NationStates Jolt Archive

http://i14.tinypic.com/2qlvksk.jpg http://i16.tinypic.com/2wodohy.jpg

OMGZ! Cutest family ever! I already loved Tammy Lynn as the bitch Nicole in "Popular," (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0202748/) but seeing her and Melissa like this just makes me yearn for two mommies.

Life is so unfair.

Awwww. :)

http://i14.tinypic.com/2qlvksk.jpg http://i16.tinypic.com/2wodohy.jpg

OMGZ! Cutest family ever! I already loved Tammy Lynn as the bitch Nicole in "Popular," (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0202748/) but seeing her and Melissa like this just makes me yearn for two mommies.

Life is so unfair.
Why does one lesbian always have short hair?

Is it part of the contract they sign?

Meh. Just as fake as any other family photo. You aren't missing out on anything Fass, except good taste in television.

Why does one lesbian always have short hair?

Is it part of the contract they sign.

Melissa is recovering from cancer... :rolleyes:

http://images.forbes.com/images/2001/11/30/movers_etheridge_210x210.jpg

This is what she usually looks like.

I wish my parents were lesbians

Who doesn't?!?

Life is so unfair.

I tend to agree. :(

In Soviet Russia, they are!

Who doesn't?!?

That's what I ask myself, too, but then the dolts and loonies inevitably show their ugly faces...

Melissa is recovering from cancer... :rolleyes:

http://images.forbes.com/images/2001/11/30/movers_etheridge_210x210.jpg

This is what she usually looks like.

Facts only get in the way of stereotyping.:(

Melissa is recovering from cancer... :rolleyes:

http://images.forbes.com/images/2001/11/30/movers_etheridge_210x210.jpg

This is what she usually looks like.
Still ugly.
As a straight man, I have no use for ugly lesbians.

Meh. Just as fake as any other family photo. You aren't missing out on anything Fass,

Oh, hush. Lesbians are scientifically proven to be better people.

except good taste in television.

Sorry, but popular is the only show to come out of the US during the 90s that was worth watching. As with all decent shows, though, it got cancelled... and people ask me why I hate the US!

Still ugly.

Well, you should know.

As a straight man, I have no use for ugly lesbians.

Fortunately the world will soon have no use for straight men, so it evens out.

Sorry, but popular is the only show to come out of the US during the 90s that was worth watching. As with all decent shows, though, it got cancelled... and people ask me why I hate the US!
Sweden is a sad, sad place. Not getting Seinfeld until after the nineties apparently.

Still ugly.
As a straight man, I have no use for ugly lesbians.

It's a bad photo. I've seen her in concert and her music videos. I think she's quite beautiful and her music is awesome.

She's just older now/recovering from cancer.

Sweden is a sad, sad place. Not getting Seinfeld until after the nineties apparently.

Seinfeld sucks.

Seinfeld sucks.
Fass, you are clearly a man of discernment.

Seinfeld sucks.
:eek: It was the single funniest show ever to be on television.

I mean Jesus, a show about what? About ridiculously good looking high school chicks and the high school problems they have to overcome which are non-existent in actual high schools?

It's a bad photo. I've seen her in concert and her music videos. I think she's quite beautiful and her music is awesome.

She's just older now/recovering from cancer.

I agree completely.

:eek: It was the single funniest show ever to be on television.

Robot Chicken.

Robot Chicken.
It's close.

:eek: It was the single funniest show ever to be on television.

You must have watched very little television, then.

I mean Jesus, a show about what? About ridiculously good looking high school chicks and the high school problems they have to overcome which are non-existent in actual high schools?

Yeah, it's fagtastic I know. It was like seeing part of myself on TV for the first time.

Fass, you are clearly a man of discernment.

I just calls it like I sees it.

Yeah, it's fagtastic I know. It was like seeing part of myself on TV for the first time.
And to think I respected you. That certainly proved to be a mistake.

And to think I respected you. That certainly proved to be a mistake.

It always does, indeed.

Sweden is a sad, sad place. Not getting Seinfeld until after the nineties apparently.

Seinfeld sucks.

no really, Seinfeld does suck.

Only in america could a show about nothing, in which bland repetition is a substitute for humour, be popular.

Funny is *not* every character on the show shouting angrily at each other until one of them shouts "shut up" louder than the rest...

In fact... I see a new thread "Seinfeld and Friends are the two biggest turds to ever slither out of the Ulcered Sphincter of Asserica"

You must have watched very little television, then.
I'm not a big fan of most of it.
Yeah, it's fagtastic I know. It was like seeing part of myself on TV for the first time.
What? How does that have anything to do with being gay?

In fact... I see a new thread "Seinfeld and Friends are the two biggest turds to ever slither out of the Ulcered Sphincter of Asserica"
Friends isn't funny, but you obviously don't get Seinfeld. There's no helping people like you.

Seinfeld sucks.

Agreed

I'm not a big fan of most of it.

Just the turdy parts, then?

What? How does that have anything to do with being gay?

How does (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcI0zVQxWCE) it not? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ZC73x0dpc)

How does (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcI0zVQxWCE) it not? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ZC73x0dpc)
On what grounds could you possibly think that was better than Seinfeld? I know some people don’t like it because its immature, but I don't think that argument is going to hold water here.

Also, I'm pretty confident that no gay people I know would like that.

Friends isn't funny, but you obviously don't get Seinfeld. There's no helping people like you.

Thanks for not supporting your argument but making a "people like you" comment - really convinced me of the rectitude of your argument.

uh, this IS still the "I wish my parents were lesbians" forum, right?

I just wish both my parents were *human*

Well, TV sucks! Period. :eek:

I win! :cool:

On what grounds could you possibly think that was better than Seinfeld?

It was clever and funny, while Seinfeld is stupid and not funny.

I know some people don’t like it because its immature, but I don't think that argument is going to hold water here.

No, people don't like Seinfeld because Seinfeld sucks.

Also, I'm pretty confident that no gay people I know would like that.

Then you must know some pretty bad gay people. I've seen a few of them, they need makeovers. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iah0u9LfyY)

Anyway, this jack of the thread ends here. This is about lesbian mommies that I want, not about your infatuation with the ugliness that is Seinfeld.

Anyway, this jack of the thread ends here. This is about lesbian mommies that I want, not about your infatuation with the ugliness that is Seinfeld.

sorry Fassigen - i did make a separate seinfeld-sucks thread...

Still ugly.
As a straight man, I have no use for ugly lesbians.

She's prettier than my mom

Wha? your mom is hawt.

Still ugly.
As a straight man, I have no use for ugly lesbians.

Which is obviously going to be such a blow to them.

I'll wager you are such a prize, too.

Agreed

Agreed. Seinfeld blows goats for quarters.

Awww! What little cutie pies those babies' are!

Lesbians are teh evil!!!111eleventyone!1! :eek:

I blame them as the reason i'm still single--they're turning every girl into man-haters! :mad:

Fortunately the world will soon have no use for straight men, so it evens out.

oooooo, I'd like to know how you worked that one out.

Seinfeld sucks.
Jew hater!

Popular was good quality tv, oh the funnies.

Why the hell would you want your parents to be lesbians? If it is so you could watch them in bed I suggest an immediate course of therapy.

Why the hell would you want your parents to be lesbians?

Because lesbian parents are the best parents from my experience. And they look the cutest.

If it is so you could watch them in bed I suggest an immediate course of therapy.

And I suggest you get some therapy for imagining that a gay kid would want to watch his lesbian mothers having sex, you pervert!

Hey just asking. Wanting your parents to look 'cute' has just isn't the first thing I think of in terms of being a good parent.

Hey just asking. Wanting your parents to look 'cute' has just isn't the first thing I think of in terms of being a good parent.

What, the sentence was too long for you so you only got the last part and missed the "Because lesbian parents are the best parents from my experience" bit?

And they are cute. Tammy Lynn rules, and Melissa, well, is Melissa. Musicality is great in a parent.

What, the sentence was too long for you so you only got the last part and missed the "Because lesbian parents are the best parents from my experience" bit?

And they are cute. Tammy Lynn rules, and Melissa, well, is Melissa. Musicality is great in a parent.

Oh I can just about cope with a sentence that long.

Why does one lesbian always have short hair?

Is it part of the contract they sign?

It's God's way of saying "I made them this way you intolerant assholes. Stop spewing your homophobic hate mongering in my name lest I smite thou with the gay." Don't believe me? Look at the GOP.

Meh. Just as fake as any other family photo. You aren't missing out on anything Fass, except good taste in television.

I was going to say, you could find innumerable hetero pictures like that.

Doesn't mean anything at all - are you trying to say that somehow, your photo proves that all lesbian couples are great at parenting?

Lesbians are teh evil!!!111eleventyone!1! :eek:

I blame them as the reason i'm still single--they're turning every girl into man-haters! :mad:
God, seriously, fucking get over yourself already.

I'd love to think it's a joke, but since you've been busy bringing it up at every possible opportunity and always accompanied with a choice smiley I guess that hope is futile.

Like, do you even still realize what kind of crap you're spouting?

It's God's way of saying "I made them this way you intolerant assholes. Stop spewing your homophobic hate mongering in my name lest I smite thou with the gay." Don't believe me? Look at the GOP.


This is just priceless.

In Soviet Russia, they are!

In Soviet Russia, Soviet Reversals fail at YOU!!

How does (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcI0zVQxWCE) it not? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ZC73x0dpc)

I know the threadjack has ended, but I just want to thank you for reminding me how much I loved that show. Especially that second clip where the you'd get parts where the irony would just grow exponentially, leading to glorious crescendo. It did jump the shark however, so I'm quite glad it did get cancelled before it ruined itself.

OMGZ! Cutest family ever! I already loved Tammy Lynn as the bitch Nicole in "Popular," (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0202748/) but seeing her and Melissa like this just makes me yearn for two mommies.

Life is so unfair.
Sure, the picture may look cute, but how many world spanning empires do you think those babies are going to create? Not many, I'll bet.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a36/Fiddlebottoms/romulus.jpg
Clearly, wolves make even better mommies.

Sure, the picture may look cute, but how many world spanning empires do you think those babies are going to create? Not many, I'll bet.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a36/Fiddlebottoms/romulus.jpg
Clearly, wolves make even better mommies.

That's not even in dispute. Everyone knows that wolves are the ultimate shiz of human child rearing.

That's not even in dispute. Everyone knows that wolves are the ultimate shiz of human child rearing.
Wasn't Genghis Khan's birth also related to wolves in some way?

Yes, I did get that from AoE 2, I think.

Wasn't Genghis Khan's birth also related to wolves in some way?

Yes, I did get that from AoE 2, I think.

Nah, that was the mongols in general, not Genghis Khan specifically.

Lesbians are teh evil!!!111eleventyone!1! :eek:

I blame them as the reason i'm still single--they're turning every girl into man-haters! :mad:
This makes me want to create a thread and a poll:

"Who Do You Blame For The Fact That You Aren't Getting Any?"

-Gays
-Feminists
-The Liberal Media
-Women in general
-Men in general
-The men and women in General
-Myrth

This makes me want to create a thread and a poll:

"Who Do You Blame For The Fact That You Aren't Getting Any?"

-Gays
-Feminists
-The Liberal Media
-Women in general
-Men in general
-The men and women in General
-Myrth

Don't those all fall in the category of "cockblockers"?

Sure, the picture may look cute, but how many world spanning empires do you think those babies are going to create? Not many, I'll bet. Clearly, wolves make even better mommies.

No, no, no, you've got it all wrong. Children to gay couples don't found empires or civilisations. They precipitate their demise.

This makes me want to create a thread and a poll:

"Who Do You Blame For The Fact That You Aren't Getting Any?"

-Gays
-Feminists
-The Liberal Media
-Women in general
-Men in general
-The men and women in General
-Myrth

You totally should. And add "A court order" to the options.

You totally should. And add "A court order" to the options.


And add Ruffy and "I saw a picture of Cluich, and it killed my sex drive."

Lesbians are teh evil!!!111eleventyone!1! :eek:

I blame them as the reason i'm still single--they're turning every girl into man-haters! :mad:

This feels appropriate:

http://images.despair.com/products/demotivators/dysfunction.jpg

I wish my parents were pterodactyls. That would have made parent/teacher conferences kind of interesting.

I wish my parents were pterodactyls. That would have made parent/teacher conferences kind of interesting.

Wait...didn't they ban you from school while still in the womb?

Wait...didn't they ban you from school while still in the womb?

No, they were stupid enough to let me attend and spread chaos through bomb threats, random porn, stink bombs, and other assorted techniques.

Wait...didn't they ban you from school while still in the womb?

no, that was Sears.

God, seriously, fucking get over yourself already.

I'd love to think it's a joke, but since you've been busy bringing it up at every possible opportunity and always accompanied with a choice smiley I guess that hope is futile.

Like, do you even still realize what kind of crap you're spouting?
No, sorry. :(

Oh, hush. Lesbians are scientifically proven to be better people.



Sorry, but popular is the only show to come out of the US during the 90s that was worth watching. As with all decent shows, though, it got cancelled... and people ask me why I hate the US!
That's why I don't watch TV anymore. The only Canadian show sucks too. :(

And they make a cute couple, if I dare say so. (and yes, I'm straight). They look very happy. Happy couples=cute couples.

http://i14.tinypic.com/2qlvksk.jpg http://i16.tinypic.com/2wodohy.jpg

OMGZ! Cutest family ever! I already loved Tammy Lynn as the bitch Nicole in "Popular," (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0202748/) but seeing her and Melissa like this just makes me yearn for two mommies.

Life is so unfair.

Rather disturbing. I don't see how they are a "family"

Rather disturbing. I don't see how they are a "family"

And I don't see how you're anything else than a caricature of a religious loon, but there you go.

I don't know, I think I'd rather have two guys as parents. I just think that would be cooler...

Rather disturbing. I don't see how they are a "family"

no, no you wouldn't. But that really doesn't surprise us, so forgive us sane people if we just ignore your viewpoints in favor of more rational perspectives.

Rather disturbing. I don't see how they are a "family"From dictionary.com

Family:

–noun 1. parents and their children, considered as a group, whether dwelling together or not.
2. the children of one person or one couple collectively:
3. the spouse and children of one person:
4. any group of persons closely related by blood, as parents, children, uncles, aunts, and cousins:

And I don't see how you're anything else than a caricature of a religious loon, but there you go.

QFT.

I really don't see why people hate gay couples for no reason other than "God said it's icky". It's not icky, and to my knowledge gay couples are happier than straight couples (feel free to comment on this, Fass).

And they really do make a cute couple. Who's the biological mother though, or is the baby adopted?

Rather disturbing. I don't see how they are a "family"

As long as there's a positive male role model somehwere in the picture as "Uncle" or "Gramps" or something then I'm quite happy for them to be a family as thats one of the important aspects of a family for me. That there be positive male and female role models to help the children learn through example I don't give a damn whether those role models are straight, gay or bi. Whether there are two mommies or two daddies. Religion doesn't factor into it either for me.

QFT.

I really don't see why people hate gay couples for no reason other than "God said it's icky". It's not icky, and to my knowledge gay couples are happier than straight couples (feel free to comment on this, Fass).

And they really do make a cute couple. Who's the biological mother though, or is the baby adopted?

The children are biologically Tammy's (the long haired one).

The children are biologically Tammy's (the long haired one).

Oh, cool. :)

As long as there's a positive male role model somehwere in the picture as "Uncle" or "Gramps" or something then I'm quite happy for them to be a family as thats one of the important aspects of a family for me. That there be positive male and female role models to help the children learn through example I don't give a damn whether those role models are straight, gay or bi. Whether there are two mommies or two daddies. Religion doesn't factor into it either for me.

Why would there need to be a positive male role model? Are women in some way incapable of imparting the same moral values that men are?

The children are biologically Tammy's (the long haired one).

Melissa has already mothered children, not to mention having gone through chemo for her cancer, so Tammy Lynn was the obvious choice to be "incubator."

Melissa has already mothered children, not to mention having gone through chemo for her cancer, so Tammy Lynn was the obvious choice to be "incubator."

with David Crosby as the donor if I'm not mistaken. The donor for Tammy's biological children I believe is not known.

Aiee it's awkward to defend my viewpoint on this without sounding like a prick but I'll try. It's not that I believe women can't instill the same moral values as men it's more that I believe some children respond better to a mans influence than a womans and vice versa, by having positive role models of both sexes around them it makes it harder for them to be influenced by negative role models as they grow up. If it was two gay guys I'd want there to be positive female role models around as well.

At the end of the day a happy stable home where the parents love and respect each other is whats important not sexuality or creed or any of that crap. I just happen to believe it's also important for there to be positive role models for each sex represented in the picture whether it's as uncles, aunts, grandparents etc or even just friends of the parents.

From dictionary.com

Family:

–noun 1. parents and their children, considered as a group, whether dwelling together or not.
2. the children of one person or one couple collectively:
3. the spouse and children of one person:
4. any group of persons closely related by blood, as parents, children, uncles, aunts, and cousins:

Thats not the definition Allah gives, which btw is the only definition that matters.

Melissa has already mothered children, not to mention having gone through chemo for her cancer, so Tammy Lynn was the obvious choice to be "incubator."

Doesn't bother you that children have been reduced to being grown in incubators as you put it just to meet these people's(imo selfish) desires to have children when nature and Allah is saying no.

Damn did you hear that dictionary makers you can all pack up and go home now Soviestan says only Allah's definitions matter. Theres no point in having you around.

I hope your proud of yourself Soviestan you've just put all these people out of work now how will they feed their families? :eek:

Doesn't bother you that children have been reduced to being grown in incubators as you put it just to meet these people's(imo selfish) desires to have children when nature and Allah is saying no.

Fuck Allah.

Doesn't bother you that children have been reduced to being grown in incubators as you put it just to meet these people's(imo selfish) desires to have children when nature and Allah is saying no.

Doesn't it bother you that idiots have been throwing religious stuff in your face when you're an atheist?

Oh wait...

F*******h.

Ok, I will try this without the religious aspect in hopes of getting an actual answer out of you.

Doesn't it bother you that some will use certain methods to have kids that seem to go against everything in nature and the natural order of things? Don't you find this somewhat selfish on the part of the would be parents and potentially damanging to the children?

As far as I'm aware Tammy Lynn is of child bearing age and so the method used to impregnate her is of no concern to me or this discussion. I only get upset at artificial insemination when it is used on women who have gone through the menopause, and I mean those who have gone through it in their forties/fifties not those unfortunate individuals who have suffered it early.

Doesn't it bother you that some will use certain methods to have kids that seem to go against everything in nature and the natural order of things? Don't you find this somewhat selfish on the part of the would be parents and potentially damanging to the children?

Having two mommies by itself will not damage the children. The risk is that the parenting skills of these two women may be sorely inadequate. I will believe that they will be good parents however so I really don't see the issue here.

Doesn't it bother you that some will use certain methods to have kids that seem to go against everything in nature and the natural order of things? Don't you find this somewhat selfish on the part of the would be parents and potentially damanging to the children?

No. No, it doesn't bother me. It doesn't bother me because NOTHING in this goes against "the natural order of things", whatever that is supposed to be.

No I don't find it selfish, and I sure as hell don't find it fucking damaging to the children!

I don't understand you people. I don't. What is it that makes you hate gay people so much? What is it that makes you use fundamentalist religion or even "political views" as a crutch to surplant what you once may have had in terms of empathy and, really, common sense?

Why can't you just live your fucking lives without diving head over heels into one fervent belief system after another, and then start preaching whatever gospel du jour it is you're currently into and selling it as the "natural order of things"?

Ok, I will try this without the religious aspect in hopes of getting an actual answer out of you.

Doesn't it bother you that some will use certain methods to have kids that seem to go against everything in nature and the natural order of things? Don't you find this somewhat selfish on the part of the would be parents and potentially damanging to the children?

Homosexuality does not "go against nature". What makes you think that its mutually exclusive to humans?

And children raised by gays will not catch "the ghey".

Homosexuality does not "go against nature". What makes you think that its mutually exclusive to humans?

And children raised by gays will not catch "the ghey".

Ok even if homosexuality doesn't go against nature( for argument's sake) homosexuals having children most certainly is. I don't care how hard a homosexual pair try, they won't have children together because its not meant to be. And I never said children will turn gay simply because they were raised by gays.

Although sometimes I wish it was possible to make some of the nutjobs out there spend a week or a month gay to see that it doesn't make them less human.

Homosexuality does not "go against nature". What makes you think that its mutually exclusive to humans?

And children raised by gays will not catch "the ghey".

Thank you for putting that, Pancake.

Ok even if homosexuality doesn't go against nature( for argument's sake) homosexuals having children most certainly is. I don't care how hard a homosexual pair try, they won't have children together because its not meant to be. And I never said children will turn gay simply because they were raised by gays.

There is a way gays can have children, or are you against artificial inseminiation too?

There is a way gays can have children, or are you against artificial inseminiation too?

He said earlier that it isn't "natural". Which is hard to take given that if we banned everything that wasn't "natural" it would set medicine and science back a good century.

Doesn't it bother you that some will use certain methods to have kids that seem to go against everything in nature and the natural order of things?

There is no "natural order" of things. Only dolts believe in such anthropomorphisms of biology. And even if there were and this were "against" it, then fuck the order - it's clearly in the wrong and needs to be ignored.

Don't you find this somewhat selfish on the part of the would be parents and potentially damanging to the children?

Nope, since lesbians make so much better parents than heterosexuals, and this is not at all "potentially damaging" to the child. Not any more than anyone else having a child, which everyone - yes, even the breeders that bred you - do for selfish reasons. Or, as the case may be, for no reason at all other than being too stupid to use a contraceptive. These children are planned and wanted and loved. Can you say the same about you? Because, from where I'm sitting, your parents failed with your upbringing according to my standards.

Still ugly.
As a straight man, I have no use for ugly lesbians.

Ugly's pretty strong. She may not be Angelina, but she's not ugly. Anyways, not my cup of tea musically bet very talented.

There is no "natural order" of things. Only dolts believe in such anthropomorphisms of biology. And even if there were and this were "against" it, then fuck the order - it's clearly in the wrong and needs to be ignored.



Nope, since lesbians make so much better parents than heterosexuals, and this is not at all "potentially damaging" to the child. Not any more than anyone else having a child, which everyone - yes, even the breeders that bred you - do for selfish reasons. Or, as the case may be, for no reason at all other than being too stupid to use a contraceptive. These children are planned and wanted and loved. Can you say the same about you? Because, from where I'm sitting, your parents failed with your upbringing according to my standards.

I wouldn't say that lebians make better parents, because straight couples can make very good parents too.

I wouldn't say that lebians make better parents, because straight couples can make very good parents too.

How about this, then?

Parenting ability does not correlate to the parents' sexual orientation.

How about this, then?

Parenting ability does not correlate to the parents' sexual orientation.

That would make too much sense. People have to debate the simplistic and complicate what should be an obvious statement.

That would make too much sense. People have to debate the simplistic and complicate what should be an obvious statement.

And such is the problem with society.

People ignore the obvious too much.*


*of course, "the obvious" isn't as obvious to the apathetic...

There is a way gays can have children, or are you against artificial inseminiation too?

together? I don't together artificial inseminiation works. Two eggs can't impergnate one another which is what I'm talking about. A gay couple can not have children together, plain and simple.

*of course, "the obvious" isn't as obvious to the apathetic...

If people were truly apathetic about homosexual couples having children then they simply wouldn't care and would ignore the issue. They do care however and simply let their closed minds take over.

There is no "natural order" of things. Only dolts believe in such anthropomorphisms of biology. And even if there were and this were "against" it, then fuck the order - it's clearly in the wrong and needs to be ignored.

Funny you should mentioned this. The Imam talked about this during the sermon today. Sure you can have control over some things on earth like when and where you eat, but the order of Allah can not be controlled by humans or defied. You simply can not simply ignore the laws of Allah and say "oh screw the order of Allah, I want to do what I want." It just can not be without serious problems.

Nope, since lesbians make so much better parents than heterosexuals,

bull. Proof?

Because, from where I'm sitting, your parents failed with your upbringing according to my standards.

I think they did a fine job all things considered, but what are your standards?

Ok even if homosexuality doesn't go against nature( for argument's sake) homosexuals having children most certainly is. I don't care how hard a homosexual pair try, they won't have children together because its not meant to be. And I never said children will turn gay simply because they were raised by gays.


This is the problem with people talking about things they don't have any goddamn clue about, like the GOP talking about abortions (IT R TALKIN FEETUS LOLZ LUK AT TEHS DYGRAAAMS). Technically, sperm isn't required. Technically. But without sperm, as far as I'm aware, it's just rudimentary cloning (and that's a whole 'nother can of worms). As was said previously in the thread, we don't know who the sperm donor is. Meaning that there was a man somewhere along the lines for the artificial insemination.

He said earlier that it isn't "natural". Which is hard to take given that if we banned everything that wasn't "natural" it would set medicine and science back a good century.

I find it ironic that many people who are against ''unatural'' things, happen to worship some god that supposedly created this world and all creatures that live on it. That doesn't seem natural to me. ;)

As to the OP: Those two mothers look very happy and cuddly. :)

As was said previously in the thread, we don't know who the sperm donor is. Meaning that there was a man somewhere along the lines for the artificial insemination.

right, which means the child is not that of both lesbian parents, its only the child of one of the parents and a "unknown sperm person". how natural:rolleyes:

As natural as adoption or a single parent meeting someone they care for and settling down to raise the child etc and theres nothing wrong here or in any of those situations.

right, which means the child is not that of both lesbian parents, its only the child of one of the parents and a "unknown sperm person". how natural:rolleyes:

As natural as the child conceived through rape, neither aborted, nor given up, with the father never found.

He said earlier that it isn't "natural". Which is hard to take given that if we banned everything that wasn't "natural" it would set medicine and science back a good century.

Well I think that's the century he's getting all this allah shit from, so go with the flow on this one, i guess...

Nope, since lesbians make so much better parents than heterosexuals, and this is not at all "potentially damaging" to the child.

Wow, great job there buddy! WOOT! that really makes you sound so fucking smart you deserve a medal! This is worse than the allah crap. And then you wonder why people hate Gays when they think lesbian parents are better that straight ones. It's unfounded and pretty stupid, considering how few lesbian parents there are and how many straight ones.

Funny you should mentioned this. The Imam talked about this during the sermon today. Sure you can have control over some things on earth like when and where you eat, but the order of Allah can not be controlled by humans or defied. You simply can not simply ignore the laws of Allah and say "oh screw the order of Allah, I want to do what I want." It just can not be without serious problems.


Allow me Fass to echo your prior statement.

Fuck Allah. And while you're at it, fuck Jesus, Buddah, Vishnu, Krishna, and anybody else you care to mention.

Please no, I would absolutely hate having lesbian mothers. I couldn't stand my mother, and I only had one. If I had had two mother I would probably be some wierd twit now. I spent 90% of my time with my father, and the other 10% the absolute minimum I had to with my mother.
For me this would be a nightmare scenario. Most probably I would have run away as soon as I could, even the army doesn't sound that bad as imagining x2 the stress, bitching, moaning, overprotectiveness, fussiness, inane desire to know every last secret of mine, etc..

Of course thinking the other way around, I wouldn't mind two homosexual men as father. Only if they were not of the, forgive my expression, "f*g" type. I liked my father because he went out fishing with me, camped out in the woods, also went hunting with me once.

Although preferably, I would still have a mother and a father, there were as rare as the moments were times when I actually cherished my mothers company as the stark opposite of my fathers. But still two mothers, seems a bit perverse and strange to me, I grew up with both parents so I am used to that and wouldn't want it to change. However those children will only know the two mothers as their parents, so its their dilemma/joy to deal with. I neither support it or denigrate it, not my life but theirs.

PS: Reading from all your posts Fassigen I get the feeling you are an insecure homosexual looking for strength in your conviction through baiting bigots or looking for the acceptance of others in your views. Of the two homosexuals I know they are secure enough in their sexuality they don't have the need to be as overbearing as you seem to come accross. But accept that despite all one does there will always be people who will disagree with what you are, who you are and what you do. This is regardless of your skin color, sexuality, or social standing. Life is too short to deal with people who disagree, let alone waste your time trying to demonize them or insult their views (often related with religious connonations) simply because one views their thoughts as inferior, due to being fragile enough to be hurt on a personal level by their conviction.

Just the turdy parts, then?



How does (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcI0zVQxWCE) it not? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ZC73x0dpc)
This is just my opinion but if those two clips are the best that show had to offer I, for one, am glad I never watched it.

PS: Reading from all your posts Fassigen I get the feeling you are an insecure homosexual looking for strength in your conviction through baiting bigots or looking for the acceptance of others in your views.

And reading your post I get the "feeling" that you've no idea what you're talking about, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst. Imagine that?

Of the two homosexuals I know they are secure enough in their sexuality they don't have the need to be as overbearing as you seem to come accross.

This is me giving a shit.

But accept that despite all one does there will always be people who will disagree with what you are, who you are and what you do. This is regardless of your skin color, sexuality, or social standing. Life is too short to deal with people who disagree, let alone waste your time trying to demonize them or insult their views (often related with religious connonations) simply because one views their thoughts as inferior, due to being fragile enough to be hurt on a personal level by their conviction.

Their views are inferior. And stupid. And in some cases insane. And I shall call them that. Now, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst, who has no idea what he's talking about, might want to make the fag shut up, but as noted earlier, this is the fag giving a shit. ---> Right here. Look at him. Oh, he gives it so much.

Please no, I would absolutely hate having lesbian mothers. I couldn't stand my mother, and I only had one. If I had had two mother I would probably be some wierd twit now. I spent 90% of my time with my father, and the other 10% the absolute minimum I had to with my mother.
For me this would be a nightmare scenario. Most probably I would have run away as soon as I could, even the army doesn't sound that bad as imagining x2 the stress, bitching, moaning, overprotectiveness, fussiness, inane desire to know every last secret of mine, etc..

Of course thinking the other way around, I wouldn't mind two homosexual men as father. Only if they were not of the, forgive my expression, "f*g" type. I liked my father because he went out fishing with me, camped out in the woods, also went hunting with me once.

Although preferably, I would still have a mother and a father, there were as rare as the moments were times when I actually cherished my mothers company as the stark opposite of my fathers. But still two mothers, seems a bit perverse and strange to me, I grew up with both parents so I am used to that and wouldn't want it to change. However those children will only know the two mothers as their parents, so its their dilemma/joy to deal with. I neither support it or denigrate it, not my life but theirs.

Ever occur to you that you just had a bitch of a mother?


PS: Reading from all your posts Fassigen I get the feeling you are an insecure homosexual looking for strength in your conviction through baiting bigots or looking for the acceptance of others in your views. Of the two homosexuals I know they are secure enough in their sexuality they don't have the need to be as overbearing as you seem to come accross. But accept that despite all one does there will always be people who will disagree with what you are, who you are and what you do. This is regardless of your skin color, sexuality, or social standing. Life is too short to deal with people who disagree, let alone waste your time trying to demonize them or insult their views (often related with religious connonations) simply because one views their thoughts as inferior, due to being fragile enough to be hurt on a personal level by their conviction.

I'm sure he really appreciates your thought provoking commentary. Who the fuck are you again?

Ever occur to you that you just had a bitch of a mother?
Perhaps not, but I'm pretty sure that it occured to a lot of other people.

I'm sure he really appreciates your thought provoking commentary. Who the fuck are you again?
Well, Fass does seem to be a bit of a prick from time to time. (Wow, I'm really abusing my euphemism privileges there...)

Well, Fass does seem to be a bit of a prick from time to time. (Wow, I'm really abusing my euphemism privileges there...)

Only from time to time? I must be slipping...

Only from time to time? I must be slipping...
Well, like I said - the Euphemometer was going nuts there.

- snip-

LOL.



What can I say? It was taunting me. :(

Thats not the definition Allah gives, which btw is the only definition that matters.Well, the Invisible Pink Unicorn gives a different definition, and since I believe in her more than in Allah, I'll go with hers.

together? I don't together artificial inseminiation works. Two eggs can't impergnate one another which is what I'm talking about. A gay couple can not have children together, plain and simple.Of course they can, as this case aptly shows.

right, which means the child is not that of both lesbian parents, its only the child of one of the parents and a "unknown sperm person". how natural:rolleyes:Uh, no. A parent is not simply a sperm or egg donor. In fact, I'd go as far as to say the donation of sperm and egg is irrelevant. Unless, of course, you're saying that people who adopt children aren't parents.

Fuck Allah.

But I don't have a condom!

right, which means the child is not that of both lesbian parents, its only the child of one of the parents and a "unknown sperm person". how natural:rolleyes:
I take it that you consider adoption to be a great horror that no proper human being would ever consider.

Rather disturbing. I don't see how they are a "family"

Why wouldn't they be?

Thats not the definition Allah gives, which btw is the only definition that matters.

To you.

Your religious persuasions have little to no effect on how I perceive the world. Thank the gods.

Ok, I will try this without the religious aspect in hopes of getting an actual answer out of you.

Doesn't it bother you that some will use certain methods to have kids that seem to go against everything in nature and the natural order of things? Don't you find this somewhat selfish on the part of the would be parents and potentially damanging to the children?

Might want to do your research before you open your mouth. Most human societies, and most 'natural' societies that are not human, too - feature variants on extended family structures - where other members of the family than the 'parent' take on parenting responsibilities - often, to the exclusion of individuals that might have been more biologically relative.

Thus - there is nothing 'un-natural', or even unusual, about family groupings that are not some arbitrary binary hetrogenous design.

together? I don't together artificial inseminiation works. Two eggs can't impergnate one another which is what I'm talking about. A gay couple can not have children together, plain and simple.

But they can with other people... and they can then raise the children together.

Or, are you also on an 'orphans should be left on the ice' kind of kick?

right, which means the child is not that of both lesbian parents, its only the child of one of the parents and a "unknown sperm person". how natural:rolleyes:

How would it be unnatural?

Nature doesn't call on us to marry - it calls on us to fuck and run. The constructs (like 'fidelity' and 'marriage') we put in place to hold our families together are un-natural, no matter how they are often necessary.

Why would there need to be a positive male role model? Are women in some way incapable of imparting the same moral values that men are?

Children are quite prone to gender roles. If they do not see many men around, the will get the idea that it has tobe something to do with men themselves.

But I could be making that up.

Ok even if homosexuality doesn't go against nature( for argument's sake) homosexuals having children most certainly is. I don't care how hard a homosexual pair try, they won't have children together because its not meant to be. And I never said children will turn gay simply because they were raised by gays.

Homosexual homo sapien sapiens have children. They are part of the natural world. Therefore homo parents = natural.

And reading your post I get the "feeling" that you've no idea what you're talking about, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst. Imagine that?



This is me giving a shit.



Their views are inferior. And stupid. And in some cases insane. And I shall call them that. Now, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst, who has no idea what he's talking about, might want to make the fag shut up, but as noted earlier, this is the fag giving a shit. ---> Right here. Look at him. Oh, he gives it so much.

How old are you? From your posts I get the feeling you are still a teenager, i.e 16-17. You seem to have a lot of vented up anger. You view yourself as morally superior to others and the right to judge and insult them, however wish yourself to be immune to such criticism.

If you wouldn't have given a shit you wouldn't have replied to my post, clearly through your own actions you just showed me your sensitive point. You are insecure about what others view or think about your homosexuality, and so attack those who aren't directly supportive or drift from your views of the world. Or this whole thread here, meant to instill in others to support your lifestyle, trying to convince others your lifestyle/movement is superior to theirs. This kind of behavior is arch-typical in adolescents and youths.

To be fair, artificial insemination is an unnatural way of achieving the result, but natural went out the window centuries ago. So whatever, whatever causes the happiness drug.

How old are you? From your posts I get the feeling you are still a teenager, i.e 16-17. You seem to have a lot of vented up anger. You view yourself as morally superior to others and the right to judge and insult them, however wish yourself to be immune to such criticism.

If you wouldn't have given a shit you wouldn't have replied to my post, clearly through your own actions you just showed me your sensitive point. You are insecure about what others view or think about your homosexuality, and so attack those who aren't directly supportive or drift from your views of the world. Or this whole thread here, meant to instill in others to support your lifestyle, trying to convince others your lifestyle/movement is superior to theirs. This kind of behavior is arch-typical in adolescents and youths.

If I'm correct, Fass is probably a quarter again as old as I am. (Old fogey.) I'm around 20, you do the math.

As for your fairly pathetic psychoanalysis... well, you deserve what you get - don't take most people on here seriously if it doesn't sound like they really are serious. Especially Fass. Furthermore, despite being gay, I hope for the sake of my short-term mental health that his homo-elitism is a farce...

If I'm correct, Fass is probably a quarter again as old as I am. (Old fogey.) I'm around 20, you do the math.

As for your fairly pathetic psychoanalysis... well, you deserve what you get - don't take most people on here seriously if it doesn't sound like they really are serious. Especially Fass. Furthermore, despite being gay, I hope for the sake of my short-term mental health that his homo-elitism is a farce...

I find that hard to believe. And what exactly did I get? Flamed by a bitter old man insecure of his sexuality, there are worse things in life.

Homo-elitism, well there is a term that you don't hear often. Almost seems an oxymoron in today's soceity.

I find that hard to believe. And what exactly did I get? Flamed by a bitter old man insecure of his sexuality, there are worse things in life.

Homo-elitism, well there is a term that you don't hear often. Almost seems an oxymoron in today's soceity.

Fass is quite secure in his sexuality. That's most likely part of the problem.

The whole 'insecurity' thing? That's very 1995. Should probably leave that alone before it comes back to bite you in the ass.

How old are you? From your posts I get the feeling you are still a teenager, i.e 16-17. You seem to have a lot of vented up anger.

Mr. Internet-guy-analyst - vying for every opportunity to show us how little of a clue he has.

You view yourself as morally superior to others and the right to judge and insult them, however wish yourself to be immune to such criticism.

I am morally superior. And I do have the right to judge them. And I am "immune" insofar as I don't give a shit. Really, must this be rehashed for you again? I mean, sure, your sophomoric attempt at pop-psych doesn't give you away as the shiniest apple on the branch, but you should be able to get that much in only one cycle?

If you wouldn't have given a shit you wouldn't have replied to my post, clearly through your own actions you just showed me your sensitive point. You are insecure about what others view or think about your homosexuality, and so attack those who aren't directly supportive or drift from your views of the world. Or this whole thread here, meant to instill in others to support your lifestyle, trying to convince others your lifestyle/movement is superior to theirs. This kind of behavior is arch-typical in adolescents and youths.

Thank you, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst. And to think I would have had to call Ms. Cleo and pay 20 kronor a minute for such an accurate analysis - this way, I get it for free from a true expert. My, my, the cereal box people you got your credentials from must be quite renowned!

Don't you just love it when belligerent twits make whopping great assumptions about you - assumptions that leave them with egg yolk dripping down their stern faces?

I know I do.

*hands Cybach a towel*

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16224672/

Bush says Mary Cheney will make a FINE mother. I'm sure there was NOTHING political in the comment though. :p

Mr. Internet-guy-analyst - vying for every opportunity to show us how little of a clue he has.



I am morally superior. And I do have the right to judge them. And I am "immune" insofar as I don't give a shit. Really, must this be rehashed for you again? I mean, sure, your sophomoric attempt at pop-psych doesn't give you away as the shiniest apple on the branch, but you should be able to get that much in only one cycle?



Thank you, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst. And to think I would have had to call Ms. Cleo and pay 20 kronor a minute for such an accurate analysis - this way, I get it for free from a true expert. My, my, the cereal box people you got your credentials from must be quite renowned!

So far you have done nothing but try to insult me and shoo me away with rather crude language. You desperately try to ridicule with rather fraught and acrid humor in the form of sarcasm. All at the same time trying to explain you don't give "a s***", which makes you either a hypocrite or a tad bit confused. Since normally when someone doesn't care they tend not to go on the defensive. All you have done is effectively shown me how to provoke you to rash language and flaming, pushing you into a defensive corner.
Also how is it psycho-analyzing, you brought that up. I am merely questioning your whole point behind a claim as benign and frankly stereotypical as "lesbian mothers are the superior set of parents." And we should all have wished to have them. I could on the same claim all children should have asian parents, because they instill a good working attitude in children. Gross generalization which serves to no point, other then push ones fragile beliefs to the forefront.

So far you have done nothing but try to insult me and shoo me away with rather crude language. You desperately try to ridicule with rather fraught and acrid humor in the form of sarcasm. All at the same time trying to explain you don't give "a s***", which makes you either a hypocrite or a tad bit confused. Since normally when someone doesn't care they tend not to go on the defensive. All you have done is effectively shown me how to provoke you to rash language and flaming, pushing you into a defensive corner.
Also how is it psycho-analyzing, you brought that up. I am merely questioning your whole point behind a claim as benign and frankly stereotypical as "lesbian mothers are the superior set of parents." And we should all have wished to have them. I could on the same claim all children should have asian parents, because they instill a good working attitude in children. Gross generalization which serves to no point, other then push ones fragile beliefs to the forefront.

Really, you should start your own phone line, Mr. Internet-guy-analyst. Share your gift for the inanely inaccurate with the world. Don't just waste it on me.

I take it that you consider adoption to be a great horror that no proper human being would ever consider.

I think if people lived as they should, adoption would not be needed, especially for these gay "families"

Homosexual homo sapien sapiens have children. They are part of the natural world.

no they aren't, there is nothing natural about them in the puriest sense

I think if people lived as they should, adoption would not be needed, especially for these gay "families"
"Your parents are both dead? Yeah, well, tough luck. Adoption is unnatural. Next time, tell them they should have lived as they ought to."

I think if people lived as they should, adoption would not be needed, especially for these gay "families"

One of the dumber comments I've ever seen... obviously, if we 'lived as we should', no one would ever die in accidents or anything...

no they aren't, there is nothing natural about them in the puriest sense

They're not natural?!

Then, please, do tell, how did they come to be? Were they magically created out of thin air? Or perhaps they were created in some freak cosmic accident? Maybe, they're the advanced forces of an alien invasion, aimed at destroying humanity by hindering reproduction! :eek:



Seriously. :rolleyes:

So far you have done nothing but try to insult me and shoo me away with rather crude language. You desperately try to ridicule with rather fraught and acrid humor in the form of sarcasm. All at the same time trying to explain you don't give "a s***", which makes you either a hypocrite or a tad bit confused. Since normally when someone doesn't care they tend not to go on the defensive. All you have done is effectively shown me how to provoke you to rash language and flaming, pushing you into a defensive corner.
Also how is it psycho-analyzing, you brought that up. I am merely questioning your whole point behind a claim as benign and frankly stereotypical as "lesbian mothers are the superior set of parents." And we should all have wished to have them. I could on the same claim all children should have asian parents, because they instill a good working attitude in children. Gross generalization which serves to no point, other then push ones fragile beliefs to the forefront.

Who are you? Are you a psychologist? Are you anyone whose opinion is any more valid than anyone else's? No? You're no more an expert than anyone else here, and your futile attempts to overstate your intelligence through your ignorant interpretations of Fass' pysche just serve to further degrade your integrity. In fact, if I were forced to pretend to be a psychologist like you do, I would say that you like to dole out passive-aggressive "advice" under a pretense of being helpful in order to attack other people in a way that will make you look like the victim when they react to your comments. You like to portray yourself as kind and sage, so when people do react negatively to your comments, people ought to rally to your side against the "attacker." This is your way of humiliating people whom you dislike, and I would say it stems from a history of being picked on as a child and generally ganged up on. But, I'm not a psychologist (like you), and I'm most likely full of horseshit (like you).

bull. Proof?
Well, for one thing, child physical and sexual abuse is most often committed by the father, step-father or mother's boyfriend. A child who does not have a father, step-father, or mom's boyfriend around will obviously not be at as high a risk for abuse.

A 1998 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of pedophiles are men and that 95% of these individuals are heterosexual. Lesbians are not men, nor are they heterosexual, so right there they are statistically far less likely to be molesting their kids.

Furthermore, some studies have found that daughters of lesbians have higher self-esteem than daughters of straight women, while sons are more caring and less aggressive (e.g. Hoeffer, 1981).

Of course, the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (2004) found that, on measures of psychosocial well-being, school functioning, and romantic relationships and behaviors, teens with same-sex parents are as well adjusted as their peers with opposite-sex parents. I tend to agree that homosexual parents are no better or worse on average than heterosexual parents.

The one factor that might skew things is what I call the "oops" babies. Heterosexual couples are, obviously, far more likely to experience accidental pregnancies, and therefore are more likely to have unplanned children. I think anybody, heterosexual or homosexual, will be a better parent if their child is planned. Since homosexual couples most often cannot have "oops" babies, they may have a bit of an edge when it comes to being prepared parents.

Doesn't bother you that children have been reduced to being grown in incubators as you put it just to meet these people's(imo selfish) desires to have children when nature and Allah is saying no.

Nature clearly isn't saying no, else the child wouldn't have been born.

What a fictional creature says is really of less importance.

And having children, regardless of the parents involved, is ALWAYS a selfish exercise. And that's ok.

Best thread EVER, by the way.

I have to say I found your post interesting Bottle, though I still hold to my belief that their should be positive role models of both genders in the childrens lives and I feel that I explained myself well enough on that point.

I think the planned vs oops theory is a possibility, of course good parents will still be good parents even if it is an oops baby, like mine were to me, and the reverse is sadly true. In fact I think it's more of a maturity thing, it's far easier for immature heterosexual couples to have children before they are truly ready for the responsibility of being a parent than it is for homosexual couples and that might be whats skewing the results. What do you think?

And I am "immune" insofar as I don't give a shit. Really, must this be rehashed for you again?
And Soviestan is morally superior and immune insofar as he doesn't give a shit! What a wonderful world in which we live.

I have to say I found your post interesting Bottle, though I still hold to my belief that their should be positive role models of both genders in the childrens lives and I feel that I explained myself well enough on that point.

Meh. I think the whole problem is that kids are taught that males and females are different enough that you need role models of each gender. Do we expect that kids be provided with a black role model, a Asian role model, a Hispanic role model, etc? Of course not, because that would be silly. I think gendered role models are equally silly. I think men and women are as fundamentally similar as people of different "races," and the idea that you need a role model with certain genitals is as stupid as the idea that you need role models with particular concentrations of dermal melanin.

However, even if you want to assume that kids DO need to have gendered role modeling, I still don't see why children with lesbian parents are going to have to go without such role models. I had at least 5 male role models growing up, and only one of them was even biologically related to me. I would pity any child who was stuck with just their father as a male role model.

I think the planned vs oops theory is a possibility, of course good parents will still be good parents even if it is an oops baby, like mine were to me, and the reverse is sadly true.

Yes, but I believe that people who are good parents to an oops baby would have been BETTER parents to a planned baby. That was my point.


In fact I think it's more of a maturity thing, it's far easier for immature heterosexual couples to have children before they are truly ready for the responsibility of being a parent than it is for homosexual couples and that might be whats skewing the results. What do you think?
Absolutely. That's a major factor. Also, I think a lot of heterosexual couples have babies simply because that's what they're supposed to do. They get to a certain age and everybody is asking them when they're getting preggers, so they get preggers.

Gay couples don't face the same level of pressure to have babies. Often quite the opposite. So if they have babies, you know for damn sure that they really wanted to have those babies.

Also, I think a lot of heterosexual couples have babies simply because that's what they're supposed to do. They get to a certain age and everybody is asking them when they're getting preggers, so they get preggers.

Gee, I had babies because I wanted children. Yes, people were bugging me about it when I was younger, but that's hardly why I went about it.

Gee, I had babies because I wanted children. Yes, people were bugging me about it when I was younger, but that's hardly why I went about it.
...

Ok. That's lovely for you.

In Soviet Russia, they are!

...I'm russian. I am bisexual, and i don't have short hair, and neither did past gfs.

http://i14.tinypic.com/2qlvksk.jpg http://i16.tinypic.com/2wodohy.jpg

OMGZ! Cutest family ever! I already loved Tammy Lynn as the bitch Nicole in "Popular," (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0202748/) but seeing her and Melissa like this just makes me yearn for two mommies.

Life is so unfair.

YUCK, no way, why would you bring that upon yourself??

i say all lesbian mothers are just asking for the kids to be bullied the hell out of all their lives.

YUCK,

Grow up, kid.

no way, why would you bring that upon yourself??

Because I like lesbians, and these two are great.

i say all lesbian mothers are just asking for the kids to be bullied the hell out of all their lives.

And I say you're the type of lowlife who'd bully these children (jealous as you probably are of them for being from a loving, devoted family), meaning you are the problem we should quash, not them.

What point are you trying to make, fass?

And I say you're the type of lowlife who'd bully these children (jealous as you probably are of them for being from a loving, devoted family), meaning you are the problem we should quash, not them.


I probably would not bully these kids as i would feel so sympathetic for them. but as i said; who would be the bigger bully victim at school; the kid with the mother and father, or the kid with two lesbian mothers. i think you know the answer, even if you do not agree with it.

I probably would not bully these kids as i would feel so sympathetic for them. but as i said; who would be the bigger bully victim at school; the kid with the mother and father, or the kid with two lesbian mothers. i think you know the answer, even if you do not agree with it.

Is that silent sympathy, or would you step in and tell the bully to bugger off? Or is it the kid's own fault for having lesbian parents?

I probably would not bully these kids as i would feel so sympathetic for them. but as i said; who would be the bigger bully victim at school; the kid with the mother and father, or the kid with two lesbian mothers. i think you know the answer, even if you do not agree with it.

Actually, studies done on children of homosexual couples in Sweden show no significant increase in tendency to be bullied over that of those children with heterosexual parents. So, shows what you know.

What point are you trying to make, fass?

That I wish my parents had been lesbians - I thought that was pretty obvious with a title like "I wish my parents were lesbians."

That I wish my parents had been lesbians - I thought that was pretty obvious with a title like "I wish my parents were lesbians."

Really? No underlying political/social message?

And how does one photo show what lesbian parents are really like?

Really? No underlying political/social message?

What need would there be for such? You forget where I live...

And how does one photo show what lesbian parents are really like?

How does one photo make you believe that that's its intent?