<Snipped quote by IceHeart>

If you have an alternative framework you should call Nature and get it published. Overturning the fundamental theory of modern biology would make you a shoe in for that sweet sweet Nobel Prize money.

But I digress and many of you will obviously disagree with this sentiment...

You go on about how they have less rights but the current example is adoption. Adoption is not a right, many people have to work very hard to be considered to have adoption privileges. I know a wonderful heterosexual couple who were denied being able to adopt children because of their religion, so why were the kids they could have taken in given to homosexual couples instead? Criteria must be met and maybe that homosexual couple meets all the right criteria except for their homosexual relationship, but if these adoption agencies can refuse to give a heterosexual couple a kid because of their religion why can't Catholic agencies do the same with homosexuals? Can't have this kind of double standard floating around.

<Snipped quote by IceHeart>
Are you suggesting that a Catholic adoption agency gave children to a homosexual couple rather than a religious one? Because that would kind of blow my mind.

You know now I am curious as to how many people here believe in Pure Evolution = As in Nothing, or Something, somehow, someway became Us and everything else. Who believes in Intelligent Designed Evolution, as in some being, entity, whatever, helped engineer the current Universe as we know it. And who believes in Intelligent Design full on, as in no super long process of evolution from proteins to current life and instead life was just created. Just to note most people in this camp think there probably were 'base' species and breeding brought about all the varieties we have today.

@IceHeart ...you're actually arguing that nuclear heterosexual families are the best environment for children. I'm guessing no amount of scientific evidence will convince you otherwise, but may I suggest if these religious organizations want to deny LGBT parents, they not take federal funding? And whether or not they believe the parents will be good for the child has nothing to do with whether or not they actually are.

Also, the Texas wrestling championship was a transgender boy who was forced to participate in the women's division because his school wouldn't let him wrestle with the boys. And I'm fairly certain one would not go through transition simply to win a wrestling competition--why would someone voluntarily cause gender dysphoria to themselves, ever?

Here's a study which combines 59 studies published by the APA, which provide rather conclusive evidence that homosexual parents are equilivant in parentage to heterosexuals.

If you'd like to tell a gay person why you think they aren't as good a parent as a straight person would be, go ahead! I'm all ears. You can say I'm baiting, if you want, but I'd very much like to hear your reasoning.

Also, tolerance of intolerance-how far are you willing to let that go? Should we not force any moral codes onto society? Was it bad to enforce nondiscrimination laws based on sex, race, religion? If not, then why is it bad to have them based on sexuality and gender? Where do you draw the line?

<Snipped quote by NightinGem>

They tend to abuse their children and divorce much more than hetero couples for a start.

@POOHEAD189 Maybe I just need to find the right teacher. I tried to pick up a little Swedish to wow my Swedish friends, its tantalizingly familiar to English, except when its not :(

Ich liebe den Hund

@POOHEAD189

Maybe I'll add Germany to my list of countries to flee too.

I just worry that I would walk around saying: "This is how we say goodbye in Germany!"

@mdk
TBH the whole history of Germany can be described as "Oh boy, let's destroy Europe!"

Fucking Germans at it again