[Hildy]

Seemingly, your citation of such an extreme example isn't all that far removed from the common tactic of pro-abortionists who habitually come up with a rationale of incestuous rape while conveniently ignoring far more common &, for the most part, irresponsible causes of pregnancy.
What on earth are you talking about?

My position begins with the ideal insofar as any child's best interests with respect his/her emotional health & physical safety. Accordingly, children should rightly have - not withstanding valid reasons serving to preclude as much - the closest possible relationships with both their natural & heterosexual mother & father since these are their most appropriate role models for countless reasons in a host of areas.

Again, what on earth are you talking about? You asked me about gay adoption. An adoption takes place when the PARENTS DON'T WANT THE CHILD, am I incorrect on that?

I suspect you like to hear yourself talk, because this means nothing in terms of the discussion we were having.

[GMMAC]

It's hardly surprising that someone who makes sweeping statements which they apparently can't back up, then pleads incomprehension, offers up insults & finally hangs the tiniest part of their position on what amounts to several assumptions.

To be accurate, you made some male bashing & pro-homosexual statements, I questioned your views on several issues & you brought it all down to - aside from your rudeness - the gay adoption issue alone which you've attempted to rationalize with the most extreme & narrow example possible: presumably cold & brutal orphanages vs. loving homosexuals.

Ann Coulter wrote a whole book on those whose favor your style of debate.