Bob/PKB
NO EXCUSE FOR THIS
Whoever was responsible for this ad should be exiled to a very tiny island in a major hurricane path.
7/15/12: AFTER ASKING THIS QUESTION ONLY TWO DAYS AGO, IT IS BEING CLOSED TO FURTHER RESPONSES. THE REASON FOR THE CLOSURE - PEOPLE ARE NOT RESPONDING TO THE QUESTION. (Read the answers and comments if you don't believe me)
FOR THOSE WHO FOCUSED THEIR THOUGHTS AND ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION OF THE MANIPULATED PHOTO, THANK YOU.
After getting sued for everything they've got.
Who was being sued ? I don't get the part about " finding photo hate group " What's a " photo hate group" ?
6 Answers
Colleen
Best answer!
The senator should turn it around and promote a resounding YES to this ad! Even gays have family values. The children of gays are brighter, smarter, better adjusted, more open and loving than the children of heterosexuals because of the gay family values. This is a very well documented fact.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 12 | |
It's out there. Study after study, after study. All over the internet. I do not keep a list of the sites and I do not have time to dig them all up for you. If you are really interested, you will look.
If I had any belief you weren't out to try and discredit anything I post, I might be willing to oblige you. But you have caused enough trouble on this forum for me to believe you really want a grown up discussion. There are many here who have noticed that you like to target anything I have to say. It's really obvious that you go out of your way to try and cause an argument with me. Go search the internet just the way you searched it to find the lies that support Obama's bogus health care. I said something you've chosen to question. Go find the facts to prove me wrong. I really have no interest in discussing anything with you. Especially when I know the truth about you. Facebook is a great place to find people on.
https://www.livescience.com/17913
January 15, 2012 article about why gay parents may be the best parents....
January 15, 2012 article about why gay parents may be the best parents....
RJ: This is just one of many articles about the subject matter. I have not read all of them; Colleen is, I'm sure, much more knowledgeable on the topic. However, I chose to be a parent. I did not choose to be a SINGLE parent, though.
rj, Colleen actually said, and I quote " It's out there. Study after study, after study. All over the internet. I do not keep a list of the sites and I do not have time to dig them all up for you. If you are really interested, you will look" this was not speaking of one article only, not in my opinion anyway, if you wish to criticise someones answer get onto the internet,research, and prove them wrong.
I have no reason to lie. Only a liar would suspect me of lying. After over a year here, I have proven to the longtime members that my postings are truthful and always have the facts to back them up. I am not interested in a mile long argument with you about this. It's out there on the internet. Every study done on homosexual families. Do your own research. That will prove to you the truth so much better than I can since all you want to do it try to discredit anything I post. I have proven myself here with the top members. I do not need to reprove myself to you.
I'm not a hand holder. I do not have to provide you with anything. You know how to use Google. What you read is a link Bob provided. Not an article I took my facts from. I've no accused you of lying many times you liar. I skewed no facts based on my bias. That's your trick. I always have facts to back up what I say. All the facts are out there. Go look.
rj,I don't think Colleen has any "bias"towards any subject,she never says or states anything without having researched the facts about the subject she is debating,she doesn't discriminate one faction against another merely states the facts of research and knowledge,I think if you were to look into things a little more you might get her point,it didn't take me long to look these things up,try it.
Your comment was edited by a moderator. I would have edited it no matter who you said it about. The part I left is generalized and does not target one individual. All members can argue with you about your generalized comment now if they do not agree with you.
Since you chose to re-edit your comment and add back in what was removed along with telling a moderator not to do something that is their job to do, you have been suspended for one day. The next time it will be 3 days. Eventually it will be permanent suspension if you continue to try and undermine the moderators here.
Since you chose to re-edit your comment and add back in what was removed along with telling a moderator not to do something that is their job to do, you have been suspended for one day. The next time it will be 3 days. Eventually it will be permanent suspension if you continue to try and undermine the moderators here.
rj,I am a fully fledged heterosexual and personally I have never been biased towards anyone who is not, but if anyone ever had the audacity to question my sexuality or whatever, I would be down on them like a ton of bricks. Colleen sticks up for who she is when she feels others are being biased towards the gay society and any other similar topics.
Prove me wrong "dear". Read the thread "dear". Interesting "how do ya do from a newbie" isn't it? A newbie looking for free help even.
I gave you the proof elsewhere. You'll find it.
I gave you the proof elsewhere. You'll find it.
They've prohibited their child from having a mother ,or a father, whatever the case may be. You can never replace a mother's love, as in the case of Niel Patrick Harris and his boy friend adopting two little boy babies
Does your brain hurt from being squeezed shut so tight? Go whine at the broken heteros homes where children are being denied a mother or father because the mother or father TOOK OFF and do not see their kids! Gay's are adopting unwanted children who have no mother or father. Speak to your hetero tribe about that too since they are the ones creating these unwanted children. The children of gay parents are not being denied love, safety and security in these families. That's what is most important and they are growing up very well adjusted. Better than kids of broken hetero homes.
most kids from div hetero homes still see their mom or dad, and have a memory of having both of them in the home. There are divorces among gay couples with children, too. In some gay couplings, one partner has children from a previous hetero marriage.
From a study I read:
Children of separated/divorced gay couples, especially lesbian couples, usually experience more frequent contact with their fathers versus children of heterosexual couples. Children of gay couples also appear to have a stronger extended social support system than children of heterosexual couples.
Where do you get your facts that > most < children from broken homes get to see the parent they do not live with?
Children of separated/divorced gay couples, especially lesbian couples, usually experience more frequent contact with their fathers versus children of heterosexual couples. Children of gay couples also appear to have a stronger extended social support system than children of heterosexual couples.
Where do you get your facts that > most < children from broken homes get to see the parent they do not live with?
FISH-O
lambshank
ROMOS
A little information for rj, took me two minutes to find, not difficult either, there's lots.
The authors found that children raised by lesbian mothers — whether the mother was partnered or single — scored very similarly to children raised by heterosexual parents on measures of development and social behavior. These findings were expected, the authors said; however, they were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.
"We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls," says Gartrell. "I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn't something I anticipated."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html#ixzz20b8FcECN
| 12 years ago. Rating: 9 | |
Thank you ROMOS. The people who know me best, know I do not make up stuff. That if I say it, then it's out there. I appreciate your support.
Too bad you're too lazy to search for information like this. ROMOS took the time to look and found this in a matter of minutes. Have you been hand held all your life?
You were too lazy to research the information on your own. Instead you demanded that I get it for you. NOT. You lied by saying I've called you a liar many times. I have not done so many times. Make your comments about me, demand things from me, this is what you get back. Oh and you have called me names. Bully comes to mind. You've even attacked my character many times. I just don't cry over it.
clu
digger
Colleen, I don't buy this "children of gay parents are brighter,smarter and better adjusted..." than those of heterosexual parents. It simply doesn't stand up to reason.
For starters, brightness and smarts is a function of genetics, not social development. Given that at least one (possibly both) of the gay couple is excluded from the procreation of the child, the intelligence (bright,smart) originated from an outsider (possibly gay too but statistically-speaking, more likely heterosexual).
Even if intelligence was a human feature that could be developed and enhanced by human interaction, which it DOES NOT, these "studies" would essentially conclude that Gays are generally speaking, brighter,smarter and better adjusted than heterosexuals. This is why I don't buy it.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 6 | |
The children of gay parents have one huge advantage. They are always wanted by their parents. They were not "surprises" like 50% of the children born to heterosexual parents. Surprises that are kept because they are there but not properly looked after because, well, the parents were not really looking to have a child. They were not born to teenagers who know nothing about parenting. Gay parents spend thousand of dollars just to get the child/children they desire. Once they have the children, they put their all into them. Everything revolves around their child, or their children. These children get the benefit of a parent helping them with their homework ( a lot of these children are actually home schooled now, even more of an advantage because their learning is not limited to only what the government wants them to know). They have the advantage of having both parents involved in their lives and teaching them how to be good productive people, because both parents want them. These children are appreciated more and given more because each parent knows what it took to have this child. The child benefits from the attention that kids born to a lot of heteros do not get because it's just too easy for a lot of heteros to pop out yet another kid.
"Even if intelligence was a human feature that could be developed and enhanced by human interaction, which it DOES NOT"
I can't even begin to agree with this. Interaction makes all the difference in how a child learns. A person's brain expands through learning. When taught many things, more of the brain is used. This in itself can make a person smarter, more aware, more open to many things than the next.
Many studies over the decades, (whether you agree with studies or not) have found this to be true.
"Even if intelligence was a human feature that could be developed and enhanced by human interaction, which it DOES NOT"
I can't even begin to agree with this. Interaction makes all the difference in how a child learns. A person's brain expands through learning. When taught many things, more of the brain is used. This in itself can make a person smarter, more aware, more open to many things than the next.
Many studies over the decades, (whether you agree with studies or not) have found this to be true.
As for intelligence, there is a clear difference between it and knowledge. Intelligence is what you're born with. Knowledge is what you pick up along the way. The link between the two is that intelligence is what makes knowledge acquisition possible and certainly easier to gather.
If you're suggesting that Gay parents provide an environment that is more conducive to knowledge-gathering, that's different. I may agree with the findings of such a study that would corroborate this hypothesis. Not that I've seen one yet, but reason leads me to believe that it is at least, possible.
If you're suggesting that Gay parents provide an environment that is more conducive to knowledge-gathering, that's different. I may agree with the findings of such a study that would corroborate this hypothesis. Not that I've seen one yet, but reason leads me to believe that it is at least, possible.
I think I fixed it for you. You just hit, edit this answer instead of comment this answer. I've done the same myself a few times.
Yes, this is what the studies are showing. It also shows that children of gays are less likely to be aggressive due to being taught that prejudice thinking is not productive to any culture. These children are aware of the differences in people/kids and accept those differences and treat their peers as equals, and do not treat them as "those people over there". Studies show that when people go through life with little to no negative thinking, it allows them to be open to all kinds of things and through open thinking, they learn so much more than a closed off mind could. This makes them brighter (not necessarily intelligent like a super brain, but brighter, more aware and with the ability to see beyond the limiting negative thinking). This is the point I was after when I said brighter.
Yes, this is what the studies are showing. It also shows that children of gays are less likely to be aggressive due to being taught that prejudice thinking is not productive to any culture. These children are aware of the differences in people/kids and accept those differences and treat their peers as equals, and do not treat them as "those people over there". Studies show that when people go through life with little to no negative thinking, it allows them to be open to all kinds of things and through open thinking, they learn so much more than a closed off mind could. This makes them brighter (not necessarily intelligent like a super brain, but brighter, more aware and with the ability to see beyond the limiting negative thinking). This is the point I was after when I said brighter.
Thanks. Unfortunately,most of my text got lost in cyberspace and I'm too lazy to start over;-)
Thank you digger for addressing the concerns correctly and allowing me to answer them. I know you now understand my comments better and realize where I was coming from. I never said, children of gay parents were more intelligent than all children of heterosexual parents. The research out there can explain all this better than I can.
Bright and smart are not akin to natural intelligence, the intelligence that digger eluded to, intelligence that comes from genetics.
Smart can be book smart or smart in comprehending words and ideas that others may never get a grasp on because no one took the time to teach them. Brighter, more willing to accept and learn equalizing ideas, concepts, things like we are all the same and prejudice does not belong in a civilized society. When I write, I expect that I am writing for educated adults who can understand what I'm saying without having to draw lines for them. digger questioned and understood without continuing to come at me and argue some more. He got it. You are still arguing.
Smart can be book smart or smart in comprehending words and ideas that others may never get a grasp on because no one took the time to teach them. Brighter, more willing to accept and learn equalizing ideas, concepts, things like we are all the same and prejudice does not belong in a civilized society. When I write, I expect that I am writing for educated adults who can understand what I'm saying without having to draw lines for them. digger questioned and understood without continuing to come at me and argue some more. He got it. You are still arguing.
Please, no thanks needed to you both.
As for the Bob's specific question/assertion (which I haven't yet addressed) "No excuse for this" , I'm not too clear on what the real issue here is.
Is it about the appropriateness of issuing a seemingly anti-gay ad during an election campaign? Or is it about infringing on personal property (a wedding picture)without the prior consent of the owner?
In the case of the former, the ad is selling the message that Gay marriage is not OK and the targeted candidate thinks that it is.Perhaps some day this (view) will be considered by most as being revolting and inappropriate. Today, however, the issue is still very open and debated. As such, I don't find the picture's message revolting whatsoever. I don't agree with its position but revolting? Not at all.
If however, the question has to do with using a private picture without permission, I again don't consider it a tragic event. The picture, as I understand it, was captured from a public source (owner's blog ?;whatever THAT is). Anyone that posts personal pictures (in the nude or otherwise) better be prepared to assume that it can go viral.Next time, keep your wedding pictures in a photo album or in a personal file folder on your very own hard drive.
As for the Bob's specific question/assertion (which I haven't yet addressed) "No excuse for this" , I'm not too clear on what the real issue here is.
Is it about the appropriateness of issuing a seemingly anti-gay ad during an election campaign? Or is it about infringing on personal property (a wedding picture)without the prior consent of the owner?
In the case of the former, the ad is selling the message that Gay marriage is not OK and the targeted candidate thinks that it is.Perhaps some day this (view) will be considered by most as being revolting and inappropriate. Today, however, the issue is still very open and debated. As such, I don't find the picture's message revolting whatsoever. I don't agree with its position but revolting? Not at all.
If however, the question has to do with using a private picture without permission, I again don't consider it a tragic event. The picture, as I understand it, was captured from a public source (owner's blog ?;whatever THAT is). Anyone that posts personal pictures (in the nude or otherwise) better be prepared to assume that it can go viral.Next time, keep your wedding pictures in a photo album or in a personal file folder on your very own hard drive.
It's because they used a picture of a same sex couple after their marriage to promote an anti-gay marriage message. This is what I understand to be Bob's issue with the ad. The owner's of the photo are claiming infringement by using their photo without permission. What you say is true. If they did not copyright the photo and allowed it to be posted to the internet with no copyright, then it is free for anyone to use.
As for the children always being wanted......what if the one gay parent wants another child, and the other gay parent doesn't, but he/she gives in to keep the peace. So,they get or have another child.
With the cost involved in getting a child, this is not something that will happen just to "keep the peace". In vitro can run anywhere from 10k to 30k. Adoption requires so many hoops to jump through and red tape and oodles of money too, that again, no one is going to agree just to keep the peace. Things are harder in the homosexual world when it comes to having children. We can't just make decisions on a whim. A lot of thought and planning goes into it and both parties have to be completely in agreement.
Top contributors in Other - Politics & Government category
Unanswered Questions
vnd789black
Answers: 0
Views: 9
Rating: 0
winboxvn online
Answers: 0
Views: 11
Rating: 0
king888live
Answers: 0
Views: 5
Rating: 0
king888live
Answers: 0
Views: 5
Rating: 0
king888live
Answers: 0
Views: 5
Rating: 0
king888live
Answers: 0
Views: 5
Rating: 0
philippavia123b
Answers: 0
Views: 8
Rating: 0
Y2Mate Email
> More questions...
Answers: 0
Views: 11
Rating: 0