Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares for Supreme Court decision

Full story: Fox News 1,568
Big change is coming to the lives of the lesbian couple at the center of the fight for same-sex marriage in California no matter how the Supreme Court decides their case. Read more
Nobody

Dallas, TX

#793 Apr 12, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>who is planning on changing the 2nd amendment?
SORRY forget it. I thought you knew what was going on. just keep on BSing

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#795 Apr 12, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
Please tell this 'useless, useful idiot'...when did these 200 signing off on this letter get the study declared denounced and removed from all scientific journals???
It's only in the one dear, you know, the one that admitted that if the peer review process had worked like it should, Regnerus, the less than impartial scientist's "bullshit" would never had been published in that. Once that horse had left the barn, there was no taking it back dear. It just had to wander off into the street to be smeared by the ugly bus called truth. Buttercup, even Marky-Mark admits that those who he classified as Lesbian Mothers and Gay Fathers really didn't have to be actually Lesbian and or Gay under his definition for them. Only ONE child in his entire study had been raised since birth by an honest to God Lesbian couple and the SOLE thing that his children of Lesbian mothers and Gay Fathers actually had in common was that they had been the product of a broken heterosexual home. He guaranteed the outcome of his study by rigging it to get the worst possible examples that didn't even have to be homosexual to qualify to be called one. Read the f*cking study you moron, even you are bright enough to see the gaping holes in the validity of his so-called study.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#796 Apr 12, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>It's only in the one dear, you know, the one that admitted that if the peer review process had worked like it should, Regnerus, the less than impartial scientist's "bullshit" would never had been published in that.
Really?? You know, they can always 'retract' it...'if' they believe that was the case..which obviously...they don't....

Your mighty '200' should be able to squash this 'one' journal like a bug...yet, it persists....funny how that happens...

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#797 Apr 12, 2013
And yet you wonder why I call you a useless useful idiot, that really was the best you can do. Sad.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#798 Apr 12, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
And yet you wonder why I call you a useless useful idiot, that really was the best you can do. Sad.
It kicked your butt!!(no pun intended)...

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#799 Apr 12, 2013
Nobody wrote:
<quoted text>SORRY forget it. I thought you knew what was going on. just keep on BSing
i thought you could fit the term citizen, but like most, you don't know enough about your own country to converse intelligently about it.

there are no plans I've heard of to change the 2nd amendment.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#800 Apr 12, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>It's only in the one dear, you know, the one that admitted that if the peer review process had worked like it should, Regnerus, the less than impartial scientist's "bullshit" would never had been published in that. Once that horse had left the barn, there was no taking it back dear. It just had to wander off into the street to be smeared by the ugly bus called truth. Buttercup, even Marky-Mark admits that those who he classified as Lesbian Mothers and Gay Fathers really didn't have to be actually Lesbian and or Gay under his definition for them. Only ONE child in his entire study had been raised since birth by an honest to God Lesbian couple and the SOLE thing that his children of Lesbian mothers and Gay Fathers actually had in common was that they had been the product of a broken heterosexual home. He guaranteed the outcome of his study by rigging it to get the worst possible examples that didn't even have to be homosexual to qualify to be called one. Read the f*cking study you moron, even you are bright enough to see the gaping holes in the validity of his so-called study.
I'm just wondering why you are having such a hissy fit over the largest, latest and most scientific study to date on seven family types.

While it isn't what you want to hear, it does make sense. It equates the outcome of adoptive, foster, step and single parents, whether they be hetero or homosexual, with a negative edge on the homosexual side. Which also makes sense because ss couples are always only a duplicated half of what a heterosexual couple provides.

Moreover, you touted clearly bogus studies that tried to assert that lesbian couples were better parents than biological. Something even children know better. Where was your outrage then???

Smirk smile.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#801 Apr 12, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm just wondering why you are having such a hissy fit over the largest, latest and most scientific study to date on seven family types.
While it isn't what you want to hear, it does make sense. It equates the outcome of adoptive, foster, step and single parents, whether they be hetero or homosexual, with a negative edge on the homosexual side. Which also makes sense because ss couples are always only a duplicated half of what a heterosexual couple provides.
Moreover, you touted clearly bogus studies that tried to assert that lesbian couples were better parents than biological. Something even children know better. Where was your outrage then???
Smirk smile.
you are starting from the faulty premise that "ss couples are always only a duplicated half of what a heterosexual couple provides." this is not even remotely true. when you start from a faulty premise, your conclusions will also be faulty.

perhaps learn about your fellow humans before attempting to both pass judgement and label them incorrectly.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#802 Apr 12, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>you are starting from the faulty premise that "ss couples are always only a duplicated half of what a heterosexual couple provides." this is not even remotely true. when you start from a faulty premise, your conclusions will also be faulty.
perhaps learn about your fellow humans before attempting to both pass judgement and label them incorrectly.
No, it is completely and obviously true to anyone with eyes.

Smile.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#803 Apr 12, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it is completely and obviously true to anyone with eyes.
Smile.
but not to people with brains. gender roles are not set in stone. some men are far more "mothering" than some women. and the roles also reverse the other way.

you are starting with a faulty premise, as that supports your prejudice int his matter. if you look at the issue objectively, you would laugh at your own statements.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#804 Apr 12, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but not to people with brains. gender roles are not set in stone. some men are far more "mothering" than some women. and the roles also reverse the other way.
Which is why there are sexual defects.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#807 Apr 15, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but not to people with brains. gender roles are not set in stone. some men are far more "mothering" than some women. and the roles also reverse the other way.
"EXCEPTIONS" do NOT make the rule...how many times will you try this stu-pid tactic...this will be true EVERY TIME...
you are starting with a faulty premise, as that supports your prejudice int his matter. if you look at the issue objectively, you would laugh at your own statements.
Do 'you' think you are 'objective'??? You are anything but...

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#808 Apr 15, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
"EXCEPTIONS" do NOT make the rule...how many times will you try this stu-pid tactic...this will be true EVERY TIME...
<quoted text>
Do 'you' think you are 'objective'??? You are anything but...
Who said anything about exceptions?

yes, i look at all things objectively. you don[t even know what the word means. your prejudices and bigotry are so ingrained in your being that you will never get rid of them until the day your carcass rots...

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#809 Apr 15, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Who said anything about exceptions?
You did! You keep trying to throw exceptions into the mix like they are the rule..it only shows your ignorance and intolerance of the truth...
yes, i look at all things objectively. you don[t even know what the word means. your prejudices and bigotry are so ingrained in your being that you will never get rid of them until the day your carcass rots...
Vocabulary must have been your worst subject in school....
objective&#8194;
noun
--5. not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
You have NO facts to base your 'opinion' on...it is all you OPINION...you are not 'objective'...you are 'biased'...
Vocabulary lesson over for today...

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#810 Apr 15, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
You did! You keep trying to throw exceptions into the mix like they are the rule..it only shows your ignorance and intolerance of the truth...
<quoted text>
Vocabulary must have been your worst subject in school....
objective&#8194;
noun
--5. not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
You have NO facts to base your 'opinion' on...it is all you OPINION...you are not 'objective'...you are 'biased'...
Vocabulary lesson over for today...
no, the fact that gender roles are not set in stone has nothing to do with exceptions.

What opinions do you think I have presented that are not backed up with facts?

you always fail when you try this...heck what's one more time. you don't mind looking foolish at all.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#811 Apr 15, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no, the fact that gender roles are not set in stone has nothing to do with exceptions.
What opinions do you think I have presented that are not backed up with facts?
The fact that men can't be mothers 'is' set in stone...
you always fail when you try this...heck what's one more time. you don't mind looking foolish at all.
Yeah, right...it's me saying men and women have the same roles in society...uh-huh....

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#812 Apr 15, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that men can't be mothers 'is' set in stone...
<quoted text>
Yeah, right...it's me saying men and women have the same roles in society...uh-huh....
That has nothing to do with the issue.

i guess when proven wrong you have to change the issue, as you do not have the integrity to admit you are wrong.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#813 Apr 15, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>That has nothing to do with the issue.
i guess when proven wrong you have to change the issue, as you do not have the integrity to admit you are wrong.
The whole issue is 'roles'...women have the 'role' of mother...men have the 'role' of father...it is YOU trying to state the opposite....
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#814 Apr 16, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole issue is 'roles'...women have the 'role' of mother...men have the 'role' of father...it is YOU trying to state the opposite....
No honey. It's YOU being unable to think outside the box. Parenting skills are not determined by sex organs.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#815 Apr 16, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole issue is 'roles'...women have the 'role' of mother...men have the 'role' of father...it is YOU trying to state the opposite....
gender roles are not set in stone. they run the gamut of all human types from one gender to another.

your simplistic view of this shows you are not even remotely in touch with the real world.

but we knew that already...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

California Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) 5 min Just Think 58,783
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 39 min OzRitz 52,287
News Jerry Brown is mad Ted Cruz is running for pres... 47 min Sam I Am 6
News How To Remove Florida Arrest.org And a Dui Mug ... (Jun '11) 9 hr the shield 138
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 11 hr JRB 185,851
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 20 hr Nine Ball 201,794
News California attorney general moves to end anti-g... Fri Sneaky Pete 26
More from around the web