Gay designers Dolce and Gabbana come out against gay marriage and parenting

I can’t afford Dolce and Gabbana clothes – unless they’re doing a special mini-collection with Target – but I’d certainly want to wear them with pride now. [Note: this is Michele Hickford writing, not Col. West]

Darlings of the fashion and entertainment industry! Fabulously wealthy! Fabulously gay!

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana have “come out” to the world with their views on gay marriage and gay parenting, and darned if they don’t sound like….(gasp)… conservatives!

In an interview with Italian magazine Panorama, the pair said, “The only family is the traditional one. No chemical offspring and rented uterus. Life has a natural flow; there are things that cannot be changed.”

Quanto pazzesco!

According to Breitbart, they also said, “Procreation must be an act of love.”
“I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Uteri for rent, semen chosen from a catalogue,” Dolce stated.

Gabanna said, “The family is not a fad. In it there is a supernatural sense of belonging.”

The pair have long been outspoken about gay marriage. In 2013, when the LondonTelegraph asked them if they had ever considered getting married, they answered, “What? Never!” Dolce said, “I’m a practicing Catholic.”

Gabbana told the Daily Mail in 2006, “I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents.”

Not surprisingly, this got the sequined knickers of Elton John in a bit of twist. The music star who has fathered two children with husband David Furnish via rented uteri has called for a boycott of Dolce and Gabbana clothing and vowed never to wear it himself again.

Former tennis star Martina Navratilova who married her girlfriend late last year also tweeted her shock at “this ridiculousness” from the Italian designers.

Designer Tom Ford also recently weighed in on the pair’s comments, calling them “ignorant and insensitive” over their comments about IVF.

Yes, liberals do find it ridiculous when the progressive line is not properly followed. If you’re gay, you must be liberal, correct?

And woe betide you if you dare step off the luxuriously appointed plantation with an opinion contrary to the accepted dogma.

How DARE Dolce and Gabbana express their opinions about traditional families and their Catholic faith.

I mean, who do they think they are? Chick-fil-A?

[Note: This article was written by Michele Hickford, Editor-in-Chief]

173 COMMENTS

    • According to your bible, you embrace the sinner not the sin. They are within their rights to believe in the traditional marriage. They had a civil union, which is not the same as a marriage.

  1. but…….they’re gay? they’re basically stating that gay people don’t count and shouldn’t have rights?…………but, they’re gay and catholic???
    They must not be too serious about their religion……………

    • Trish Sweetheart they happen to be right. Being Catholic does not somehow make you better than anyone…..you would be surprised what you would find if you took lessons in the Catholic Church. No one is turned away. if we CHOOSE to turnaway, that’s your choice.

      • I’m a Deist. I don’t believe in organized religion. I don’t believe any religion is better than the other. And I believe, if you choose to love someone and decide to get married, or enter into a union, then you should have that right.
        I know Gay couples who are way better parents than the traditional family unit I grew up with. Am I saying all gays should be parents? No. But, then again not all male/female couples should be parents either.
        and………if you don’t agree with me, it’s OK too. 😉

    • Not at all… They are saying that it takes a male and a female to make a baby (which is backed up by science)… So, their position is, if you are in a homosexual relationship (as they are), there is no NATURAL way to make babies with your partner (Which is backed up by science)… They consider this to be a sacrifice that they have made for their relationship… They do not believe that IVF or surrogacy are “natural” ways to have children, and they are opposed to those options… That is their OPINION, they are not trying to stop anyone from doing anything… Elton John and company are opposed to Dolce and Gabbana’s opinion, and that’s perfectly fine, BUT they are trying to hurt them because they disagree with them… That’s oppressive and wrong.

      • Why would you assume something so ridiculous?… I am defending a gay couple for having their own opinions, while also expressing disappointment with other gay people for trying to hurt someone for having their own opinions, so I must be okay with oppressing gay people?…My entire post expresses that I am AGAINST it, so why would you say that I believe it’s “OK”?…I doubt that even YOU could explain your own thinking on this one…

  2. I find it hilarious when gays and feminists champion the liberal mantra, because that doctrine includes embracing the Muslims and allowing Sharia law. Liberals as a group are not tolerant, throw in Sharia and gays will be thrown out of windows while feminists are stoned to death. Then it will be too late to wake up.

    • Not to mention the muslim pedophiles that will be having sex with 9 year olds, its amazing the liberals think this only happens over there, lol..

      • Muslim soldiers in London had to be sent home bc they didn’t know raping infidels was against the law in jolly old England. Do you really think that mindset changes bc they move to america? Go take your daughters to Dearborn

      • Sorry kid.
        The majority of the world’s Muslims live in peace.
        Your logic is as crazy as radical feminist who thinks all men are rapists.

      • You condescending slob. 350,000,000 of your terrorist pals are radicalized. Now go suck them off Brenda.

      • Quit having weird sexual fantasies about me troll.

        by the way, even if your made up number were correct… that’s still a minority of the Muslims

      • Wrong again… as usual.
        I believe ISIS and all radical Muslims need to be wiped out.
        No matter how many times I say that, you seem to think that somehow I support radical Muslims.
        You look pretty foolish kid.

        And, unlike you, I also understand the very real external threat of a nuclear Iran… something you seem to think is okay… just an internal matter

      • I say there are 350,000,000 Muslim radicals and you shrug. Then you follow it up with pure stupidity by saying it doesn’t matter because more are not radicalized. So what kind of moron says 350,000,00 of your psychos running around is okay? And you can’t understand why blanket surveillance should be conducted? Every time you post on this subject you show us what a terrorist sympathizer you are.

      • I shrugged?
        HAHAHA
        And now you say I said radical muslims don’t matter?
        HAHAHA
        You are such an obvious liar.

        Oh… and just for good measure, you also argue that my supporting the Constitution is wrong.
        Typical

      • Civil liberties lawyers defend the civil liberties of scum too, not just wholesome people.
        The ACLU has even defended Conservative racist organizations.

      • hahaha… all that because i disagreed with you?
        Wow.
        Child molesters are sick and should be wiped out… and ISIS also needs to be wiped out… but that’s okay… anyone reading these comments can see how delusional you are being

    • Agreed. If the Westboro Baptist Church turned violent, Christianity would be outlawed in a week. This is what I NEVER understood about liberal feminists; how can you condone or silently accept Islam Faith, when women are being raped, murdered, veiled; female girls beheaded, sexually mutilated and the pedophilia running crazy in that whole ideology?? WHERE IS CODE PINK???

      • Not true. Libs ARE the Muslim platform. If you want to be a lib you can at least pay attention to your dnc which voted to take God off their platform and had classes on how to Make the u.s. government more sharia friendly. Also see how libs in England have helped them take over portions of the city of London. You really need help.

      • Wrong… that is pure paranoid fantasy thinking on your part.
        What part of liberal ideology do you think is the “Muslim platform?”

        Also you seem to think that allowing religious freedom (one of our founding prnciples0 is making the US government shariah friendly.
        Liberals are not putting religious law into US law… conservatives, however, are trying.

      • Silently accepting radical treatment of women in that grossly termed ‘religion’ when, infact, it’s a LAW, not a religion, is condoning their behavior. Feminists are silent and resigned; that’s not a feminist thing to do, IMO. Feminism cannot work with picking and choosing. IE, if you support Hilary Clinton, you have to support Sarah Palin. She’s a woman, too…but what did the media do when she was running for vice president? They destroyed her character; they mocked her motherhood and everything about her. That was a sad attack on feminism, and practically, socalled ‘feminist’ backed. IMO, that was simply a form of internalized misogyny.

        Bit by bit, in England, Sharia Law has became a serious contender with their government assigned laws. Now, to the meat of the matter; do I believe in gay marriage? It’s not for me to decide what people consider family. Do I think it chips away at traditional family? Yes, I do, but again, that’s not for me to decide what’s best for millions of people. Even if it’s a sin within my faith, who am I to call anyone else’s sins out? I have mine to worry about!

        As a rational sort of feminist; one that also represents motherhood, what I don’t believe in is abortion. Even if it’s not a feminist friendly concept, it’s very wrong to me and I cannot believe in taking a life, ever. I’d propose more welfare to care for unwanted children, if those two were on the table.

      • Saying that feminists must support every female candidate simply for their gender is absurd.
        That implies that all women are the same and if you are a feminist, I doubt you truly believe that.
        It also implies that feminists only choose based on gender

      • Do you just babble nonsense troll?

        What does any of what you wrote have to do with my comment?
        Nothing.

      • Wrong kid.
        next time read the actual link you post.
        All that that showed was that some feminists don’t see the difference between honor killings and other forms of domestic abuse that lead to murder.
        They still oppose it and speak out against it.
        They just see the cause differently.

      • Here ya go you inbred clod…………..

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/may/16/liberal-groups-attack-state-anti-sharia-statutes/

        Liberal groups attack state anti-Sharia statutes

        By Annie Yu The Washington Times – May 16, 2013, 02:24PM

        Moves by more than 30 states in recent years to curb the use of foreign law in U.S. courts has been fueled by “anti-Muslim bigotry” and will present legal and practical problems for American courts and families, according to a new report released Thursday by a pair of leading liberal interest groups.

        Legislators in at least 32 states have introduced or discussed such laws in the last two years, according the report released by the Brennan Center for Justice and the Center for American Progress (CAP). Oklahoma, Kansas, Louisiana, Tennessee and Arizona have already passed foreign law bans, while South Dakota has banned enforcement of any “religious code.”SEE RELATED:

        The law’s drafters say they are needed to preserve U.S. sovereignty and halt the incursion of foreign legal ideas and values into American law, but Daniel Mach of the American Civil Liberties Union said anti-foreign law proponents draw on longstanding nationalistic fear and distrust of other cultures. in particular Muslim “Sharia law” based on Islamic religious principles.

        “It’s quite clear that the driving force of this movement to push bans on Sharia law is anti-Muslim bigotry, plain and simple,” Mr. Mach said Thursday in a CAP discussion on the report.

      • Of course you left off the bottom of the article troll…

        *****************************************
        The Brennan Center’s Faiza Patel, a co-author of the report, said foreign laws don’t intrude on constitutional rights because they only apply when they do not conflict with U.S. laws. She brought up the example of polygamy — a practice allowed under Sharia law but not recognized in the U.S.

        The Brennan/CAP report cites potential problems for non-Muslim religious communities when marriages, adoptions,divorces and child custody agreements based on foreign law are recognized in some states but not in others. Other potential problems include complicating international business agreements, giving states too much power and invalidating the decisions of other state courts.

      • Hey slime. Here was your post…………That is nonsense … utter paranoid hysteria… what liberals support instituting shariah law?

        I gave you the answer. I gave you a link that showed where your fellow terrorists support Sharia. No changing horses
        ISIS humper.

      • hahaha… you don’t know how to read…hahaha

        The bottom of the article explains that it is NOT about instituting shariah law because shariah should not trump US law… it is about honoring contract agreements that may have been made in foreign courts, so long as they do not conflict with US Law.

        Do you understand that?
        NOT instituting shariah

    • Sharia law? Stupid post. Go live somewhere where Sharia law is actually practiced (may I suggest Saudi Arabia, or northeastern Syria?), then come back here and tell us that “liberal mantras” espouse the same thing.

  3. At this writing “intolerant” Christians are boycotting dozens of major US-based corporations for “expressing their opinions about traditional families.” Those companies include Starbucks, General Mills, Home Depot, Macy’s, Tiffany, JC Penney, and on and on and on. When gays boycott: Fascism! When Christians boycott: Jesus!

    • How does it make Christians intolerant for boycotting businesses that are showing intolerance towards Christianity? Sorry dude but boycotting a business by anyone for any reason is covered under that thing liberals don’t understand called the Constitution. BTW, I’ve not read a single post calling anyone Fascist…..except you.

      • Again you are twisted. The liberals want to shut THEm up or else Elton John wouldn’t have called for a boycott

      • hahaha…
        So you’re saying liberals aren’t allowed an opinion.
        Typical.
        Here’s how the world works…
        You are allowed your opinion… and others are allowed their opinion too and can support your or oppose you.

      • You seem confused.
        let me help you kid.
        you are allowed to voice your opinion.
        I may disagree with you and publicly oppose you.
        But the fact that I disagree with you and oppose you does not mean i think you should be denied your right to have an opinion.

      • So you support attacking people if they don’t agree with you. I remember you constantly whining about me doing that to you. Do you slimy libtards ever go one day without being hypocrites?

      • You seem inconsistent NAMBLA member………..So you support attacking people if they don’t agree with you. I remember you constantly whining about me doing that to you. Do you slimy libtards ever go one day without being hypocrites?

      • poor sensitive delusional kid… you think someone disagreeing with you is an attack.
        Run back to mommy

      • [[ poor sensitive delusional kid ]]

        Yes you are child, yes you are.

        [[ you think someone disagreeing with you is an attack.]]

        Likewise.

        [[ Run back to mommy ]]

        Yours is runnin’ me punk.

      • We are not generally allowed our opinion. Our kids get humiliated and kicked out of school for the stupidest of reasons, get zeros for grades for mentioning God, get sent home for displaying the flag, liberals attack and attempt to destroy anything and everything that doesn’t tow their line.

      • Geez, it’s getting tiresome slapping the stupid out of you every time you puke………er….post something…………..

        http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2015/03/16/nets-hype-firestorm-against-dolce-and-gabbanas-pro-traditional-family

        ABC, CBS, and NBC’s morning newscasts on Monday all touted the apparent “backlash” and “firestorm” against Italian fashion designers Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana for their support for the traditional family and condemnation of in-vitro fertilization and surrogate motherhood –

      • HAHAHA
        You think disagreeing with someone’s opinion is the same as saying they are not allowed to have an opinion.
        HAHAHA

      • ‘ HAHAHA ‘=Brenda.

        Again——–So you support attacking people if they don’t agree with you. I remember you constantly whining about me doing that to you. Do you slimy libtards ever go one day without being hypocrites?

      • Perhaps you have not read the comments posted here by liberals. So we forgive you for your ignorance.

      • The only ignorance is hyper sensitive folks who think that disagreeing with someone is the same as trying to disallow their right to have an opinion.

      • All I have? That is a characterization of how I see you. You’re a lot of noise, and on occasion a sight to see. However all the fuss you stir up is really the the equivalence of you blowing your nose and getting it on the hapless tourist in the boat.

  4. Celine Dion, Al Roker, Mariah Carey, Nicole Kidman, Courtney Cox, Brooke Shields, Emma Thompson, Christie Brinkley, Joan Lunden, and many thousands of other heterosexuals have had “synthetic children” via IVF. Jesus must hate them all too, right?

    • Dolce and Gabanna are a gay couple who are opposed to IVF and surrogacy in general… They didn’t specify gay or straight, and they certainly didn’t mention Jesus’s stance on this issue… It’s obvious that you are looking for a fight, but it’s not quite apparent with whom…

      • Dolce and Gabanna are not a couple and have not been for more than a decade. They broke up in 2003 and both have been single ever since. Hence their vitriol towards happy gay couples.

      • Okay, I should have said, “WERE a gay couple for 20 years, are still business partners, and still hold the same views that they always have”… I have not seen them express any “vitriol towards happy gay couples”.

        From Dolce and Gabanna: “This online campaigning is useless. A gay rights group put words in our mouths in bad faith, and it got out of control,” Gabbana told Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera on Tuesday. “We don’t and won’t boycott anyone.”

        He added in a statement provided to NBC News: “We firmly believe in democracy and the fundamental principle of freedom of expression that upholds it. We talked about our way of seeing reality, but it was never our intention to judge other people’s choices. We do believe in freedom and love.”

        Dolce also noted in the statement that “I was talking about my personal view, without judging other people’s choices and decisions.”…

        I’m going to go ahead and accept what they say about their own beliefs, over what you assume about their beliefs.

      • And today Stefano Gabbana posted an Instagram message comparing himself to the Charlie Hebdo victims. You still want to defend this loony tune?

      • I can find nothing on all of the vast internet that makes this claim, except your blog, and certainly no proof to back it up… In fact, it was Italian politician Roberto Formigoni (not Cabanna), who made the Hebdo comparison in an interview with the Telegraph… However, IF Cabanna DID make such a comparison, I would consider it to be a ridiculous statement made under duress (a wounded animal WILL bite you when cornered), and I would STILL defend his right to his opinion, even if I disagreed with it… I believe that EVERYONE has a right to their opinion, whether I agree with it or not (this is called, “tolerance”)… If I have an opposing opinion, I want to understand how the opposing party formulated their opinion (this is called, “being open-minded”)…If they have based their opinion on something that is false, I will inform them of the facts, and ask what their opinion is after they have more information (this is called, “educating”, “enlightening”, and “discourse”)… I draw the line at people hurting each other… I will always disagree with people who try to hurt each other.

      • Some people just love to pull out the parts they like and comment on those. So don’t dwell on it dear! No matter what you say the trolls will get you!

      • Very nicely put, and I agree with them–not necessarily their views but their overall view on life (as stated in your post).

      • Where did they address happy gay couples?? You trolls keep making stuff up and accusing others of having said things they didn’t.

  5. Please, stop any talk of “hatred” toward gays when it comes to Christians. Christians do NOT hate gays. On the contrary, we love them, as they are souls for whom Christ died. We DO oppose what the Bible calls sin, i.e., homosexual behavior, as well as any other behavior contrary to the will of God. In the words of St. John, “He who hates his brother is a murderer, and no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (I John 3:15)…

    • It seems that people who don’t know God are confused when they encounter those who do. Christians accept God’s standards, God’s definitions of sin, God’s wisdom. It’s impossible for any of us to live up to God’s standard of righteousness, which is why we all have a desperate need for our savior, Jesus Christ. Those of us who have accepted the free gift of forgiveness of sins, eternal life, the hope of heaven, and intimacy with God here and now, have been freed from the shackles of sin. We are no longer slaves to sin. We will always be tempted, and we will slip up repeatedly, but we will never again be under the power of sin because we have been reconciled to God through the sacrifice of the sinless Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, and we live in him and he lives in us. How can someone who doesn’t believe in God, who has no relationship with the holy and perfect creator of the universe, understand absolute right and wrong? People are born with the propensity to sin, and without the direct intervention of Jesus Christ, they will remain under its destructive power and die as slaves to sin. This means their standards are based on their own limited judgement, the culture they live in, what makes them feel good at the moment…none of which can be relied upon. It’s just like Paul wrote to the Christians in Corinth, “The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from
      the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand
      them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.” Marriage was instituted by God. God designed men’s and women’s bodies to complement each other. God decided how we would procreate. God knows best and he has made himself crystal clear in scripture. When people tell me that my so-called morals are ridiculous, or call me a hater because I believe same-sex marriage is wrong, I sometimes use Dana Loesch’s line, “If you have a problem with it, take it up with God.”

  6. Wow!! You people just can’t handle it when others actually have their own opinions. EJ and MN demand acceptance of diversity. Well, this is diversity guys!

    • EJ said he won’t support them and Mn said they were ridiculous.
      So?

      Neither said that they weren’t allowed their opinions… but you seem to think anyone who disagrees with them isn’t allowed an opinion

      • They did not just disagree. There was the call to boycott. That is more than a difference of opinion. But then those who want to boycott Elliot and company are just as wrong.

  7. I couldn’t ask anything more from the homosexual community than to live your life, love who you want, but don’t try to re-define marriage to include something it is not defined as. No one hates homosexuals, but lots of people hate their push to refine marriage and family.

  8. Last week the Catholic Cardinal Newman Society called for a boycott of all 379 corporations that signed the Supreme Court brief in support of same-sex marriage. These companies include Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, and Apple. The boycott campaign was promoted (you guessed it) on Twitter.

    How “intolerant”!

    On the board of directors of the Cardinal Newman Society is right wing commentator Brent Bozell, who appeared on Fox News in 2011 to call President Obama a “skinny ghetto crackhead.”

    • If I were going to tell someone to boycott something including twitter. I’d use twitter. Your brain is as twisted as your undies

    • Though Bozell’s comment was unkind and uncalled for, how does that have anything to do with this article on Dolce and Gabbana’s traditional view of marriage and family.

      • Actually, in context, Bozell’s comment was in reference to something Chris Matthews said… Chris Matthews said on MSNBC that Rush Limbaugh “looks like a car bomber…who loves torture”… Bozell asked (on FOX), what would happen on Hannity’s show if someone called Obama a “skinny ghetto crackhead”… His point was, that sort of comment wouldn’t stand on Hannity’s show, while MSNBC had no problem with Matthews’s similar comment… That’s a bit disingenuous on JoeMyGod’s behalf, then again, to be fair, the person who told him about it, probably didn’t give it to him in context, and he didn’t verify its veracity…It happens… And, it still has absolutely nothing to do with this issue.

      • You are too generous–he outright lied. Or as you say he made a mistake repeating second hand information.
        On a lighter note, Chris Matthews is crazy. Rush doesn’t look like a car bomber, he probably wouldn’t fit. With all the information we have thus far, car bombers look a lot more like skinny ghetto crackheads. Just sayin’.

  9. They might think there is nothing amiss, but both Elton John, Domenico Dolce, Stefano Gabbana, Ricky Martin, George Michael, and all others admit the fact that it is unnatural–even in their song lyrics! But hey, their moral conscience is seared. They do it anyway like a bad habit such as prostitution or trafficking-in-persons, or an addiction such as smoking hashish or driving drunk, and do not consider the negative consequences on those of us who are family: Parents, grandparents, siblings, uncles, aunts, cousins, nephews and nieces. Tolerance has feelings too!

      • I have listened to Elton John since I was a child. There was real pain in the lyrics, you could feel it, which is why I liked it. The music seemed to express someone’s true feelings–I was too young to realize the source of his pain (or Bernie’s). Generally I would rather not here the opinions of musicians–if I get there listening that is enough for me. Ricky and George, thanks but no thanks.

  10. I agree with them, obviously, but I feel bad for little kids being called “synthetic”. Whatever those who have chosen to create them have done, they don’t deserve that.

    • An adopted child wouldn’t be thought of as synthetic. A child adopted by a gay couple is like a contradiction in family terms. It’s like the pair made one decision, then another that contradicts the first. It’s like they don’t know what they want, or they’re selfish enough to ignore it. If you look at it that way, I guess. I can understand why they feel that way, but I guess I’ll just go with the choices I’ve made for me, and let others decide what they want out of life.

  11. I guess the kids are better off with two crackheads as long as it’s one man and one woman as defined in Bible. Or with a daddy that beats on mommy everyday. Or better yet with good Christian and State Rep Justin Harris of Arkansas. And end-up “re-homed” with a child rapist. I won’t even get to the part where the holier than thou self-righteous pro-life people are calling children “unatural”. These guys are rich enough they should rent a brain. Or stick to the handbags.

    • People are people, and always will be. They will surprise you in the best and worst ways, then they’ll do it again. Heterosexual couples should not be assumed to be crackheads any more than gay couples should be assumed to be excellent parents. Many gay people were heterosexual parents before their dormant gay gene kicked in. Parenting is parenting. If you’re gay and wish to raise children in that household, you should be prepared that you are subjecting that child to some unconventionality that might be very painful. It would be your job to make sure that kid(s) get the best possible shot at a happy future, which, I guess, isn’t all that different than any other parent. You just don’t need to judge people on their personal choices and opinions with regard to themselves.

      • Painful how? How do you determine that? Who decides what’s conventional? Funny how you tell not to pass judgement right after passing judgement yourself.

      • It’s not up to you, or me, or anyone else to decide. Moral relativism is a slippery slope indeed. Thankfully we were given the Word of God to tell us right from wrong. God has decreed that homosexuality is a sin and an abomination, same as abusive parents, drug addiction, etc.

        You can scream and justify it until the cows come home, but at the end of the day, every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, including your own.

      • God or the Bible didn’t keep the Harris’s from giving that little girl to that rapist. I think as far as a moral standard it’s not that relative.

      • What am I missing here? The Harris’s? Gave a little girl away to a rapist? Was that in the article somewhere?

      • Now you are somewhere on a different planet! Where did child rape come from?? I’m not passing judgment and if you don’t see how ‘suzy has two mommies’ could cause suzy some pain, you are willfully ignorant. I don’t have to pass judgment. I just try to take the best path for me myself. Now don’t go raping children! Please!

      • I am going to pretend you are engaging in serious conversation, which I doubt. It’s not a cut-and-dried issue. Rape is awful in any context and the rape of children is something you will burn over. How does gay marriage become the rape of a six year old boy?

      • He obviously hasn’t read any of the many books that kids from gay parents has written !! Some people don’t do there research or get facts before spewing horse shit out there mouths !!

      • Well kid, I was raped as a 6 year old in the foster care system many years ago. Not conventional, I assure you. No better way to find out waaaaay early you are not gay. That being said, I believe it was painful on the part of my next set of foster parents to deal with the aftermath. I assume from your monicker and your little picture that you consider yourself to be a minority wunderkind, in possession of all things wise and worthy. News flash. Your opinion is not the only valid one. Perhaps not even a valid one. keep an open mind, and I do not mean just let the breeze blow through your ears. Listen, weigh evidence, and search outside your own little corner of the world. You might even learn something. I take leave to doubt that, but you might.

    • I agree with D&G above because of the definition of Marriage. I don’t ever recall a word that has been in existence for such a long time it’s definition getting changed. Marriage means between a Man and a Women. We need to call it Civil Unions and the govt can legally allow us the same rights as a Married Couple but it should be called Civil Union – before you get your panties in a bunch I’m Gay and also believe that aborting a fetus into the first trimester should be illegal. – I think 30 days is long enough to decide if you should keep the child or not waiting any longer and aborting it after that time frame is murder. Currently you can abort up until the 24th week and that is WRONG

    • The only two options are crackheads for parents or gays for parents? Wow that’s not even addressing the issue, which is having real biological humans or ones manufactured in a laboratory.

      • Actually children never have a choice on who their parents are. Sometimes it is the very real choice. What you call a life manufactured others call it a life saved. Who are you to judge?

      • Can save a life via adoption. Don’t need a lab for that. Humans are not goods to be bought, ordered and manufactured in a factory.

      • Like I just said what if means getting adopted by a sick animal. I thought pro-life meant respect for life above all. Truth it’s just euphemism for self-righteous bullshit artists.

      • What’s up with the fallacies in all your statements? When did I meantion “pro-life”? Youre changing the issue and buck dancing Repeatedly. Sense you brought it up, I don’t consider lab experiments to be human.

      • Sadly you turned out to be malfunctioned. Lab children can never be considered natural, can a stuffed animal be considered a living being? It too was made in a factory. Crack head children? Domestic abuse? Church molestation? So you are implying that homosexuals that “customize and create their children” raise them immune to the abuse? And their highly dysfunctional families do not have violence? You realize that when a child grows old enough and learns that he was created like THAT he’s be pissed/suicidal/depressed though most likely all of the above even (which is a sure thing) he’d grow to be gay, because what chance is there to be straight with gay parents? Dont lie it’s almost 0

      • The only sad thing is how freaking stupid you are. How exactly do you “customize a child”. Seriously did your parents really waste and education on you? Where did you get your scientific data other than your malfunctioning brain? Explain one thing, how do children with straight parents end up gay? Who the hell are you to know their relationship are dysfunctional? Do you get invited to gay threesomes?

      • Who the hell were you when you said that straight families have child abuses aswell as daddy beating up mommy. Since you are a fatass troll, I just threw everything you said in reverse back at you. You were being a self-rightious judgmental spoiled brat.

      • On a serious note though. gay people are extremely selfish, they want children? Fine adopt one, save someone’s life, straight couples adopt children ALOT, how better are homosexuals? Are the just above taking someone else’s child? Spoiled, selfish. Also fun fact is the most intolerant people are LGBT members.

  12. Reading these comments is painful to me … because so many of you don’t know how to spell, or don’t take the time to correct what you’ve written before you hit “Enter.”

  13. Finally people of integrity. I am all for health too. Being gay is unsanitary and the men have a very high ratio of aids related diseases or contacting it.

    • And speaking of God below, that was God’s idea to have marriage between a man and a woman. He thought it up and he defined it.

  14. I have a gay child.. and I still agree with D&G.. a true parent wants to protect a child.when they are gay it is a heartbreak to watch.. so much hate in the world & indifference. I still believe in a mother and father giving a child a balanced up bringing.. in todays society this is near impossible..I didn’t want children for this reason, but my husband wanted us to bring in balanced children hoping to help society. And now I have a gay/transgendered daughter/son adult and a autistic son..so I guess I got a balanced family huh. but they are still mine..and love them same..

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here