Mr Woof - I challenge you
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-12-2012, 09:52 PM
Mr Woof - I challenge you
Quote:I am not convinced that gay parenting is a good thing.

In the animal kingdom this rarely applies.

We have abundant problems with heterosexual parenting ; it does not
follow that gay parenting will be better and there are additional
problems to boot.

When the druggie Elton and his partner adopted, I was quite concerned for the child.

Surrogate paid mothers do not provide a good start and way down the track there may be serious psychological repercussions.

The child as a pet notion is worrisome.

What about bi sexual parenting?

I am not convinced that all gays are naturally predisposed; what of
those opting for variation; is this a good feature for parenting?

While gay appeasement is becoming politically correct the issue of parenting needs sound evaluation.

There are many other issues.

Wrong, and I would love to tell you why.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
14-12-2012, 12:28 AM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
(13-12-2012 09:52 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
Quote:I am not convinced that gay parenting is a good thing.

In the animal kingdom this rarely applies.

We have abundant problems with heterosexual parenting ; it does not
follow that gay parenting will be better and there are additional
problems to boot.

When the druggie Elton and his partner adopted, I was quite concerned for the child.

Surrogate paid mothers do not provide a good start and way down the track there may be serious psychological repercussions.

The child as a pet notion is worrisome.

What about bi sexual parenting?

I am not convinced that all gays are naturally predisposed; what of
those opting for variation; is this a good feature for parenting?

While gay appeasement is becoming politically correct the issue of parenting needs sound evaluation.

There are many other issues.

Wrong, and I would love to tell you why.
Go for it!
Irrespective of perceived evolutionary difficulties, explain to me why homosexual men,bi sexuals, and to a lesser degree lesbians, are equal to, or better than, heterosexuals, not withstanding issues where the latter may be deemed grossly incompetent.
The issue involves not simply the rights of a specific gender it involves the rights and future of of a child.
It is not a question of one gender not being kind , decent, or caring . The crux of the issue is how we re produce as a species and whether an enormous change in the rearing of children, contrary to the historical method, will be equal to or superior.
I am well aware of the neglect, cruelty, and abuse inflicted on infants by heterosexuals. Is there reason to think that the male or female species involved in homosexual union will perform better. Why would this be so? It seems quite possible that all the problems of current parenting would emerge.
In terms of an agnostic idealism I would also question what seems a strange aberation in terms of the historicity of the human species.
I personally feel that any rushed or coerced legislation in this area could open a Pandora's Box and that the rights of gay people should be carefully weighed against the rights of those whom they would seek to rear.
Find all posts by this user
14-12-2012, 02:48 AM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
Okay where to begin.

I think what you are saying is that all the negative shit straight parents do will still happen with the gays.
This I disagree to an extent (and the reaosn for the thread).

The core issue for things such as abuse and neglect is simply because that child was unwanted. But for whatever reason the parents believed that they now have an obligation to raise this child even though they are resistant to the idea and perhaps see the child as the cause of all their new found problems.
There is certainly evidence for when abortion is made legal that crime rates drop because unwanted babies are simply not born (most often the case is that that person then has a baby later when she/they are ready/want a baby). I believe this to be significant evidence that most abuse and neglect you speak of then comes from as I say unwanted babies.

Now as to why this wont (or far far less) with homosexual parents is obvious, homosexuals can't create a baby (with each other). So in order for that couple to have a child they need to a) rent-a-whom or b) adopt.
This is not something that just happens and so serious discussion ensues. Straight away if that couple doesn't want children they simply wont go to adoption agency.
This results that gay couples that have children via whatever option truly do want that child and so thus are more likely to love, care-for, protect etc.. that child. They certainly are not going to go through the lengthy adoption process just to get a child and throw it in the washing machine for a couple hours a day.

Just because naturally male and female can create a baby I don't believe that qualifies them as better parents.
What about single parents? You imply that single parents are then bad parents because they're not the natural man/women.
The key ingredients in raising a child have absolutely no relevance to gender. Things like love/patience/good role model etc.. etc.. all that airy fairy stuff. Gender plays no role in that it is purely personality.

Obviously no parents is perfect and issues will arise, not 100% of children raised with gay parents is going to be mr/mrs goody-two-shoes but that is all part of parenting. Parents of same-sex or parents of different-sex will and do make mistakes, that is just part of life.

I also think gay parents would raise more tolerant children. As gay people themselves, not to mention a gay couple, not to mention a gay couple with a child, they are under certain social pressures much the same as say teenage girls and models in their magazines (probably a bad example but you get my drift) and so they will raise their children to be more tolerant as they know what it is like to be on the receiving end.

And finally it's not the governments place to determine who and who isn't fit for parenthood.
Well with the exception of course if you get your children taken away because your a bad parent (which I support), BUT even in those cases the government gave you a chance. Think, innocent until proven guilty.

You/government simply cannot look at someone and simply based on their sexuality say "no you will make an unfit parent", that is morally wrong.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
[+] 3 users Like earmuffs's post
14-12-2012, 08:51 AM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
(14-12-2012 02:48 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Okay where to begin.

I think what you are saying is that all the negative shit straight parents do will still happen with the gays.
This I disagree to an extent (and the reaosn for the thread).

The core issue for things such as abuse and neglect is simply because that child was unwanted. But for whatever reason the parents believed that they now have an obligation to raise this child even though they are resistant to the idea and perhaps see the child as the cause of all their new found problems.
There is certainly evidence for when abortion is made legal that crime rates drop because unwanted babies are simply not born (most often the case is that that person then has a baby later when she/they are ready/want a baby). I believe this to be significant evidence that most abuse and neglect you speak of then comes from as I say unwanted babies.

Now as to why this wont (or far far less) with homosexual parents is obvious, homosexuals can't create a baby (with each other). So in order for that couple to have a child they need to a) rent-a-whom or b) adopt.
This is not something that just happens and so serious discussion ensues. Straight away if that couple doesn't want children they simply wont go to adoption agency.
This results that gay couples that have children via whatever option truly do want that child and so thus are more likely to love, care-for, protect etc.. that child. They certainly are not going to go through the lengthy adoption process just to get a child and throw it in the washing machine for a couple hours a day.

Just because naturally male and female can create a baby I don't believe that qualifies them as better parents.
What about single parents? You imply that single parents are then bad parents because they're not the natural man/women.
The key ingredients in raising a child have absolutely no relevance to gender. Things like love/patience/good role model etc.. etc.. all that airy fairy stuff. Gender plays no role in that it is purely personality.

Obviously no parents is perfect and issues will arise, not 100% of children raised with gay parents is going to be mr/mrs goody-two-shoes but that is all part of parenting. Parents of same-sex or parents of different-sex will and do make mistakes, that is just part of life.

I also think gay parents would raise more tolerant children. As gay people themselves, not to mention a gay couple, not to mention a gay couple with a child, they are under certain social pressures much the same as say teenage girls and models in their magazines (probably a bad example but you get my drift) and so they will raise their children to be more tolerant as they know what it is like to be on the receiving end.

And finally it's not the governments place to determine who and who isn't fit for parenthood.
Well with the exception of course if you get your children taken away because your a bad parent (which I support), BUT even in those cases the government gave you a chance. Think, innocent until proven guilty.

You/government simply cannot look at someone and simply based on their sexuality say "no you will make an unfit parent", that is morally wrong.
I made no reference to single parents but will address the points you raise.
The fact that same sex couples can't create a baby together, as you indicate may be a good place to begin.
Even if we assume that the same sex couples are top people the situation is complicated by surrogacy or adoption.
Remember the baby has no say in any of this. If the couple divorces, the child is left in limbo so to speak.Should it then be raised by a heterosexual couple or go to another gay couple?

I do not think it "morally wrong" for a government to look at sexuality relevant to bringing up children.
Would a child prefer gay parents or straight parents? Are two males equal or preferable to a loving natural mother's nurturing breast? Irrespective of how nice the gay parents may be, nature, in the big picture, is geared to heterosexuality and in the higher animal kingdom this has governed where we find ourselves today.

Yes some heterosexual couples carelessly have unwanted children; I see this as a separate problem.
With gay couples there may be a novelty factor,serious discussion may or may not occur, and even if they do sincerely want children they may fail to recognize that given the way things actually are in the world, and have been for thousands of years, they are placing their demands before the child's best interests.

AS for the children of gays being more tolerant this pre supposes to some degree that the gay life is preferable to the heterosexual life and I don't see this as in any way being established.

Your reference to liberal abortion laws preventing child neglect is really off the gay topic and could be addressed in another post.
Find all posts by this user
14-12-2012, 08:23 PM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
Well that was certainly the most homophobic post I have seen yet on these forums. So congratulations.

Quote:I made no reference to single parents but will address the points you raise.

Yes you did.
You said that homosexual couples make unfit parents because apparently nature is geared towards male/female partnerships (when it's not, it's simply geared towards male/female genes interacting to form the baby). Single parents are then not this male/female but rather just male or just female. Thus according to you, single parents are wrong and shouldn't have children.

Quote:Remember the baby has no say in any of this.

The baby has no say in whether it is born to some crips gang member drug addict in LA either, yet under your logic as long as said gang member is with a male partner, they are better fit parents more so then some gay couple from Beverly hills with all the money (and wait for the cheesy line) and love (annd there it is) in the world.

Quote:If the couple divorces, the child is left in limbo so to speak.

If the couple divorces then it is exactly the same situation as if a heterosexual couple was to divorce. The baby is not re-homed in the sense that it goes to new parents. ???

Quote:I do not think it "morally wrong" for a government to look at sexuality relevant to bringing up children.

Because you're a homophobic bigot.

Quote:Would a child prefer gay parents or straight parents?

A child would prefer to go where ever it can receive said things I mentioned in my previous post; patience, love blah blah blah.
The only reason I can think of as to why heterosexual parents are favorable to same-sex parents would be if the child was picked on for having 2 mommies or two daddies. But who's fault is that? People like you Mr Woof.
If you constantly deny gays equal rights to things such as marriage or the ability to adopt then you continue to say "gays are not equal to straight people" and just leave it open for bigotry and whatever the word equal to racism is for sexuality. sexualitism?
Think about the blacks. 1950's it was illegal for black people to drink from the same fountain (in the states). Today you guys have a black president. The racism is there but it's certainly not that bad and it's frowned upon.
Black children didn't get to choose if they were black back then, are you saying they should have chose to be white? That they brought racism upon themselves? Or that the black parents should have done the "responsibly" thing and just not have children?

You can ask any teenager, any adult, any child today raised by gay parents and I would bet my life savings they would give you the same if not better responses to questions in regards to their parents as children brought up under straight parents or single parents.

Quote:Are two males equal or preferable to a loving natural mother's nurturing breast?

If by breast feeding then I would say nothing really beats natural milk, BUT, there are many parents who never breast feed. MY mother never did because it was too painful for whatever reason. Are you suggesting that heterosexual parents that don't breast feed are horrible parents?
And besides, baby formula today is very very good.

If you are referring to love then it goes back to what I say about unwanted pregnancies. They believe 50% of all pregnancies are unplanned. Which leads to neglect, abuse etc...
Where as gay and lesbian couples very really have an unwanted child. It's almost always planned.
Like I said, you don't plan to have a baby just so that you can throw it in the dishwasher for a couple hours...

Look at this picture, you can't honestly tell me those two guys don't look like they're gonna love that child to death?

[Image: 800px-Male_Couple_With_Child-02.jpg]

Quote:Irrespective of how nice the gay parents may be, nature, in the big
picture, is geared to heterosexuality and in the higher animal kingdom
this has governed where we find ourselves today.

No, it's not.
Making a baby obviously requires male/female but raising that child has absolutely nothing to do with gender.
Please explain to me HOW nature has geared parenting towards heterosexual parents? You say it is but not how it is.
I've told you how it's not.

Quote:Yes some heterosexual couples carelessly have unwanted children; I see this as a separate problem.

It's not a separate "problem" as much as single parents in the scheme of your bigoted argument are a separate "problem".
Like I say, 50% of heterosexual couples babies are unplanned.
This relates back to the abortion because the abortion shows that unwanted/unplanned children suffer more neglect, more abuse and are more likely to become things like criminals.
And as I also said, same-sex couples very rarely have an unplanned/unwanted child. Any idiot can see the benefit in that.

Quote:With gay couples there may be a novelty factor

Novelty factor?
I think this line takes the cake for most bigoted line in TTA history.
Are you suggesting that the reason as to why gay couples have children is because of "novelty factor"?

Quote:and even if they do sincerely want children they may fail to recognize
that given the way things actually are in the world, and have been for
thousands of years, they are placing their demands before the child's
best interests.

Wrong.
False bigoted retarded assumption.

Quote:AS for the children of gays being more tolerant this pre supposes to
some degree that the gay life is preferable to the heterosexual life and
I don't see this as in any way being established.

It's a bit of common sense really.
If a child grows up in a home where the parents are not homophobic bigoted assholes, then that child is far less likely to grow up as a bigoted homophobic asshole.
Just look at religion, parents are Catholic or whatever that child doesn't grow up Muslim, they grow up Catholic.

Quote:Your reference to liberal abortion laws preventing child neglect is
really off the gay topic and could be addressed in another post.

No it's not as mentioned above.



Article

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
15-12-2012, 12:34 AM (This post was last modified: 15-12-2012 01:53 AM by Mr Woof.)
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
(14-12-2012 08:23 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Well that was certainly the most homophobic post I have seen yet on these forums. So congratulations.

Quote:I made no reference to single parents but will address the points you raise.

Yes you did.
You said that homosexual couples make unfit parents because apparently nature is geared towards male/female partnerships (when it's not, it's simply geared towards male/female genes interacting to form the baby). Single parents are then not this male/female but rather just male or just female. Thus according to you, single parents are wrong and shouldn't have children.

Quote:Remember the baby has no say in any of this.

The baby has no say in whether it is born to some crips gang member drug addict in LA either, yet under your logic as long as said gang member is with a male partner, they are better fit parents more so then some gay couple from Beverly hills with all the money (and wait for the cheesy line) and love (annd there it is) in the world.

Quote:If the couple divorces, the child is left in limbo so to speak.

If the couple divorces then it is exactly the same situation as if a heterosexual couple was to divorce. The baby is not re-homed in the sense that it goes to new parents. ???

Quote:I do not think it "morally wrong" for a government to look at sexuality relevant to bringing up children.

Because you're a homophobic bigot.

Quote:Would a child prefer gay parents or straight parents?

A child would prefer to go where ever it can receive said things I mentioned in my previous post; patience, love blah blah blah.
The only reason I can think of as to why heterosexual parents are favorable to same-sex parents would be if the child was picked on for having 2 mommies or two daddies. But who's fault is that? People like you Mr Woof.
If you constantly deny gays equal rights to things such as marriage or the ability to adopt then you continue to say "gays are not equal to straight people" and just leave it open for bigotry and whatever the word equal to racism is for sexuality. sexualitism?
Think about the blacks. 1950's it was illegal for black people to drink from the same fountain (in the states). Today you guys have a black president. The racism is there but it's certainly not that bad and it's frowned upon.
Black children didn't get to choose if they were black back then, are you saying they should have chose to be white? That they brought racism upon themselves? Or that the black parents should have done the "responsibly" thing and just not have children?

You can ask any teenager, any adult, any child today raised by gay parents and I would bet my life savings they would give you the same if not better responses to questions in regards to their parents as children brought up under straight parents or single parents.

Quote:Are two males equal or preferable to a loving natural mother's nurturing breast?

If by breast feeding then I would say nothing really beats natural milk, BUT, there are many parents who never breast feed. MY mother never did because it was too painful for whatever reason. Are you suggesting that heterosexual parents that don't breast feed are horrible parents?
And besides, baby formula today is very very good.

If you are referring to love then it goes back to what I say about unwanted pregnancies. They believe 50% of all pregnancies are unplanned. Which leads to neglect, abuse etc...
Where as gay and lesbian couples very really have an unwanted child. It's almost always planned.
Like I said, you don't plan to have a baby just so that you can throw it in the dishwasher for a couple hours...

Look at this picture, you can't honestly tell me those two guys don't look like they're gonna love that child to death?

[Image: 800px-Male_Couple_With_Child-02.jpg]

Quote:Irrespective of how nice the gay parents may be, nature, in the big
picture, is geared to heterosexuality and in the higher animal kingdom
this has governed where we find ourselves today.

No, it's not.
Making a baby obviously requires male/female but raising that child has absolutely nothing to do with gender.
Please explain to me HOW nature has geared parenting towards heterosexual parents? You say it is but not how it is.
I've told you how it's not.

Quote:Yes some heterosexual couples carelessly have unwanted children; I see this as a separate problem.

It's not a separate "problem" as much as single parents in the scheme of your bigoted argument are a separate "problem".
Like I say, 50% of heterosexual couples babies are unplanned.
This relates back to the abortion because the abortion shows that unwanted/unplanned children suffer more neglect, more abuse and are more likely to become things like criminals.
And as I also said, same-sex couples very rarely have an unplanned/unwanted child. Any idiot can see the benefit in that.

Quote:With gay couples there may be a novelty factor

Novelty factor?
I think this line takes the cake for most bigoted line in TTA history.
Are you suggesting that the reason as to why gay couples have children is because of "novelty factor"?

Quote:and even if they do sincerely want children they may fail to recognize
that given the way things actually are in the world, and have been for
thousands of years, they are placing their demands before the child's
best interests.

Wrong.
False bigoted retarded assumption.

Quote:AS for the children of gays being more tolerant this pre supposes to
some degree that the gay life is preferable to the heterosexual life and
I don't see this as in any way being established.

It's a bit of common sense really.
If a child grows up in a home where the parents are not homophobic bigoted assholes, then that child is far less likely to grow up as a bigoted homophobic asshole.
Just look at religion, parents are Catholic or whatever that child doesn't grow up Muslim, they grow up Catholic.

Quote:Your reference to liberal abortion laws preventing child neglect is
really off the gay topic and could be addressed in another post.

No it's not as mentioned above.



Article
Well you seem to have worked very hard on that fatuous little diatribe.
Your first effort was more restrained and well presented.

I had planned responding to whatever you came up with but seeing you have chosen attacks and insults I will endeavour to get between those ear muffs that seem to be limiting your insights even if it means saying a few things I would not normally say.

Back in the 50s when I was about your age I mixed with many gay people, only in those days they were known as camp. Someone once told me that stood for convicted and male pervert. In those days in Melbourne the gays did not seem overly concerned about parenting, the emphasis then being getting layed as much as possible. The fact that people did not like them as much as today made the sexuality a sort of taboo experience, and this was enjoyed by some. How things have changed in a relatively short time.I am not saying that all malegays are like this but with some there is an unrestrained attitude to sexuality. As you are probably aware gay men in many cases adopt passive and positive roles relevant to intercourse with one adopting the dominant male role and the other the submissive role. Some swap roles (versatile) and others abstain from anal intercourse. Whether this aligns well with bringing up a child is highly debatable. Sure, heteros, in some instances practise buggery,but it is not obligatory,and the fact that males may be obliged to engage in unhygienic, unaesthetic intercourse, may not be their fault, and while arguably acceptable in a one to one relationship, may be something of a barrier to child caring.
It may not be the norm, but some young men have breast implants along with hormone treatment and become chicks with dicks and engage in both receptive and and penetrative anal intercourse. Would they make good mothers...fathers.

It does not make a person a bigot to express an honest opinion and I am not beholden to you or the gay community. The past few decades or so has seen the gay community attempt to merge into main stream society and they have used alleged discriminations and violence against them to create an atmosphere conducive to such their sexuality being thought no different to that of heterosexuals, when in fact it is,physically, manifestly so.

You seem to see a great experiment with the lives of children as justified and make no mention of any need to assess gay parents as you see only genuine parenting types would choose to adopt. I am not at all sure about that. Stupid people gay, hero, bisexual or whatever are in no way immune to wanting to bring up a family. Heteros are not obliged either; as you seem to think. There are many contraceptives available and there have been for years. It may be justifiable to sterilise some women rather than create surrogate kids for the lowest order gay men, and they do exist, contrary to your beliefs, and will certainly prevail themselves with legislation that is too open and poorly thought out.

Finally let me mention bi-sexuality; here the sex addict will look to the best of both worlds ( I know, I was one) though in those few early years marriage was the last thing on my mind. AS bi-sexuality is often unfairly linked to males/females I would like to make a distinction between the genuine people with male/male, female/female desires, who through no fault of their own have been born that way. These people unlike the bisexual do not have an option and all of their problems need to be addressed as fairly as possible.

If an open slather legislation is utilised enabling all gay people in an historically untried mass experiment, it may well backfire and lead to an exacerbation of our already dire family problems. The loving kind parenting gay may well prove to be, en masse, in no way superior to the en mass heterosexual, along with the attendant problems associated simply in being as they are. It is also highly probable that the hard line gay lobbyists are looking to the general acceptance, even dominance of a third sex a factor that we need to be aware of and one that would insure a snow balling effect on the existing status quo'
Find all posts by this user
15-12-2012, 02:03 AM (This post was last modified: 15-12-2012 02:12 AM by earmuffs.)
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
So it's not gay parenting you have a problem, not even sure it's gay people but rather allllll this could have been avoided because the underlying issue you have with the whole thing is the way gay people have sex.

So I'm not even going to bother responding any more.
One thing I have learned on my time on this forum is that there is no use arguing with ill-informed-bigoted-fucktards.

Your apparent dislike of homosexual intercourse is clearly clouding your ability to think rationally on a topic completely unrelated.
Come back when that cloud passes by.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
15-12-2012, 04:32 AM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
(15-12-2012 02:03 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  So it's not gay parenting you have a problem, not even sure it's gay people but rather allllll this could have been avoided because the underlying issue you have with the whole thing is the way gay people have sex.

So I'm not even going to bother responding any more.
One thing I have learned on my time on this forum is that there is no use arguing with ill-informed-bigoted-fucktards.

Your apparent dislike of homosexual intercourse is clearly clouding your ability to think rationally on a topic completely unrelated.
Come back when that cloud passes by.
So now you are a psych therapist as well as a loud mouth,
My youthful experience with gays taught be that they aren't all poor deprived folk who have been eternally misunderstood, far from it!
You see gay culture through rose coloured glasses and refuse to consider any criticisms; like many others,you are hoodwinked by the claims that homosexuality is normal and not a condition to be acceptive of, or look to correct.
You refuse to consider that some gays involve themselves to a high degree in cruising, steam rooms,multiple partners, and are obsessed with sex. Rather you see them as potential hopes for young children and the unborn. You make no attempts to differentiate between bi sexuality and natural homosexuality, so called. The afflicted gay cannot turn the anal orifice into a vagina so in many cases says its just a matter of 'natural' choice.The same thing,quite normal. While a lie is told enough times to many, it becomes a truth.

You speak of the caring men but ignore the uncaring who would become part of the parenting legislation.
Your approach is to simplify and down grade all of the potential negative implications.
From an evolutionary stance, your rigid determinism sees man/woman as a joke, while our evolution depended on just that.
You speak of the sadness re the child born in the ghettoes and see salvation in the would be third sex.
Your whole approach is simplistic and geared to a highly questionable premise.
As you are 'right' anyone who disagrees is a bigot and fucktard.

Gay folk, like all of us, are good and bad in varying degrees and I think the genuine ones would prefer heterosexuality if they had the chance. Why wouldn't they? Any schism designed to advance gay sexuality at the expense of the conventional is to promote an inferior (by virtue of physical actuality) one.

I am very happy that in my youth I saw this optional (for some) life style for what it is, in at least some circumstances, and can warn others of embracing something that is not natural at all, in any meaningful sense, being, rather, a denied affliction.
Find all posts by this user
15-12-2012, 07:19 AM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
I take it back, THAT is the most homophobic post I've seen on the forum.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
[+] 3 users Like earmuffs's post
15-12-2012, 08:20 AM
RE: Mr Woof - I challenge you
It is people like you Mr Woof that this is even an issue.
It is people like you that are causing the whole gay "issue" and "issue".
It is people like you that are causing young teen boys and girls to take their own like because society has such a strong negative stigma towards it because people like you, Mr Woof, that are ill-informed, selfish, bigoted, homophobic cunts who can't see beyond their own little selfish world.
It is people like you Mr Woof that perfectly decent people whos only apparent "problem" is that they are gay are constantly treated like second class citizens.
It is people like you Mr Woof that have made it so middle age + aged men are only now coming out of the closet because they have been ashamed to come out earlier, who have been living with this secret their whole lives, living a lie (if you want cliche's).

How fucking dare you consider the way I am something that needs to be corrected. You have no fucking idea what it is like, no fucking idea.
For shame.
You are a grown fucking adult for christ sake with a "claimed" brain, I suggest you pull your bigoted head out of your fucking ass, you low life disgusting individual and use it.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: