Gay Weddings Legalized in....wait, Vietnam?

[The Scientific States]

It's called a debate forum for a reason.

If we don't like what you say, we'll debate you. Simple.

Then don't complain when it doesn't go your way. I already said that you are welcome to argue.

Why don't you define it? The further this discussion progresses, the less effort you put into your responses or arguments, and the more effort we put into them. I'd like to flip the script for the moment, and see you actually challenge yourself.

I am not going to bother.

That's exactly what I'm doing, arguing against your argument. It's tough to do so when you keep spouting the same bs over and over again, instead of taking the argument to the next level.

[Shershah]

The same generation where "men are no longer men, women try to be men..." and all that ? right.

Maybe is the fact we don't believe in bullshit gender roles?

Oh, how can we ever be redeemed on challenging such a wise concept as the fact men cannot be soft and women should only stay at home and make sandwiches for us men.

Like i said, the world has gone to hell. What else do you expect from this generation. And was that one of those lines that the feminists use to get sympathy ?

[The Scientific States]

Maybe is the fact we don't believe in bullshit gender roles?

Oh, how can we ever be redeemed on challenging such a wise concept as the fact men cannot be soft and women should only stay at home and make sandwiches for us men.

Like i said, the world has gone to hell. What else do you expect from this generation. And was that one of those lines that the feminists use to get sympathy ?

Stop and get back to the main argument please. You're setting up plenty of strawmans, like this one.

[Liriena]

It's called a debate forum for a reason.

If we don't like what you say, we'll debate you. Simple.

Then don't complain when it doesn't go your way. I already said that you are welcome to argue.

You failing to provide sources and blaming it on imaginary liberal conspiracies =/= Debate not going our way

It's just you lying your ass off to cover for your failed arguments.

[Liriena]

I would rather see you admit that you have no idea how the scientific method work, that you have no valid sources to prove your assertions, and that the lack of evidence means your claims are currently worth less than Glenn Beck's.

You really had to bring Glenn Beck into the conversation?

I mean, really?

Yes. >:3

[The Truth and Light]

I am not going to bother.

If you are not going to bother to even provide a definition of a word, when it's your definition that will ultimately guide the remainder of the debate, I don't see how you think you have any grounds to tell people, "If you want to argue, do so."

You've made it very clear that you don't want to use this forum for its purpose, and would rather spam. You should leave.

[Liriena]

Maybe is the fact we don't believe in bullshit gender roles?

Oh, how can we ever be redeemed on challenging such a wise concept as the fact men cannot be soft and women should only stay at home and make sandwiches for us men.

Like i said, the world has gone to hell. What else do you expect from this generation. And was that one of those lines that the feminists use to get sympathy ?

More red herrings. Delightful.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I already said how it can influence the result. And the "entire" ? as in all of them ? can you say that for a fact ?



But the fox...

Anyway i have already stated how that is almost impossible due to all the liberals.

The same generation where "men are no longer men, women try to be men..." and all that ? right.

It's impossible to find a non biased source because homosexuality isn't a disease, and the only websites that claim it is one, are downright lying without any source.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072932/

Just sayin.

[Shershah]

...

Like i said, you are not getting any more "proof" unless something new comes up. So abandon all hope of that until then.

And like i said i don't care whether you take it seriously or not. I posted something, you replied and now i am replying to you. That is all.

That's exactly what I'm doing, arguing against your argument. It's tough to do so when you keep spouting the same bs over and over again, instead of taking the argument to the next level.

Keep on arguing. Maybe we will get somewhere, sometime in the near future.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Maybe is the fact we don't believe in bullshit gender roles?

Oh, how can we ever be redeemed on challenging such a wise concept as the fact men cannot be soft and women should only stay at home and make sandwiches for us men.

1 - Like i said, the world has gone to hell.

2 - What else do you expect from this generation.

3 - And was that one of those lines that the feminists use to get sympathy ?

1 - I don't see Satan coming, so sorry I don't believe this.

2 - What can we expect from you is the question at hand.

3 - Not really, but you are mentioning about gender roles being challenged in our generation and homosexuality being accepted. And to be honest, I like it that way, that people can accept each other.

[The Scientific States]

It's impossible to find a non biased source because homosexuality isn't a disease, and the only websites that claim it is one, are downright lying without any source.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072932/

Just sayin.

All that shows is that LGBT people are more likely to have mental disorders then heterosexual people.

This does not mean that all LGBT people have mental disorders, it simply means they are more prevalent in LGBT people.

[Condunum]

I don't know enough about Vietnam to be able to be surprised by this, but good job Vietnam.

[The Scientific States]

...

Like i said, you are not getting any more "proof" unless something new comes up. So abandon all hope of that until then.

And like i said i don't care whether you take it seriously or not. I posted something, you replied and now i am replying to you. That is all.

That's exactly what I'm doing, arguing against your argument. It's tough to do so when you keep spouting the same bs over and over again, instead of taking the argument to the next level.

Keep on arguing. Maybe we will get somewhere, sometime in the near future.

Then provide a argument, otherwise you're simply spamming.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You really had to bring Glenn Beck into the conversation?

I mean, really?

Yes. >:3

I guess that will do.

[The Emerald Dawn]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072932/

Just sayin.

All that shows is that LGBT people are more likely to have mental disorders then heterosexual people.

This does not mean that all LGBT people have mental disorders, it simply means they are more prevalent in LGBT people.

Although the debate on classification ended in 1973 with the removal of homosexuality from the second edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM; American Psychiatric Association, 1973), its heritage has lasted. This heritage has tainted discussion on mental health of lesbians and gay men by associating—even equating—claims that LGB people have higher prevalences of mental disorders than heterosexual people with the historical antigay stance and the stigmatization of LGB persons (Bailey, 1999).

It says right there that scientific debate was ended with the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.

It literally means that there is no more scientific debate on the topic, because it was found to NOT be a disease, or disorder.

[Liriena]

...

Like i said, you are not getting any more "proof" unless something new comes up. So abandon all hope of that until then.

And like i said i don't care whether you take it seriously or not. I posted something, you replied and now i am replying to you. That is all.

Then you are, in my honest opinion, a shameless fraud, making factual claims without a single shred of actual proof, and refusing to debate properly.

[The Scientific States]

All that shows is that LGBT people are more likely to have mental disorders then heterosexual people.

This does not mean that all LGBT people have mental disorders, it simply means they are more prevalent in LGBT people.

Although the debate on classification ended in 1973 with the removal of homosexuality from the second edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM; American Psychiatric Association, 1973), its heritage has lasted. This heritage has tainted discussion on mental health of lesbians and gay men by associating—even equating—claims that LGB people have higher prevalences of mental disorders than heterosexual people with the historical antigay stance and the stigmatization of LGB persons (Bailey, 1999).

It says right there that scientific debate was ended with the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.

It literally means that there is no more scientific debate on the topic, because it was found to NOT be a disease, or disorder.

I see. I thought you were showing that to me to say "LGBT people are mental".

My bad.

[Blasveck]

...

Like i said, you are not getting any more "proof" unless something new comes up. So abandon all hope of that until then.

And like i said i don't care whether you take it seriously or not. I posted something, you replied and now i am replying to you. That is all.

That's exactly what I'm doing, arguing against your argument. It's tough to do so when you keep spouting the same bs over and over again, instead of taking the argument to the next level.

Keep on arguing. Maybe we will get somewhere, sometime in the near future.

But you've said before that you won't accept said proof because it has political bias. Based on that assertion, you shouldn't accept any scientific sources because they could have political bias, including the ones that you yourself have provided.

[The Emerald Dawn]

It says right there that scientific debate was ended with the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.

It literally means that there is no more scientific debate on the topic, because it was found to NOT be a disease, or disorder.

I see. I thought you were showing that to me to say "LGBT people are mental".

My bad.

Is coo.

I'm just saying that there are scientifically valid scholarly sources that we can point to and say, "No seriously, we've had this out. It's not a disease or disorder, move on."

[Risottia]

Exactly what I was telling Octavianus...

I don't think he listened to you that well...

Oh no he did. Nero, he got a bit too excited about the stuff. Real serious problems began with Traianus and Hadrianus, though, one was too busy securing the borders and the other was too busy being generally a good man.

[Liriena]

Like i said, you are not getting any more "proof" unless something new comes up. So abandon all hope of that until then.

And like i said i don't care whether you take it seriously or not. I posted something, you replied and now i am replying to you. That is all.



Keep on arguing. Maybe we will get somewhere, sometime in the near future.

But you've said before that you won't accept said proof because it has political bias. Based on that assertion, you shouldn't accept any scientific sources because they could have political bias, including the ones that you yourself have provided.

Biasception!

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

All gays should face the death penalty, because YAHWEH god demands it.

*** Warned *** for trolling.

[The Truth and Light]

I see. I thought you were showing that to me to say "LGBT people are mental".

My bad.

Is coo.

I'm just saying that there are scientifically valid scholarly sources that we can point to and say, "No seriously, we've had this out. It's not a disease or disorder, move on."

Settled science is a fun thing. It frees up a lot of space in the scientific community for worthwhile research.

[Shershah]

I am not going to bother.

If you are not going to bother to even provide a definition of a word, when it's your definition that will ultimately guide the remainder of the debate, I don't see how you think you have any grounds to tell people, "If you want to argue, do so."

You've made it very clear that you don't want to use this forum for its purpose, and would rather spam. You should leave.

If you can't bother, then why should i ? And i am under no obligations to do so just because you said so. Again, "If you want to argue, do so". If you don't, then don't. Simple.

Then provide a argument, otherwise you're simply spamming.

What do you think everything that has been going to far has been. Let me tell you, it is not spam. Not my fault if you only see it as such. Speaking of which you haven't started an actual argument yet.

1 - Like i said, the world has gone to hell.

2 - What else do you expect from this generation.

3 - And was that one of those lines that the feminists use to get sympathy ?

1 - I don't see Satan coming, so sorry I don't believe this.

2 - What can we expect from you is the question at hand.

3 - Not really, but you are mentioning about gender roles being challenged in our generation and homosexuality being accepted. And to be honest, I like it that way, that people can accept each other.

1) Hello, i am Lucius Cypher. Nice to meet you. Would you like to have a cup of tea ? coffee perhaps ?

2) how about we make it up as we go ? I can't predict the future you know ?

3) I don't see it that way.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I don't think he listened to you that well...

Oh no he did. Nero, he got a bit too excited about the stuff. Real serious problems began with Traianus and Hadrianus, though, one was too busy securing the borders and the other was too busy being generally a good man.

Damn Hadrianus, he always wanted to be a good man. He should have been deposed for a more cruel emperor, one that would have wiped out the blasphemy that is Christianity, so that true Roman paganism would have been instituted all over the world.