Well now we have at least one valid reason to kill a feotus, the greens have got to be happy about that, because even the jeezus mob would agree about aborting such a defective non-human.


Man, I love science when it does something useful  :)



Being gay could be in the DNA.
Scientists have found two stretches of DNA linked to homosexuality in men.
The confirmation of the existence of a ‘gay gene’ or genes will strengthen arguments that homosexuality is a matter of biology, rather than choice.
However, it also raises the prospect of a genetic test that could be used by insurance companies to discriminate against clients or by pregnant women to abort gay babies.
In the study, Chicago University researchers analysed the DNA of more than 400 pairs of gay brothers, recruited at Gay Pride festivals at marches over several years.

This revealed flagged up two pieces of DNA that seem to be linked to homosexuality.
It is not known which of the many genes they contain are key or how they affect the development of sexual orientation.
However, the result, revealed at a science event in Chicago, backs up a contentious 1993 study.
That research, the first to find evidence of a ‘gay gene’, created a storm of controversy, which was further fuelled when other scientists failed to find a genetic link.
Dr Michael Bailey from Northwestern University in Illinois, who contributed to the latest study, said it is the biggest of its kind.
He added: ‘Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice. Our findings suggest there may be genes at play – we found evidence for two sets that affect whether a man is gay or straight.
‘Although this could one day lead to a pre-natal test for male sexual orientation, it would not be very accurate, as there are other factors that can influence the outcome.’
Despite this, he would not would not object to a prenatal test being developed.
He said: ‘Clearly parents should not be allowed to torture or kill babies. But they can currently choose to terminate a pregnancy early on, so they should be allowed to have as much information on the future child as possible.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2559021/Being-gay-DNA-researchers-claim-controversial-new-study.html#ixzz2tRNiTr3o

So gay couples can engineer gay children now bigol.


Congrats.

Well now we have at least one valid reason to kill a feotus

_______

you are forgiven

for you know not what you do

namaste

ॐ

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:37am:

So gay couples can engineer gay children now bigol. Congrats.

You still have to find a genetisist willing to engineer defective babies, we just need to go to an abortion clinic.


And just kill them at will because they are defective, I guess we win again.  ;D  ;D


See i was not too keen on abortions, but now I can see real value in killing the unborn, a real win for your arguments greens

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:42am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:37am: So gay couples can engineer gay children now bigol. Congrats. You still have to find a genetisist willing to engineer defective babies, we just need to go to an abortion clinic. And just kill them at will because they are defective, I guess we win again.  ;D  ;D See i was not too keen on abortions, but now I can see real value in killing the unborn, a real win for your arguments greens

Defective … kids are not born homophobic, it's learnt.
Nurture, not nature.


.

You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess.

SOB

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:44am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:37am: So gay couples can engineer gay children now bigol. Congrats. You still have to find a genetisist willing to engineer defective babies, we just need to go to an abortion clinic. And just kill them at will because they are defective, I guess we win again.  ;D  ;D See i was not too keen on abortions, but now I can see real value in killing the unborn, a real win for your arguments greens Defective … kids are not born homophobic, it's learnt. Nurture, not nature. .

Lifestyle abortions a dream come true isn't it greens?

Tested and killed immediately, thank to progressives wanting to p1ss of the jeezus mob.


The end of homophia, by ensuring the end of homosexuallity  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D another win for the progressives

This means gays can be tested to see..

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:47am:

You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB

Ummm, yeah, ok, thanks for that nugget of useless information

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:48am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:44am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:37am: So gay couples can engineer gay children now bigol. Congrats. You still have to find a genetisist willing to engineer defective babies, we just need to go to an abortion clinic. And just kill them at will because they are defective, I guess we win again.  ;D  ;D See i was not too keen on abortions, but now I can see real value in killing the unborn, a real win for your arguments greens Defective … kids are not born homophobic, it's learnt. Nurture, not nature. . Lifestyle abortions a dream come true isn't it greens? Tested and killed immediately, thank to progressives wanting to p1ss of the jeezus mob. The end of homophia, by ensuring the end of homosexuallity  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D another win for the progressives

Yet will it.
It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour.

It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children.

FOETUS OR FETUS

Your choice

The Sexual Assault Hotline

You rape em
We scrape em
No Foetus
Can beat us

Call 1800 Yabby Pump

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:47am:

You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB

They had some americans giving talks on late term abortions and stuff on foxtel: yuck, but i thought the least i could do was listen and learn ======>> Y U   C    K  K   K     K !     !     !

If anything, bigol's thread here is a great push for gay marrage in Australia.

The conservatives are excluding a natural group of people from marriage on the bases of their homophobia.

Marriage Equality Now !

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:53am:

Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children.

I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group.


We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea.


The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:59am:

If anything, bigol's thread here is a great push for gay marrage in Australia. The conservatives are excluding a natural group of people from marriage on the bases of their homophobia. Marriage Equality Now !

We could end that discussion now too, lifestyle abortions mean all the homos will be irradicated and no need for gay marriage.


The benefits are endless with this genetic testing and couple with easy no questions asked abortions.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:49am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:47am: You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB Ummm, yeah, ok, thanks for that nugget of useless information

Well i doubt a foetus can be tested for the gene.

SOB

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:34am:

The confirmation of the existence of a ‘gay gene’ or genes will strengthen arguments that homosexuality is a matter of biology, rather than choice.

Why, oh why*, is it still presented as being wholly one or wholly the other?  It, just like everything else, is a bit of both.




*rhetorical.  Perpetuating irresolvable arguments between two, equally incorrect camps = ongoing clicks = $$$$. 

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:01am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other.

Well the internet has heard of war-porn but is this forum really ready to become globally famous for naming and shaming the phenomena of abortion-porn ?????  :-[ :-? :-?  :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:06am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:47am: You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB Ummm, yeah, ok, thanks for that nugget of useless information Well i doubt a foetus can be tested for the gene. SOB

That's because you are not very bright or particularly well read; makes you ignorant in the extreme.


Do you believe this because you believe that a foetus does not have DNA and thereforehas nothing to test or that a feoetus is surrounded by an impenetrable barrier and protected from testing.


Because the story clearly states that is will very much be able to be tested in the near future, you have to read it to know that.

Gnads wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:55am:

FOETUS OR FETUS Your choice The Sexual Assault Hotline You rape em We scrape em No Foetus Can beat us Call 1800 Yabby Pump

Your sense of humour, massively pointed as it is - has taken a serious downturn since you have had contact with me......

;D    ;D   ;D

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:01am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other.

You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it


Famous homosexuals from history :

Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on.


You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence.


Put up or reinforce your laughable status as villiage id. on this board.

... wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:06am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: The confirmation of the existence of a ‘gay gene’ or genes will strengthen arguments that homosexuality is a matter of biology, rather than choice. Why, oh why*, is it still presented as being wholly one or wholly the other?  It, just like everything else, is a bit of both. *rhetorical.  Perpetuating irresolvable arguments between two, equally incorrect camps = ongoing clicks = $$$$.

But why take the chance, and progressive love to kill the unborn, so it is a win - win

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:06am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: The confirmation of the existence of a ‘gay gene’ or genes will strengthen arguments that homosexuality is a matter of biology, rather than choice. Why, oh why*, is it still presented as being wholly one or wholly the other?  It, just like everything else, is a bit of both. *rhetorical.  Perpetuating irresolvable arguments between two, equally incorrect camps = ongoing clicks = $$$$.  But why take the chance, and progressive love to kill the unborn, so it is a win - win

Honky has a point, does bisexuals have the gay gene bigol?

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:06am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: The confirmation of the existence of a ‘gay gene’ or genes will strengthen arguments that homosexuality is a matter of biology, rather than choice. Why, oh why*, is it still presented as being wholly one or wholly the other?  It, just like everything else, is a bit of both. *rhetorical.  Perpetuating irresolvable arguments between two, equally incorrect camps = ongoing clicks = $$$$.  But why take the chance, and progressive love to kill the unborn, so it is a win - win

Yes, I'd love to see the knots they tie themselves in trying to justify that one.

It's abhorrent to abort on the basis of genetic defect - the only acceptable reason for abortion is to preserve your lifestyle. 

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:09am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. Well the internet has heard of war-porn but is this forum really ready to become globally famous for naming and shaming the phenomena of abortion-porn ?????  :-[ :-? :-?  :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

No, please don't let it be so... we haven't got our house in order yet- our global mod is fossil fooled incorporated yet our name gives the impression that we have uncensored debate surrounding all issues toward making the country of Australia better and a more legitimate world citizen.... aggggghhhhhhhh we are not ready to host the worlds interested partys who simply want to checkout the cojones of a political forum who dared invent the term 'abortion-porn'.... AAAAUrrrrrrrghhhhh!!! We're...just not readddddddy aaaaaaargggghhh  :o :o ;D

**   quick,... everyone grab a broom,... do something aaaaaauuuurghhhhhh !!!!!!  :-?  ;D ;D

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status on this board.

It is defective because it is in only a small non-replication portion of the population and as progressive know, abortions are a great way of getting the lifestyle you feel you deserve and who realy wants to deal with a homo kid all day.

It a lifestyle choice, it's what you progressive have been actively promoting; now we all have a vallid reason to kill off the unwanted


You have been one of the main proponents of lifestyle abortions, you know kill it if it interferes with you personal lifestyle; well embrace the progressive new world you wanted.

Isn't science great?

... wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:17am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: ... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:06am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: The confirmation of the existence of a ‘gay gene’ or genes will strengthen arguments that homosexuality is a matter of biology, rather than choice. Why, oh why*, is it still presented as being wholly one or wholly the other?  It, just like everything else, is a bit of both. *rhetorical.  Perpetuating irresolvable arguments between two, equally incorrect camps = ongoing clicks = $$$$.  But why take the chance, and progressive love to kill the unborn, so it is a win - win Yes, I'd love to see the knots they tie themselves in trying to justify that one. It's abhorrent to abort on the basis of genetic defect - the only acceptable reason for abortion is to preserve your lifestyle.

Sad but true, we all want what the progressives want us to want.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status as villiage id. on this board.

Um, how do you know jesus was a homosexual?

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:18am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status on this board. It is defective because it is in only a small non-replication portion of the population and as progressive know, abortions are a great way of getting the lifestyle you feel you deserve and who realy wants to deal with a homo kid all day. It a lifestyle choice, it's what you progressive have been actively promoting; now we all have a vallid reason to kill off the unwanted You have been one of the main proponents of lifestyle abortions, you know kill it if it interferes with you personal lifestyle; well embrace the progressive new world you wanted. Isn't science great?

You are now getting your tail in a spin and mixing things up.

Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send.

If more of the population were to breed gay children then we would have the best of both worlds … the drive of more gay people amongst us and reducing the risk of the human race from the situation of plague population proportions in a few generations.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:24am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status as villiage id. on this board. Um, how do you know jesus was a homosexual?

The bible tells us

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:27am:

Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send.

My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:18am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status on this board. It is defective because it is in only a small non-replication portion of the population and as progressive know, abortions are a great way of getting the lifestyle you feel you deserve and who realy wants to deal with a homo kid all day. It a lifestyle choice, it's what you progressive have been actively promoting; now we all have a vallid reason to kill off the unwanted You have been one of the main proponents of lifestyle abortions, you know kill it if it interferes with you personal lifestyle; well embrace the progressive new world you wanted. Isn't science great?

2 girls up the street from me as a kid had a dad who turned gay..

One of those kids.. NAH CAN'T SAY THAT!!

but the point is.. you're an idiot  :o

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:27am:

You are now getting your tail in a spin and mixing things up. Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. If more of the population were to breed gay children then we would have the best of both worlds … the drive of more gay people amongst us and reducing the risk of the human race from the situation of plague population proportions in a few generations.

But this is about lifestyle abortions.

Look imagine if you will.

You're a hetrosexual male and you invite a few of your mates over for a BBQ, all of a sudden your homo kid burst out in to a supergay song and dance routine. That is not the lifestyle anyone would want.

Wouldn't you want to save yourself the embarrassment of that?

So in keeping with the progressive lifestyle abortion choices funded by the taxpayer, you would test and kill until you got a good one.


Don't overthink this, no-one aborts a viable foetus because they want to save the planet; they do so because of selfish personal needs, just ike the progressives have told them.


Could you think of a better progressive argument for lifestyle abortions than that, so it must be right.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:29am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status as villiage id. on this board. Um, how do you know jesus was a homosexual? The bible tells us

Um, some special version with extra chapter perhaps!???!

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:12am:

Gnads wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:55am: FOETUS OR FETUS Your choice The Sexual Assault Hotline You rape em We scrape em No Foetus Can beat us Call 1800 Yabby Pump Your sense of humour, massively pointed as it is - has taken a serious downturn since you have had contact with me...... ;D    ;D   ;D

You think? ;D ;D ;D

... wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:31am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world.

Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system.


If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:39am:

... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:31am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world. Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system. If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off.

And that is why we progressives promote lifestyle type abortions; why bother with a kid that is an embarrassment to your family


Keep the good ones and kill the defects

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:39am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:29am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status as villiage id. on this board. Um, how do you know jesus was a homosexual? The bible tells us Um, some special version with extra chapter perhaps!???!

The disciple whom Jesus loved is referred to, specifically, six times in John's gospel:
It is this disciple who, while reclining beside Jesus at the Last Supper, asks Jesus, after being requested by Peter to do so, who it is that will betray him.[Jn 13:23-25]
Later at the crucifixion, Jesus tells his mother, "Woman, here is your son", and to the Beloved Disciple he says, "Here is your mother."[Jn 19:26-27]
When Mary Magdalene discovers the empty tomb, she runs to tell the Beloved Disciple and Peter. The two men rush to the empty tomb and the Beloved Disciple is the first to reach the empty tomb. However, Peter is the first to enter.[Jn 20:1-10]
In John 21, the last chapter of the Gospel of John, the Beloved Disciple is one of seven fishermen involved in the miraculous catch of 153 fish.[Jn 21:1-25] [5]
Also in the book's final chapter, after Jesus hints to Peter how Peter will die, Peter sees the Beloved Disciple following them and asks, "What about him?". Jesus answers, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!"[John 21:20-23]
Finally, again in the gospel's last chapter, it states that the very book itself is based on the written testimony of the disciple whom Jesus loved.[John 21:24]

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:39am:

... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:31am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world. Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system. If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off.

That's a nice way of justifying "ethnic cleansing".

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:42am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:39am: ... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:31am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world. Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system. If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off. And that is why we progressives promote lifestyle type abortions; why bother with a kid that is an embarrassment to your family Keep the good ones and kill the defects

I would side more with a one child policy worldwide with financial disadvantages to the parents if they breed more unless it was twins or other multiples.

... wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:46am:

____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:39am: ... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:31am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world. Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system. If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off. That's a nice way of justifying "ethnic cleansing".

A one child policy globally is not ethinic cleansing.
Ethnic cleansing is more the realm of bigol's agenda.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:44am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:39am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:29am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:14am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:01am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:53am: Yet will it. It would be like trying to end a certain eye colour. It would be easier to end homophobia and then no one would care about the sexual energy of their children. I think killing off a defect gene type would be much easier that setting up concentration camps to re-educate an entire population to accept a defecting person or group. We all benefit with this type of abortion and it's taxpayer funded so you know it's a good idea. The progressives get more abortions, they love nothing more than killing otherwise viable foetuses for lifestyle reason, and we all get less homos, so the whinging will certainly decrease without them constantly bleating about some sh1t or other. You call homosexuality a defective gene yet is it Famous homosexuals from history : Jesus Christ, Epaminondas, Alexander The Great, Hadrian, Antinos, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Pietro Aretino, Cyrano de Bergerac, Richard Cromwell and so on. You calling all the of gay and lesbians that have helped shaped the human races as defective without any evidence. Put up or reinforce your laughable status as villiage id. on this board. Um, how do you know jesus was a homosexual? The bible tells us Um, some special version with extra chapter perhaps!???! The disciple whom Jesus loved is referred to, specifically, six times in John's gospel: It is this disciple who, while reclining beside Jesus at the Last Supper, asks Jesus, after being requested by Peter to do so, who it is that will betray him.[Jn 13:23-25] Later at the crucifixion, Jesus tells his mother, "Woman, here is your son", and to the Beloved Disciple he says, "Here is your mother."[Jn 19:26-27] When Mary Magdalene discovers the empty tomb, she runs to tell the Beloved Disciple and Peter. The two men rush to the empty tomb and the Beloved Disciple is the first to reach the empty tomb. However, Peter is the first to enter.[Jn 20:1-10] In John 21, the last chapter of the Gospel of John, the Beloved Disciple is one of seven fishermen involved in the miraculous catch of 153 fish.[Jn 21:1-25] [5] Also in the book's final chapter, after Jesus hints to Peter how Peter will die, Peter sees the Beloved Disciple following them and asks, "What about him?". Jesus answers, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!"[John 21:20-23] Finally, again in the gospel's last chapter, it states that the very book itself is based on the written testimony of the disciple whom Jesus loved.[John 21:24]

Fair enough.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:49am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:39am: ... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:31am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world. Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system. If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off. And that is why we progressives promote lifestyle type abortions; why bother with a kid that is an embarrassment to your family Keep the good ones and kill the defects I would side more with a one child policy worldwide with financial disadvantages to the parents if they breed more unless it was twins or other multiples.

Interesting stuff!

This thread could become globally important..

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:50am:

... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:46am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:39am: ... wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:31am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:27am: Not reproducing, especially in an over populated world is a god send. My goodness , Herr Hitler!  Why you just come right out and say what you're thinking -  that there's too many slopes and darkies in the world. Undualtion in a natural occurances on planets … and a rotating planet, there has to be nights unless there are two or more suns in the solar system. If you are using racist slurs, then no. There are too many humans for the limited resources and we should make policies so to reduce our population before it kills us all off. That's a nice way of justifying "ethnic cleansing". A one child policy globally is not ethinic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing is more the realm of bigol's agenda.

Not my  agenda, the progressive agenda and therefore the only correct agenda.


Killing the unborn for any lifestyle reason is a valid reason, it's what we taxpayers pay for; so to stop and potential embarassment at BBQs, it is valid to kill homo foetuses.

It's what we progressives have been working toward for years.


An easy 10% reduction in the population is a good thing is it not? No more useless eaters. interuption the progressive lifestyle

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:53am:

Interesting stuff! This thread could become globally important..

It is very important, soon we will be able to test for homo genes and thanks to our progressive abortion laws we can kill the little buggers beofre they embarrass us at mixed parties.


Because lifestyle choices is what at stake here

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 12:00pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:53am: Interesting stuff! This thread could become globally important.. It is very important, soon we will be able to test for homo genes and thanks to our progressive abortion laws we can kill the little buggers beofre they embarrass us at mixed parties. Because lifestyle choices is what at stake here

It would certainly save a helluva lot of heartache. 

Imagine going through all the trouble and expense of raising a kid, only to find out the line dies with you anyway because their sexuality precludes them from giving you grandchildren.  All that bullshit, for nothing. 

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 11:12am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:06am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:47am: You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB Ummm, yeah, ok, thanks for that nugget of useless information Well i doubt a foetus can be tested for the gene. SOB That's because you are not very bright or particularly well read; makes you ignorant in the extreme. Do you believe this because you believe that a foetus does not have DNA and thereforehas nothing to test or that a feoetus is surrounded by an impenetrable barrier and protected from testing. Because the story clearly states that is will very much be able to be tested in the near future, you have to read it to know that.

I didnt say i believed anything - im simply saying that a foetus is prolly too small to fool around with. They are more likely to do any tests when its larger and turning into a human. I see you are - as usual - resorting to abuse when anyone disagrees with you.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 12:19pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:12am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:06am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:47am: You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB Ummm, yeah, ok, thanks for that nugget of useless information Well i doubt a foetus can be tested for the gene. SOB That's because you are not very bright or particularly well read; makes you ignorant in the extreme. Do you believe this because you believe that a foetus does not have DNA and thereforehas nothing to test or that a feoetus is surrounded by an impenetrable barrier and protected from testing. Because the story clearly states that is will very much be able to be tested in the near future, you have to read it to know that. I didnt say i believed anything - im simply saying that a foetus is prolly too small to fool around with. They are more likely to do any tests when its larger and turning into a human. I see you are - as usual - resorting to abuse when anyone disagrees with you. SOB

He's a killer!

Research in the hands of imbeciles is a dangerous thing


BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:34am:

Well now we have at least one valid reason to kill a feotus, the greens have got to be happy about that, because even the jeezus mob would agree about aborting such a defective non-human. Being gay could be in the DNA. Scientists have found two stretches of DNA linked to homosexuality in men...

People who understand language will know the difference between the terms 'linked' and 'caused by'.

'Linked' could simply mean that there is a slightly higher likelihood of someone ending up choosing to be a homosexual. It is still a choice.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 12:19pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:12am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 11:06am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:49am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:47am: You cant kill babies in australia. They are foetuses. In america though you can do it i guess. SOB Ummm, yeah, ok, thanks for that nugget of useless information Well i doubt a foetus can be tested for the gene. SOB That's because you are not very bright or particularly well read; makes you ignorant in the extreme. Do you believe this because you believe that a foetus does not have DNA and thereforehas nothing to test or that a feoetus is surrounded by an impenetrable barrier and protected from testing. Because the story clearly states that is will very much be able to be tested in the near future, you have to read it to know that. I didnt say i believed anything - im simply saying that a foetus is prolly too small to fool around with. They are more likely to do any tests when its larger and turning into a human. I see you are - as usual - resorting to abuse when anyone disagrees with you. SOB

Dude....they routinely do genetic testing on nearly every pregnancy for things like cystic fibrosis and downs syndrome, and have done so for many years already.

True Colours wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 12:40pm:

Research in the hands of imbeciles is a dangerous thing BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: Well now we have at least one valid reason to kill a feotus, the greens have got to be happy about that, because even the jeezus mob would agree about aborting such a defective non-human. Being gay could be in the DNA. Scientists have found two stretches of DNA linked to homosexuality in men... People who understand language will know the difference between the terms 'linked' and 'caused by'. 'Linked' could simply mean that there is a slightly higher likelihood of someone ending up choosing to be a homosexual. It is still a choice.

Yeah it's like choosing to be heterosexual.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 12:51pm:

True Colours wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 12:40pm: Research in the hands of imbeciles is a dangerous thing BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: Well now we have at least one valid reason to kill a feotus, the greens have got to be happy about that, because even the jeezus mob would agree about aborting such a defective non-human. Being gay could be in the DNA. Scientists have found two stretches of DNA linked to homosexuality in men... People who understand language will know the difference between the terms 'linked' and 'caused by'. 'Linked' could simply mean that there is a slightly higher likelihood of someone ending up choosing to be a homosexual. It is still a choice. Yeah it's like choosing to be heterosexual.

Millions of people, from those ranging from ~2-4 on the kinsey scale have done just that. 

True Colours wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 12:40pm:

Research in the hands of imbeciles is a dangerous thing BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:34am: Well now we have at least one valid reason to kill a feotus, the greens have got to be happy about that, because even the jeezus mob would agree about aborting such a defective non-human. Being gay could be in the DNA. Scientists have found two stretches of DNA linked to homosexuality in men... People who understand language will know the difference between the terms 'linked' and 'caused by'. 'Linked' could simply mean that there is a slightly higher likelihood of someone ending up choosing to be a homosexual. It is still a choice.

We progressives believe that any lifestyle choice to kill the unborn is valid, even if it is based on the application of a single word in a whole story.

It's just about killing foetuses that may or may not interfere with ones personal lifestyle

It's progressive therefore it is valid


Just ask greens wank and any other pro-abortionist, the reason only needs to be tenuous to be acceptable to a progressive.


So your semantics are invalid, move on

F-ck the term "progressive" is overused on here.... I blame a lot of it on that halfwit Misty.

I guess it's just part of a continuous line of overused words that become a fad for a while - especially on forums such as this one.

Last year's was "socialist".... every single f-cking thing the more simple of those on the right didn't like was "socialist"... now it seems it's "progressive".

I guess creativeness isn't a conservative strong point.

____ wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 10:44am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 16th, 2014 at 10:37am: So gay couples can engineer gay children now bigol. Congrats. You still have to find a genetisist willing to engineer defective babies, we just need to go to an abortion clinic. And just kill them at will because they are defective, I guess we win again.  ;D  ;D See i was not too keen on abortions, but now I can see real value in killing the unborn, a real win for your arguments greens Defective … kids are not born homophobic, it's learnt. Nurture, not nature. .

In the past homosexuality was punished by prisons which was very undeserved as they are born that way.

This has been corrected but now, it's gone to the extremes.

They seek marriage. . . Will that make anal penetration respectable? A lot of couples just shack up and, marriage being temporary these days, it may be the best option.

The point is: what will the gays demand next? That we genuflect to them?

I find the Mardi Gras pathetic and find nothing entertaining about movies with a homosexual theme.

Fortunately, it wasn't until I was 17 years of age before being thrown into confusion and revulsion by the sight of two obese, middle-aged foreign males tongue-kissing in the dimness at the back of a restaurant

My parents had been on friendly terms with what were then known as 'poofters' and 'nancy boys', several of whom ran restaurants on the Gold Coast

So no, I wasn't raised to find homosexuality disgusting, Greens Win

When my children were young, I bought them dolls, bought them tractors and Matchbox cars, etc. despite they were male and female.  I left it up to them to decide what to play with.  So didn't raise homophobes either, Greens Win

If the vast majority are heterosexual and if the vast majority look askance at homosexuality, it means heterosexuality is considered normal the homosexuality is not.  It's that simple

Life_goes_on wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 2:02pm:

F-ck the term "progressive" is overused on here.... I blame a lot of it on that halfwit Misty. I guess it's just part of a continuous line of overused words that become a fad for a while - especially on forums such as this one. Last year's was "socialist".... every single f-cking thing the more simple of those on the right didn't like was "socialist"... now it seems it's "progressive". I guess creativeness isn't a conservative strong point.

It would be greens who introduced and uses that word constantly to describe the socialist idealouges, like himself.

If socialist want a name to describe who they are I'd be more than happy to give a few apt descriptions based on what I think of them.  ;D

I have always thought BO was as unpleasant as the face on his avatar.

This thread proves my point.

Homophobic, nasty, full of hate and bile.

Perhaps he has been out in the Townsville sun too long?

  8-)  8-)