Actually, from what I've noticed, you are tolerent of anything and everything. Basically not considering the effect things will have on society in the long run, but how each individual circumstance may effect those few minority individuals in the short run. It's a very limited scope of thought, but it's the norm in our country.
You have yet to give one example (beside what you see with you own eyes on the gay issue) of me being tolerant
of anything and everything. But since you seem to just make stuff up as you go along, I won't expect much.
You're right about about all of your posts though. You never back up any of your opinions with any facts.
Turbo, one positive impact that gay couples have had on society is all the kids that have been adopted by
them. Now, instead of being in some foster home with no parents, they'll be in a home with two people
who love each other and who love and support the child.
The boldened part is very funny, IMO.
Editorials, or OPINIONS, are the right of every human being. Facts are/can be just reiterating what some doofus feels on the matter because he researched another doofus. To claim that a certain amount of a sampled population as a result of research is "fact" is very laughable to me. The problem with human logic is there is too much room for error, and absolutely no room for perfection.
Except I was talking about ALL of Java's posts which he referenced in another post. You must have missed that,
Opinions can be backed up by evidence. That's what I meant.
I once gave an opinion that the Great Flood was caused by a set of tidal waves that hit the planet
after a comet (or numerous comets) hit the Earth 13,000 or so years ago. Spartan asked if I knew
of any scientific evidence to back up that opinion. I did and linked to it. So yes, an opinion can be
supported by evidence. Or, like Java and Turbo you can make claims that have no evidence to
support them.
Now, I'm not saying that just because I link to studies that support my opinion, I am 100% right.
But when debating an issue, I would think somebody would present at least SOME evidence to
make their point. That's normally how debates go.
As far as the "quip" about gay parents being better parents because they love each other is basing your
opinion that all gay couples live in much better harmony than all heterosexual couples do.
Never said gay parents live in better harmony. I think you're seeing things. Gay couples are just like
heterosexual couples when it comes to how they get along and how they relate to each other.
Might it be difficult for the kids to adapt? Yes. Does it have any long term effects on the kids?
So far, the data says NO. It would be great if all kids could have their biological parents taking
care of them. But in this world, that's not a reality. So, they get a same sex couple that is
willing to love them. It seems that some people would rather they be put back in a foster
home because living with gay parents might make them gay. Right Turbo? Like I said,
no evidence for that. One can say, "It's common sense!" But unless you can show some
data, the common sense is wrong.
With that, again, I find a tremendous amount of bias, and total flaw...that is like saying ALL gay
couples love each other, and provide a perfect environ for a child...
Never said that.
sometimes, being raised in a foster home could be beneficial, no? What if the people running the foster
home were very caring, very dedicated people?
I know some foster parents who are great parents. But there is a reason why social workers try to
find permanent homes for these kids.
What if the gay couple used "X" to enhance their lifestyle?
Now you sound like Turbo. Obviously, you don't want that. Do I actually have to explain
that to you?
Gay couples have just as many flaws as hetero couples do.
Really? I thought they were perfect. I've said so thousands of times.
Being adopted, or raised in a "coupled" environment doesn't mean life is good. Ask Harry Friggin' Potter. 
Once again, you're stating the obvious.
