Because we care about wider society and especially the fate of the future generation.
Homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles and more likely to abuse their children.
Bigoted, foolish nonsense. Not that I'd expect any better from a member calling himself 'Perpetual Shoah' ('Shoah' means the Jewish Holocaust for anyone who doesn't know) and has an SS symbol on his picture.
You stated, "Homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles and more likely to abuse their children."
This study you linked me to does not say anything remotely like that. In fact, it is saying the opposite. It is saying that 46% of homosexual men in the study were victims (not perpetrators) of childhood abuse.
Please don't try and claim this as universal truth. Sure, some of the more religious and older generation are opposed to same-sex marriage.
However, the vast majority of young, non Hasidic, Jews living in the UK today are pro gay-rights and same-sex marriage. I say this as someone who goes to a Jewish school with around 1000 people in, and those who express anti gay-marriage views are very much in the minority.
We have had gay pride days and there are LGBT posters on the walls in my Jewish faith school.
Don't use the outdated views of some Jews to justify your bigotry
You stated, "Homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles and more likely to abuse their children."
This study you linked me to does not say anything remotely like that. In fact, it is saying the opposite. It is saying that 46% of homosexual men in the study were victims (not perpetrators) of childhood abuse.
Yes, that was just to get you started. The statistics are out there for young adventurers such as yourself. There is a whole world outside of the PC liberal consensus to be found.
Also people who are sexually abused when they are young are more likely to become abusers themselves.
Men are more likely than women to be paedophiles and abuse children, therefore men are bad creatures and it is immoral to be one.
Women are actually more likely to abuse children. You are right that men are more likely to be paedos though.
The best place for a child to grow up is in a traditional nuclear family. Not in the presence of two pozzed homos who force "their" son to wear dresses.
Bigoted, foolish nonsense. Not that I'd expect any better from a member calling himself 'Perpetual Shoah' ('Shoah' means the Jewish Holocaust for anyone who doesn't know) and has an SS symbol on his picture.
Women are actually more likely to abuse children. You are right that men are more likely to be paedos though.
The best place for a child to grow up is in a traditional nuclear family. Not in the presence of two pozzed homos who force "their" son to wear dresses.
I assume you were raised in a 'traditional nuclear family,' yet look how badly you turned out.
Women are actually more likely to abuse children. You are right that men are more likely to be paedos though.
The best place for a child to grow up is in a traditional nuclear family. Not in the presence of two pozzed homos who force "their" son to wear dresses.
The best place for a child to grow up is with two white parents because they are so much better than black parents who will force their son to become a bank robber.
The best place for a child to grow up is with two white parents because they are so much better than black parents who will force their son to become a bank robber.
That is true. Although two black parents who are actually there and together is quite rare unfortunately.
That is true. Although two black parents who are actually there and together is quite rare unfortunately.
If you didn't detect the sarcasm, you're missing my point. I'm replacing your ridiculous generalisations with others to get you to see what you're saying is stupid, but it didn't work did it.
You actually think blacks encourage their children to become theives, and two gay men force their son to wear a dress? Who do you know that's done that?
Yes, that was just to get you started. They statistics are out there for young adventurers such as yourself. There is a whole world outside of the PC liberal consensus to be found.
Also people who are sexually abused when they are young are more likely to become abusers themselves.
Well, let us work with your first study. How random was the sample of people involved in the selection?
The data concerning homosexuals was gathered by setting up an interview booth at a “Gay Pride” parade"
What was this stall advertised as? How random was their sample of homosexual individuals? Without further explanation, this study would appear to have design faults which would imply this is not a truly random sample of the population whole.
If you didn't detect the sarcasm, you're missing my point. I'm replacing your ridiculous generalisations with others to get you to see what you're saying is stupid, but it didn't work did it.
Your generalisation made sense to a significant extent. You had the causes wrong but you are right that blacks commit more crime.
I did detect the sarcasm. Just pointing out that it is actually true.
You actually think blacks encourage their children to become theives, and two gay men force their son to wear a dress? Who do you know that's done that?
I don't think they (often) encourage them to become thieves but it is true that they are more likely to be thieves. The cause of this is likely genetic (lower IQ, more violent, lower time preference).
There have been a number of cases of homosexuals (gays and lesbians) pushing this perversion on their young children.
Well, let us work with your first study. How random was the sample of people involved in the selection?What was this stall advertised as? How random was their sample of homosexual individuals? Without further explanation, this study would appear to have design faults which would imply this is not a truly random sample of the population whole.http://www.centerforinquiry.net/uploads/attachments/Anti-gayActivismandtheMisuseofScience_1.pdf
So you are saying it's not the quiet homos that have been sexually abused only the ones that have been parading themselves naked in front of children? Good to know. Really helps your argument.You have a lot of hatefacts to absorb young lad.
So you are saying it's not the quiet homos that have been sexually abused only the ones that have been parading themselves naked in front of children? Good to know. Really helps your argument.You have a lot of hatefacts to absorb young lad.
I never said that. I am saying that they have gone to a gay pride festival and set up a stall. I am questioning how this stall was advertised? The study doesn't say, so we don't know. Basic epidemiology will tell you that this is an important factor that we need to know. If the stall advertise "study about homosexual men who were abused as children", then obviously the people who will come to the stall will be those who most likely are part of this statistic. This would not be a random sample as the study would clearly be biased into attracting these individuals, above and beyond their actual representation with the gay community.
So, you'd ban marriage for heterosexual couples past childbearing age, then? If a woman is, say, 45 or 50 or more, she can't have children any more, so she shouldn't be able to get married to a man? Is that your argument?