Couldn't be bothered to find my mod objections

[Tails82]

Regarding the above:

www.gamefaqs.com/boards/565222-/61525904

See, I have this thing, this pet peeve of mine. Where I don't like it when I'm told I have no statistics to back up my claims (even when I clearly provide links in my messages). So I figure, maybe it would be better to y'know, really get into the issue and take quite a bit of time to cite some facts, maybe some of which a few people are uncomfortable seeing, but they're facts nonetheless. After that, I still get the same outcome?

Anyway, now that I've recuperated and I'm on a bit better footing I find this worth bringing to the attention of the higher ups, because I think the fault lies elsewhere on this one. Do with it as you'd like and remember, great power comes with great responsibility.

nkl trolling

[Chromeo]

I don't see what gay marriage has to do with pedophillia. And even then I doubt pedophiles are exactly worried about what their reputations. Slandering gays is just pointless.

[Tails82]

Meh, one form of vice usually goes with another.

[Pyro ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ✔]

Like religion and murder.

[Tails82]

Stalin and Mao were the most faithful men the 20th century ever knew, right...

[Chromeo]

And Hitler was a Catholic, this line of argument is stupid.

[Tails82]

Hahah, nop.

[Pyro ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ✔]

Stats show you have a higher chance of being mudrered by a Christian than another other religion, and even less chance by non-religiousers.

[Tails82]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6ColROeJ1g

[Pyro ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ✔]

Yeah in American.

[Tails82]

"False claim."

Oh really? Do tell.

www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02
www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html
ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.92.12.1964
catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ResearchReviewHomosexualParenting.pdf

It's been consistently found that married couples > heterosexual cohabiters > homosexual cohabiters. In fact, any arrangement outside of having two married parents is significantly detrimental, e.g. higher poverty rates, higher dropout rates, and a rate of incarceration twice as high for young men who do not have a father present. Homosexuals tend to have unstable, harmful relationships (which have even been estimated to lower life expectancy by 8-20 years). Higher suicide rates. Higher rates of substance abuse, domestic violence, and psychological disorders. A greater risk that the foster children themselves could be sexually abused. Inherently unstable, unequal, promiscuous relationships which add to the stress already present among foster children, who may also have to deal with a lifestyle which is in contradiction to their beliefs and the beliefs of the general public. That's not a good environment for kids to grow up in.

**TO INDIVIDUALS LV50 OR HIGHER: LINKS BACKING THESE CLAIMS PROVIDED ABOVE**

I know conservatives who are pro-gay rights (Redcount for example).

Redcount is not a conservative.

3kl offensive

Dispute Messages
You said on 1/18/2012 11:38:32 AM
Go on. Show me a single point that wasn't backed up by research, or leave me alone. You guys are pathetic.

[Chromeo]

Inherently unstable, unequal, promiscuous relationships which add to the stress already present among foster children

nope.avi

[Tails82]

A Mod/Admin replied on 1/18/2012 2:31:12 PM
Because when I think of fair and objective research, I think of FRC, NARTH, and parts of the Catholic Church that aren't the Observtory.

You said on 1/18/2012 2:55:52 PM
Because when I think of fair and objective mods, I think Gamefaqs.

Can you tell me what's wrong with the studies they cited?
"Parts of the Catholic church" have been added to the ToU now?

A Mod/Admin replied on 1/18/2012 3:15:02 PM
We get it. You're a homophobic troll who loves to annoy the Politics board.

[Tails82]

You said on 1/21/2012 7:40:19 PM

“People may take offense at all manner of religious as well as nonreligious messages, but offense alone does not in every case show a violation”
-Lee vs Weisman, 1992

TC brought up an article that claimed that there is no research supporting the idea that homosexuals are worse parents than heterosexual couples. Knowing that claim to be a falsehood, I brought up findings that I believe would help refute this inaccurate stance. I was also not impressed by the idea that a survey of a few people raised by homosexuals somehow shows they are more "tolerant" than others, as this is an abstract concept which cannot be measured easily. The study also screamed of self-selection bias and a nonrepresentative sample size. Color me unimpressed by the idea that 28/46 people who claim to be more "tolerant" proves gay parents could be "the best parents."

And yet mods have decided to question the legitimacy of the studies in the links I provided, without explaining why. Instead they have decided to attack a few sources linking to these studies and insult my personal character. Although this line of thinking is misguided but tolerable coming from regular users, unfortunately I have to pay a penalty when such fools acquire mod status and censor anything that deviates from their ideological stance. If we don't like controversial topics here, why have a politics board? Not once have they shown me where my claims weren't backed up. They have not found my claims to be inaccurate, but have still acted against them simply because they don't like the side that I bring up. Stating an opposition to my view is fine, if they disagree with me they can come on down and use their words like any other regular poster instead of acting like a cowardly manchild. It's unfortunate that a lead mod's best defense is to label me as a troll, even though I consistently strive to provide more evidence than the typical user when it comes to backing my claims.

Cheerfully yours,

TaiIs82

Stay tuned for the thrilling conclusion.

A Mod/Admin replied on 1/23/2012 1:45:25 PM

Your links prove absolutely nothing. I can find "studies" to back up anything I want to state. That doesn't mean I get to troll just because a study sides with me.

[Mastery]

You show them.