Quick Survey!
- Thread starter SovietSecrets
- Start date
Recommended Videos
1. Male (lol who isn't on the internet m i rite)
2. Neutral.
3. Neutral. Don't really give much of a shit what they wanna do tbh.
Oh yeah I'm an evil outsider btw; Scottish.
Ah, ha, ha. XD
2. Neutral.
3. Neutral. Don't really give much of a shit what they wanna do tbh.
Oh yeah I'm an evil outsider btw; Scottish.
Ah, ha, ha. XD
I get what you mean, but I have gay parents, and for my friends one parent is a distant relative living with me and my mom. I even go to a Catholic school (not that all Catholics are anti-gay, just a large amount of my school is), and no one knows, save for a very good friend who doesn't care.Carnage95 said:
Also, I grew up normal without a male role model, I play sports regularly, get good grades in school, and compare penis size with other guys with gay parents do manly things.
So, if I turned out normal because I had awesome parents that were gay, what stops other gay parents from doing the same with their children?
(This all wasn't directed at you Carnage I just got carried away
)Anyway, OT:
1.Male
2.Strongly Agree
3.Strongly Agree (The statement was should they be able to, they should have the right, but I agree with the idea that they need to be capable parents just like any straight parents adopting should be)
1. Male
2. Meh
3. Meh
Now, just to clarify (and not seem like a dbag). For 2: I am okay with it be accepted even though I don't really care. I also have an issue with state of straight marriage, so it's hard to see what is being "kept sacred" or w/e. That being said, I fully support the idea of having marriage being a 100% religious affair and having all the rights and such be awarded to a separate thing all together with marriage just being a religious union that provides no civil benefits.
For 3: Um... Again, don't really care, but I understand the potential for the kids to have issues not from how they are raised but how they are treated by others, so I dunno really.
2. Meh
3. Meh
Now, just to clarify (and not seem like a dbag). For 2: I am okay with it be accepted even though I don't really care. I also have an issue with state of straight marriage, so it's hard to see what is being "kept sacred" or w/e. That being said, I fully support the idea of having marriage being a 100% religious affair and having all the rights and such be awarded to a separate thing all together with marriage just being a religious union that provides no civil benefits.
For 3: Um... Again, don't really care, but I understand the potential for the kids to have issues not from how they are raised but how they are treated by others, so I dunno really.
1. Male
2. Strongly Agree
3. Strongly Agree
Yeah, I got nothing witty to say right now. Maybe later.
2. Strongly Agree
3. Strongly Agree
Yeah, I got nothing witty to say right now. Maybe later.
Female
well marriage has always been about property and money, even since truly ancient times, and homosexuals should be alowed to have property and money so why not get married, the religious nut bags who go on about the sacred rite of marriage have no idea what they are talking about (strongly agree)
i agree with Homosexuals adopting while there is no evidence to support or disprove the idea of long term harm, giving a kid a home cant be worse than making it a ward of the state
well marriage has always been about property and money, even since truly ancient times, and homosexuals should be alowed to have property and money so why not get married, the religious nut bags who go on about the sacred rite of marriage have no idea what they are talking about (strongly agree)
i agree with Homosexuals adopting while there is no evidence to support or disprove the idea of long term harm, giving a kid a home cant be worse than making it a ward of the state
In my state (Mass.) I grew up with a girl who had 2 moms. And that was about a decade ago. What state are you in?EcksTeaSea said:
and
Male
Strongly agree
Strongly agree
