes! Sounds like your opinion to me. Which "denial" are you talking about exactly? I have no 'avatar'. I'm not even sure what the hell that word really means. And by the way, forget it, you'll never get to project your mirror images on to me. You guys are a laugh in a pathetic kind of way. Nice little chat, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 10:54:36 GMT
No. I don't care about what happens on Coronation St, in real life women don't voluntarily leave their children. No, you are mistaken again. Women actually do leave their children. Lesbian marriages have two of them. No, actually it's not. No more than most heterosexual marriages are. So, it seems your views are largely factually incorrect. You should therefore change your mind on this issue.
|
|
j2
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@j2
Posts: 628
Likes: 149
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by j2 on Feb 20, 2017 11:00:56 GMT
In other words, forced indoctrination ("treatment"). You mean forcing homosexuals to become heterosexuals, like most bigoted freaks think they should be? No, not really. From my point of view homosexuals can do whatever the hell they want to do, if they'd just keep it to themselves and no damned agenda keeps coming near me, for example. Good or bad, everyone chooses or should be able to choose exactly what they'd like to do with themselves. But when any agenda or group or gang tries to force me, inside my home, to accept anything whatsoever starting by falseness, then I will stand against it all the time without exception. That's also the kind of forced indoctrination I speak of, and the kind of 'social' harassment that keeps taking place on a major scale all over the place. At best, you and those like you are 'masked social bullies', pretending politeness and 'good manners' just as long as people don't challenge your positions. It's a laugh.
|
|