Posted on 05/26/2004 2:38:49 PM PDT by EdReform
Alfred Bluey said, """The point is that they can't make any claims about unbiased research on the topic if one of their basic tenents is to hold with the mother-father family. It's no different then wwhen gay groups do the research and say same-sex families are equal. Its a science thing.""""""
The hypothesis does not discredit the research.
It is "different" if the research is true - as in verifiable and repeatable by other researchers - and no data is disregarded in the discussion or conclusion.
That is "a science thing."
When you say "mother-father family", I have to laugh. Hysterically. It's such liberalspeak--so typical of the way political correctness has taken over the language! The word is "family". Period. Oh--by the way, did YOU come from a "mother-father" family?
Name one instance in which a human child has been made WITHOUT using ONE sperm and ONE egg: one sperm comes from the FATHER, and one egg comes from the MOTHER. (Of course, there are multiple births, but the principle is the same.)
I don't wish to chat any further with you, Jen, for reasons you well know, but just answer this one question, which you have steadfastly ignored:
Considering that it is heterosexual sex (that would be "mother-father" sex, more or less, Jen) that replenishes the world's population, tell me what comparable benefit to humanity homosexual "sex" provides?
(By the way, you really need to get over your obsession with that poster jael.)
SO?? It's still hysterically funny that homosexuals have so twisted the political discussion on this topic that ANYONE would have to say "mother-father family" instead of just FAMILY.
And oh, how eagerly you took up the term!
Oh, pardon me.
So... you're a person who's never signed up on Freerepublic until 4-1-04? Ever?
The way you came onto this site, where a great number of the posters obviously do not agree with you on this issue, and are pretending to be a mild-mannered "friend", is just so exactly like the way Jen insinuates herself into people's lives--well, I just couldn't tell the two of you apart. I still can't.
It is not "bias" to hold to the principle of the "mother-father family" that Nature herself invented. YOU who are rebellious against the norm are the ones who are biased. WE are just standing on the firm ground of reality and nature. Those who want to invent a twisted and broken definition of family to justify a desire for sodomy with members of the same sex are trying to change the entire foundation of the human race solely to justify the perversion of homosexual sex.
That is not a good reason to rebel against mother nature. Plus, it won't work. The more success you have, the more YOUR foundation is broken as well. Complete success would mean the destruction of human civilization, since the human society is built upon the natural family - Father, Mother, children, and extended relatives.
You destroy that - and you'll find yourself in a strange world that even you are afraid in.
But it won't happen - we won't let you destroy the world.
It is not "bias" to say we are on the side of nature and truth, and refuse to be moved off of that platform. Your comment is like saying that it is biased to say that it is light in the daytime and dark in the nighttime. It's just the truth. You don't like it? Your problem.
There's enough of that going on in Neverland........
Well-said.
They can't fit themselves and their desires in with the norm, so they neurotically spend their lives trying to re-make the norm in their own image.
Without heterosexual activity, there would be no babies for homosexuals to adopt when they decide they want to play "family". It appears that homosexual activists want to stamp out the practice of heterosexuality.
Carrying it to the extreme, this would mean stopping new humans from being born. The human race, quite simply, would die off.
Obviously, no normal person wants that to happen.
So I ask again: Considering that the birth of new humans is a direct outcome of the practice of normal, heterosexual sex, and that this is a benefit to humanity, what comparable benefit to humanity does homosexuality confer?
Obviously none. There is only one justification for homosexual acts (if you want to call it justification) - sodomy, whether oral or anal, or other masturbatory methods, provide a method for achieving sexual climax.
That's it! Nothing, nada, nie, nyet, zero, zilch, nothing else.
The entire "gay lifestyle", "queer theory and studies" on and on ad nauseum is SOLELY about weird ways to achieve orgasm.
Do we REALLY want to destroy society a tiny percentage of people who want to gratify their sexual organs in a weird way can try to feel normal about it?
Yes, and divorcing the universal desire to achieve said climax, from the REASON humans are born with that universal desire in the first place, leads to... extinction. No thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.