Does your country allow this?

Yes
Yes to marriage, no to the adoption of children
Couldn't care less what they want to do with each other, but I wont support normalizing this for children until they reach a age where they can think and decide for their own.

What said.
>your sister
Hmmmm

Attached: 1500886734490.gif (300x225, 484K)

>Spot qt
>Become friends
>She introduces me to her dyke gf
>Abort and cut any contact
>This happens 4 times

Attached: 1538951779548.jpg (597x800, 79K)

>If being gay or straight were a choice, I imagine everyone would choose to be straight so they don't have to live their lives as pariahs.
Fucking this, thank you. I don't know why it's not obvious to more people.

this

They're all fat bald and old

Attached: 1444232810315.jpg (306x306, 20K)

Yes
No
Because loving means never having to give a reason

So you'd rather let orphans grow up without a family?

Attached: bf5c65d68def4e3c7e67b7528cf00de2--lgbt-rights-human-rights.jpg (640x905, 121K)

I meant to quote OP, whatever

>its the year 2200
>westerners look and wonder how it all collapsed

>it's the year 1990
>westerners look and wonder why Poland collapsed

It's funny because Romania is passing a law to prohibit it

Disgust is a bit too universal argument.

>is passing a law
the vote failed miserably

No
No
If they're allowed, it will open the flood gate, nonce will demand it too.

>it year 600000BC
>Grug smash rock
>other Grugs no smash rock
>wonder why village collapse

Sure, since its not something between the parents but it involved a third person in this case.
Also nice to see how its really a step by step of squeezing their ideals onto society.
>We only want to be with each other, we dont want to push it onto others
>We only want our marriage recognized, we dont want to push it onto others
>We only want to adopt children, we dont want to push it onto others

Also:
>According to science
Just 70-80 years ago we were fine with racial studies and such which are at least considered taboo by now, but suddently muh-science-says is an argument?

that comic is the "ideal" of homo relationship; the reality is they're going all out, doing the most degenerate you could ever imagine, naked, fucking, sucking and anti-everything in public for parades. A bunch of rioters.

No
No
Because it's primarily a fetish. And evidence suggests children raised by homosexuals are more likely to experience gender and sexual disorders hence explaining the rise of faggotry of western countries.
BTW I have nothing against gays and I think they could do whatever they want in their homes without disturbing everybody else and their sense of normality.

>we only want to be treated equally
hard to understand, eh?

I can show you more degenerate shit which hetero couples have done, so what is your point? I'm not defending "pride parades" (aka freak shows), but you have a pretty skewed picture of how regular gay people behave

>two guys marrying each other will cause the collapse of society

Attached: the 1950s were the pinnacle of human civilization.jpg (1920x1081, 154K)

And you know this because the homosexual community in Malaysia is so extensive

>Equally
Again as I said, I couldn't care less what a grown up adult does in his free time and in his own bed. Do whatever you want (unless your special activity costs the tax-payer a lot for whatever reason), but I doubt a kid can really see and understand what it means to grow up under these circumstances. If the kids wants to be a homo or bi or whatever on their own then do it after you are 15-18 at least.

No
No
I knew that gays have higher hiv/syphilis rates, but I thought it was maybe two times more or so. Then I saw US stats - it's actually around HUNDRED times more. Sapienti sat.

Unironically this

I highly doubt that you have understood how sexual development works. Also, there are many children who have grown up with two mothers or two fathers and they all have turned out absolutely normal. You know what's not normal? A child which grows up without any parents.

how is the regular gay people behave then?
>scroll dating apps for fucking and sucking
>practicing partner exchanges with delusional monogamous relationship
>going against the already established authority instead of integrating to the system
>selfish and the world seems to be revolving around them alone
>the constant need to be the center of attention, but instead it is the eyesore in public
>degenerate lifestyle (sex, everything is to the extreme mannerism, chem fun, going under the knife, prostitution, drunks, loud and noisy)
>crossdressing is considered as pervert hobbies here
I happened to be at the wrong time and the wrong place when I was travelling in europe and canada. Fucking disgusted because there's children in the crowd, I just baka and walks away.

I don't think all homosexuals are in those parades or approve of them. There are plenty of sick straight people.

>There are plenty of sick straight people.
No wonder, since gays/msm are only 2-3% of population.

One thing for sure, the most attendees are faggots. If you want to be normal, just be like the rest of normal people; no flashy thing and going about a normal life by not having the feels to push the entitlement towards other normal people. No one wants to know your bed habit. I'd prefer the era when all faggots stays in their closet and just secretly fucking and offing their heads within themselves.

Dropping children at orphanages does not directly entitle homos to adopt them. I understand that you dont really give a damn about the conservative family model with a mother and father (as able to see from the image you posted which clearly states that every opposition to it is coming from homophobia), but I am quite suspicious of those "studies", at least for now.

>scroll dating apps for fucking and sucking
And heteros don't do this? Are you asexual?
>practicing partner exchanges with delusional monogamous relationship
Ah ok, I didn't know that heteros are all monogamous. I must be wrong about singles and people going to prostitutes or swinger clubs for example then...
>going against the already established authority instead of integrating to the system
Established authority? You mean shakira law? Gay people living in regions with equal rights certainly don't go against any authorities and just live their lives.
>selfish and the world seems to be revolving around them alone
This is a behavior you can see in many individuals, regardless the sexual orientation.
>the constant need to be the center of attention, but instead it is the eyesore in public
You are confusing flamboyant attention whores with regular homosexual people.
>degenerate lifestyle (sex, everything is to the extreme mannerism, chem fun, going under the knife, prostitution, drunks, loud and noisy)
Sex is not degenerate, you fucking virgin. Again, you are confusing people who have extreme fetishes with regular homosexuals. Your view is very much skewed and biased here. You should maybe leave your house once and see how normal people behave.
>crossdressing is considered as pervert hobbies here
Crossdressing is a bi-sexual behavior. Why would homosexual men dress like women for example? You are, once again, confusing this with fetishes.

So if heteros are as promiscuous as gays, how come that gays who constitute 2-3% of population get 2/3 of new HIV cases in USA? Is it God who punishes them?

Nie
Nie
Nie

Yes
Yes
Personal freedom

>Sex is not degenerate
True, the degeneracy is when you SHOVED it in front of strangers or even acquaintances or your "hetero" friends with kids to the point where these young minds ask "are they best friend but why they're kissing?", leaving the parents in awkward position.
We don't publicly show affections in public like westerners do, and most faggots here are adopting the westerners way of showing affection which is unacceptable here. Bed matters stays in bedroom, never in public.
"I'm a proud virgin", do you like the sound of that shoved in your face or written in your social media status?

Nice propaganda, Ivan... You might also want to go back to school and learn how HIV gets spread.
>god
why am I even responding to a retard?

>I have seen a gay couple "behaving badly" in public, therefore everyone is a degenerate faggot
>leaving the parents in awkward position
why don't the parents tell their children then that these two people are homosexual and that it's normal? no need for awkwardness then
>We don't publicly show affections
>flag
Too bad for you
>I'm a proud virgin
I already figured :)))

See, you got the answer to the question "why going msm isn't good for you". Looks like you don't like it.
>Nice propaganda
Right, propaganda from America itself. Guess they are homophobic:
hiv.gov/hiv-basics/overview/data-and-trends/statistics
>You might also want to go back to school and learn how HIV gets spread.
Yes, that's a very interesting question. How does it spread that gays get majority of new cases despite being a tiny minority of population?

>shakira law

Attached: 1369741853411.jpg (600x336, 13K)

>I have seen a gay couple "behaving badly" in public, therefore everyone is a degenerate faggot
I tried so many time to think otherwise but their sexual references and mannerism in public is going to far.
>why don't the parents tell their children then that these two people are homosexual and that it's normal?
because it is not normal, duh. the 18xxx is there for a reason.

Maybe because gay sex is between two men, you fucking retard? And because it's way easier to spread the virus with your cum if you're infected than getting it from fucking a HIV-positive person. Don't be stupid... Are you trying to bait me here or what?
You may also want to re-read your linked HIV studies and also check this to see that more than 2% of the US population are gay:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographics_of_the_United_States

>their sexual references
individual people... you are generalizing
>it is not normal
it is, deal with it and get over it

>individual people... you are generalizing
what I meant was their small talk and jokes are in a way not without that pinch of sexual references, which is off putting if the settings are in public.
>it is, deal with it and get over it
no it's not.

Fascinating, so gays have sex in a way which gives them HUNDRED times larger chance to get deadly contagious diseases. Such a number isn't a problem for you? OK then.
>You may also want to re-read your linked HIV studies and also check this to see that more than 2% of the US population are gay:
So total is 3.8%? That basically means that male gays are ~2% of total population. They get ~67% of new HIV cases. Do the math.

>And because it's way easier to spread the virus with your cum if you're infected than getting it from fucking a HIV-positive person.
What did he mean by this?

Probably that gay may engage in both active and passive sex, easily getting the disease, and then easily spreading it. Which isn't a great argument in their defense either.

God has nukes.

Attached: John_Martin_-_Sodom_and_Gomorrah.jpg (1200x767, 230K)

How come gay people living in non-shotholes like Murrica and Russia have a way lower number of HIV infections? Do the math.
>male gays are ~2%
no, read again, Ivan
It isn't a great argument? It's the best you'll get.
>in their defense
who is defending HIV here? why should I defend the behavior of HIV positive gay men living in another country with a much higher HIV rate? Your logic doesn't make any sense

>god
Another one... Russian education must be insanely good.

*not living in shitholes like Murrica and Russia
...of course, but I guess you already understood that

>How come gay people living in non-shotholes like Murrica and Russia have a way lower number of HIV infections? Do the math.
Maybe in some non-shotholes (for example?) they have not 100 times more hiv, but 20-30 times. So?
>no, read again, Ivan
Yes, read it again. 3.8% of LGBT people. Assuming that L and G has the same rate, G are ~2% of total population. Even if there are little Ls, Gs are still around 3%.
>It isn't a great argument? It's the best you'll get.
It is a good argument - but again, against gays.
>who is defending HIV here? why should I defend the behavior of HIV positive gay men living in another country with a much higher HIV rate? Your logic doesn't make any sense
You are defending the behaviour which leads to vastly increased chance of getting a very harmful contagious disease. Then you are asking, what's wrong with that behaviour. That's exactly what is wrong with it. Why not defend drug addiction, drunk driving, no vaccination or multigenerational incest then? Freedom means more than numbers?

Yes, yes, because if they love each other then they should get married

I may not be God, but I sure hate fags

That's not very based.

Va te faire enculer sale amerloque de merde tu pourris le monde avec tes conneries de trans et de pédé

Attached: because fuck you that's why.jpg (1900x2762, 437K)

Yes. I don't care.

yes
yes
same sex couples aren't inherently "worse" than opposite sex ones.

I need to brush up on my French profanity. I had to translate that. Anyway you need to relax m8. I'm not gay but who cares what others do?

I do

It destroys society, science studies prove by the buckets that trans/gay/lesbian parents create mentally ill kids, but it gets zero media coverage

Did you "read" this out of Putin's ass?

Yes
Yes
don't care what people do between 4 walls

What you conspiracy theorists don't realize is that that's not how the scientific community works. There's a general free flow of information among academics. If there were credible studies like you claim, they'd be known.

It's gay dude.
Simple

is it though?

nein, deutsche papir

Yes, its everywhere
Fuck no
Because I dont like chr*stianity

Yes,
Sure,
Not my issue. Let people live their lives.
It boils down to "who cares?"

No
Nope, unless it's passable trap girl(male) with SRS and a man(male).
Guy with another guy is disgusting.

>men
No
>women if they are beautiful
Yes

Yes
No
Two reasons,
1. Straight people will just use it to get tax benefits

2. It’s pointless and a farce since the whole concept of marriage is to have approved sex according to the religion or society and society already accepts fornication as a normal thing and gays and most mainstream religions still don’t approve of homosexuality let alone whether or not they can marry each other

It goes both ways ...

Attached: eye roll.jpg (320x223, 39K)

>fags are gross and evil!

Attached: 6B4FD41D-69D9-4A59-AB74-5BF892D62392.jpg (2000x1078, 162K)

yes
no
sodomites are disgusting and there is no such thing as a gay marriage anyways

Attached: 1538144704025.png (600x600, 339K)

no
no
I don't like it

No
No
Because it is against laws of nature.

homo marriage is hilarious and should be mocked but executing someone because they are silly is degenerate.

Yes
No
Because marriage is for having children.

No
No, I think people should be able to marry the person of any gender they want.
Because it is a personal freedom that doesn't affect others in any way but the two who want to marry. This is their life and they may do with it as they please.

yes but not in church
idc
if they don`t start adopting It`s pretty much non issue

>Because marriage is for having children.
what about straight people who can't have children? your argument is BS

Yes
No
Homosexuality is disgusting and immoral, and the government has no obligation to change the definition or function of marriage in the name of "equality." Civil marriage is an institution designed to financially and legally encourage stable families and the proper raising of children, the latter of which is especially better served by heterosexual couples.

No
Yes
Homosexuality is an integral part of European culture and used to be so since ancient times

I wish I was a greek boy back then...

>yes
>anyone who cares is a lolcow
>because i don't fucking care about other people and their actions unless they hurt anyone and/or affect me personally
i used to think le fags were gross xd and will destroy society with their degeneracy when i was like 15. then i learned straight people are also a bunch of filthy degenerates who like assfucking and sucking each other's genitals, so i stopped caring and accepted everyone has the same right to be disgusting.