Opinion of Previous Poster's Signature Thread

[Tetro Kornbluth]

My favourite sig here.

Also on the quotes: Thanks to the sig, I know who Tom Wopat is.

[minionofmidas]

I still like that first quote.

[Leftbehind]

One of the best I've seen.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Always loved Snoopy.

[TNF]

I'm not sure what to make of it, honestly.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Simple truth.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Do iPhones get good signal coverage in Kenya?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Ouch......just OUCH.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I did not know Bushie had been seeing Allison that long ago.

Ouch......just OUCH.

I think I may keep it a while.  That quote of bgwah's is an example that many people only invoke federalism when they can't win nationally on an issue, but can do so in some states.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I did not know Bushie had been seeing Allison that long ago.

That was Tiffanye, but the posts from then and now are strikingly similar, eh?

SKIP

[Maxwell]

Ugh bushie

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I do not want ants, Mr. Smarty Pants.
I do not want them in the yard.
I do not want them in the house.
I do not want them in my chard.
I do not like them, not one little bit.
When I see them them, my teeth do grit.

[Flake]

What did the person do to get ants?

Anyone who's curious why my signature has the straight marriage activists:

JCL, do you oppose adoptions by single parents?

I was raised by a single parent. My mother from 3-11 and my dad after that. While I think any situation besides the two parent married heterosexual couple is less than ideal,  if the circumstances were right a single could. There's this young lady who became a missionary in Africa. I believe she adopted some 14 or so African kids. The story is talked about in the book Kisses from Katie. .

So you have no problems with single parents, but gay parents are unacceptable because a child does better with a mother and a father?

If your union can't produce new life, you don't get to adopt. I gave you one instance where a single could do it. The circumstances of my life from 3-adulthood of how I was raised wouldn't be close to the ideal situation but it is miles ahead of a gay couple could ever offer.

1. If this is your belief, then women who can't have children shouldn't be allowed to adopt.
2. Back it up with more than disproven research.

So women and men who do not have the ability to have a child together can't adopt either?

Oh and I think that a gay couple would show much more appreciation for their children and wouldn't discriminate them because of their sexual preferences.

Another thing: gay people still have to go through months of checks for the child, caring for the child, adoption procedures, they would be as good or even better than straight parents who had a child through sex.

Heterosexual unions have the potential to create new life. Sometimes couples in those unions for whatever reason aren't able to have biological children of their own. Allowing homosexual adoption is complete and total discrimination against those heterosexual married couples. Why do you think I fight against abortion so heavily besides that of my faith based convictions? If I were married I will tell you this..... Her and I would heavily consider adoption in addition to having children of our own. I have always been an advocate for adoption and will always be. How can a gay couple be better than a traditional one in the rearing of children? I can understand what the kid in a situation like this is going through because I know what a custody fight is like. Don't you think I considered other options on who to live with other than my biological parents? I had a couple certain options because of other families that I had close contact with. Needless to say I chose my dad. Not just because I could have a chance at a better situation and could actually have considerably more freedom as a kid, but ultimately my brother and I thought it best that we stuck together.
[/quote]

Do you research the views on gay marriage of everyone who was tangentially-but-not-really involved in the production of every movie you go see?  Of course not.  This is as stupid and pointless as the Chick-fil-A boycotts.

That's not really the point, since OSC isn't just some guy who happens to oppose gay marriage. He's quite outspoken about it and sits on the board of NOM. You don't have to research his views since he flaunts them.

He was outspoken about it. He gave up a while back. I believe his words were something along the lines of "You guys won, gay marriage is gonna happen. I don't really care anymore. Let it go."

You haven't won yet. In fact you could very well lose. We will not let go of this or any culture war fight

Faith and medical science thank you very much.

Medical science? Like, say, the AMA or APA? Both back gay adoption.

Do they also support Obamacare?

Don't avoid the question with irrelevant counter-questions about a nonexistent program.

It's relevant because Obamacare exists. So answer my question.

I'd still love to know your medical science sources.

You are aware the AMA sometimes gets it wrong. I will get you a source. Are not Physiologists licensed medical professionals as well?

First of all, I would like to get a factual report from you about this. Secondly why do you really see gay people as not fit to raise children? I know gay people have every right to adopt a child because they are good parents. Think about this, JCL: If you are gay and you want a kid, you need to go through a long process of security checks, home visits, and they have to go through all these processes to adopt someone. Now, if they don't want kids, they can't because well gay sex is not able to produce children. Now, JCL, I think you don't realize how being gay truly works. What actual science has pointed out is that being gay is not a choice, but even if it is, why are you so opposed to gay people adopting?

Why do you feel as if a gay person isn't enough of a human being to raise a child?

Don't give me this faith and science bull because first of all, science does not support your claims, it will never support your claims, your claims have no base. And I'm a pretty religious person, I believe in God, Jesus, Mary, etc. and I know being gay is not a choice, I know that gay people are people, who if they want a kid, they should be able to raise one, I know that.

Your claims that gay people are unfit to raise a child is unbelievable, homophobic, and if one of your children is gay, I will pray for them, because you obviously are against human rights.

There is no freedom until we're equal. All of us. Gay, straight, white, black, Christian, Muslim.

And that you are against equality, against other people for who they love, against others who want to raise a child that a straight couple couldn't take care of, or that child of a mother or father who had died, it sickens me to my core.

I hope you have a wonderful day, JCL.

I want you to Google Dr. James Dobson on gay adoption go to page two and click on the scienceblog.com web page. It mentions noted Sociologist David Popenoe of Rutgers University and his research on the subject of gay adoption.  It basically shows why a child does best in a home with a mom and a dad.

[Immediately after I showed him undeniable proof of how the report was altered and the original author of the report was threatening to sue people who used her report against marriage equality]

[PJ]

1. I support Sink
2. It's an ok comic
3. LOL

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Doesn't exist.

[opebo]

I sure like the subject 'robots'.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

So who is the royal brat in the picture?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Dumber.

[opebo]

So who is the royal brat in the picture?

Just a little cutey.

Yeah TF's sig isn't bad, nothing like DP's horror.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Obama hasn't signed any gun control legislation and prior to Newtown barely mentioned guns.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

you're a troll.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

But what does the fox say?

[PJ]

Lol bgwah.

I had to comment on this one as well:

Obama hasn't signed any gun control legislation and prior to Newtown barely mentioned guns.

He clearly wants to, and has made efforts (thankfully, opposed) to take away our guns. It should b completely obvious the democrats agenda and goal is to take away our guns. First it was "hand gun ban" now its "semi automatic" then its "backround checks". Obviously their goal is to override and destroy the 2nd amendment, and impose anti-gun laws/ban guns exacley like the ones in the UK, Libya, Russia, China, North Korea, Europe, and many other areas.

I just love how you compare Britain to totalitarianism. But the founding fathers didn't know semi-automatics would exist in the future, so your argument is irrelevant. Show us pictures of people who oppose gun control today and your argument would look much weaker.

[Morning in Atlas]

Don't really care that much about Atlasia, but I chuckled at the libertarianism comment. Sounds like an average Friday night for me.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

So you admit that voting for Obama is all about submission!