|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban...
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban...
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| MLBoros72s |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
As an ordained minister, I look forward to performing same-sex ceremonies.
Monogomy should be rewarded for gay couples as it has been for straights.
:cool: |
Seriously? Do I need to go become a pastor or something? I feel all title deprived next to you and Rev :bw: |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
If gay marriage is OK, then why isn't incest or polygamy also OK? If people do not want to do those things, they don't have to. Just like you said with gay marriage. If you don't want to marry your sister, don't do it.
You wrote this:
The only people that fear gays are in question over their own sexuality.
Same with this, right?:
The only people who fear incest are in question over their own sexuality. |
There is a public health risk for allowing incest: birth defects, retardation, etc. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by MLBoros72s
Seriously? Do I need to go become a pastor or something? I feel all title deprived next to you and Rev :bw: |
I think you can get ordained online.
www.ulc.org
EDIT: you will be redirected to www.themonastery.org |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
There is a public health risk for allowing incest: birth defects, retardation, etc. |
There are birth defects and retardation already. They don't have to have kids. If procreation is not the issue with gay marriage than it does not have to be the issue for these other things.
Being Gay itself is abnormal and a birth defect. Surely if we were all born with this condition the human race would cease to exist. That can't be normal. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonedwall
Being Gay itself is abnormal and a birth defect. Surely if we were all born with this condition the human race would cease to exist. That can't be normal. |
:bigclap:
And there we have it. Pathetic. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
:bigclap:
And there we have it. Pathetic. |
Of course I am right. You yourself have admitted that procreation is not an issue with gay marriage. Of course it is not because procreation would be impossible. If you put 2 male dogs in a room for 3 months I don't think puppies are in your future.
Humans are meant to procreate. That is normal. |
|
|
| MLBoros72s |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Of course I am right. You yourself have admitted that procreation is not an issue with gay marriage. Of course it is not because procreation would be impossible. If you put 2 male dogs in a room for 3 months I don't think puppies are in your future.
Humans are meant to procreate. That is normal. |
I always thought of it as an evolutionary trait: we're so dominant as a species that the only way we could curb our population is to have a 10% homosexual rate. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Of course I am right. You yourself have admitted that procreation is not an issue with gay marriage. Of course it is not because procreation would be impossible. If you put 2 male dogs in a room for 3 months I don't think puppies are in your future.
Humans are meant to procreate. That is normal. |
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by MLBoros72s
I always thought of it as an evolutionary trait: we're so dominant as a species that the only way we could curb our population is to have a 10% homosexual rate. |
Are you kidding? |
|
|
| MLBoros72s |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Are you kidding? |
Actually no. I know it has no scientific basis, but neither does religion, so fuck it, I believe it. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by MLBoros72s
Actually no. I know it has no scientific basis, but neither does religion, so fuck it, I believe it. |
I doubt that "evolution" has the ability to count. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
There are birth defects and retardation already. They don't have to have kids. If procreation is not the issue with gay marriage than it does not have to be the issue for these other things.
Being Gay itself is abnormal and a birth defect. Surely if we were all born with this condition the human race would cease to exist. That can't be normal. |
Being gay is not a defect. It is, simply, different than not being gay. Is that too abstract a concept?
Procreation is NOT the issue. Being equal in the eyes of the law regarding the rights of couples is, for the most part, the issue. The right to a legally recognized declaration of monogomy is also the issue.
Obviously, people also divorce. But, you don't marry to later divorce. |
|
|
| liberal_loosh |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
There are birth defects and retardation already. They don't have to have kids. If procreation is not the issue with gay marriage than it does not have to be the issue for these other things.
Being Gay itself is abnormal and a birth defect. Surely if we were all born with this condition the human race would cease to exist. That can't be normal. |
I never said I was normal. I still have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Let me ask you a question:
If you woke up in a new world tomorrow, where it was normal to have gay sex, and where it was a crime and unacceptable to have straight sex. Would you go along with society and start fucking other men? |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by liberal_loosh
I never said I was normal. I still have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Let me ask you a question:
If you woke up in a new world tomorrow, where it was normal to have gay sex, and where it was a crime and unacceptable to have straight sex. Would you go along with society and start fucking other men? |
Therein lies the problem with much of straight society: straight society doesn't want to recognize something that is different and, for many, uncomfortable.
As a straight male, I'll admit to being a little creeped out when I see gay men being openly amorous.
However, my discomfort is my problem and should not, in any way, affect their rights as loving, moral human beings. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
Being gay is not a defect. It is, simply, different than not being gay. Is that too abstract a concept?
Procreation is NOT the issue. Being equal in the eyes of the law regarding the rights of couples is, for the most part, the issue. The right to a legally recognized declaration of monogomy is also the issue.
Obviously, people also divorce. But, you don't marry to later divorce. |
Of course it is a defect. I would consider it less of a defect than retardation, but a defect still.
It is a form of mental illness. Gay Marriage would just be a way to normalize the illness.
Gays should be equal in the eyes of the law. Just because marriage is between a man and a woman that does not mean all things are not equal in that regard. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Stumpy would fit in great in Iran....fundamentalist "values" are the same everywhere....
Ignorant. |
|
|
| liberal_loosh |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
Therein lies the problem with much of straight society: straight society doesn't want to recognize something that is different and, for many, uncomfortable.
As a straight male, I'll admit to being a little creeped out when I see gay men being openly amorous.
However, my discomfort is my problem and should not, in any way, affect their rights as loving, moral human beings. |
I don't believe in public shows of affection either.
And I don't talk funny or wear pink shirts. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by liberal_loosh
I never said I was normal. I still have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Let me ask you a question:
If you woke up in a new world tomorrow, where it was normal to have gay sex, and where it was a crime and unacceptable to have straight sex. Would you go along with society and start fucking other men? |
I agree that gays 'have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'.
The question you ask is absurd.
I have stated that I might, if given the ability to vote on the issue, I might vote to allow for gay marriage. I do understand that we only live one life and we should do all we can to accommodate people as much as we can. Not try to ruin lives during this lifetime. Try to create progress that will help the future generations.
What I reject is the idea that there is something wrong with people who have very serious concerns with gay marriage. The way to change peoples minds is not to call them bigots and all the other names. Not that you have done this. |
|
|
| liberal_loosh |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Of course it is a defect. I would consider it less of a defect than retardation, but a defect still.
It is a form of mental illness. Gay Marriage would just be a way to normalize the illness.
Gays should be equal in the eyes of the law. Just because marriage is between a man and a woman that does not mean all things are not equal in that regard. |
Is it a form of mental illness for straight couples to engage in oral or anal sex?
I think you have a defect in your mind, but I'm not asking the federal government to ban you from getting married. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by liberal_loosh
Is it a form of mental illness for straight couples to engage in oral or anal sex?
I think you have a defect in your mind, but I'm not asking the federal government to ban you from getting married. |
No, it is not a mental illness for a man and a woman to enjoy sex.
I am not asking the government to ban it. |
|
|
| liberal_loosh |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
The question you ask is absurd.
|
The question is not absurd. Even if it was absurd, why won't you answer it? I had to. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by liberal_loosh
The question is not absurd. Even if it was absurd, why won't you answer it? I had to. |
I would not change my ways, regardless of the law, in regard to sex.
Do you admit that there are serious concerns about allowing gay marriage? Normalizing the behavior and making it on par with a marriage or relationship between a man and a woman?
It is one thing to decriminalize the behavior, quite another thing to elevate it to just as normal as a relationship between a man and a woman.
I would think that people would respect that there may be a problem with that. |
|
|
| Oscar Wilde |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I would not change my ways, regardless of the law, in regard to sex.
Do you admit that there are serious concerns about allowing gay marriage? Normalizing the behavior and making it on par with a marriage or relationship between a man and a woman?
It is one thing to decriminalize the behavior, quite another thing to elevate it to just as normal as a relationship between a man and a woman.
I would think that people would respect that there may be a problem with that. |
To me it is normal, more normal then heterosexual relations. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by Oscar Wilde
To me it is normal, more normal then heterosexual relations. |
I don't understand why Gays do not seek a Constitutional Amendment. Buy TV time and convince your fellow Americans.
The way it is being done, within the Courts is not helping. It has actually hurt Gays by doing it this way. Sure you have a couple wins but all in all since the Mass. decision it has been downhill and has worked against what gays say they want.
A campaign to convince the American people would be more productive and if it works will actually fix the problem nationwide. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonedwall
I don't understand why Gays do not seek a Constitutional Amendment. Buy TV time and convince your fellow Americans.
The way it is being done, within the Courts is not helping. It has actually hurt Gays by doing it this way. Sure you have a couple wins but all in all since the Mass. decision it has been downhill and has worked against what gays say they want.
A campaign to convince the American people would be more productive and if it works will actually fix the problem nationwide. |
Why don't you champion the cause Stumpy? Instead of jerking yourself off over Islam every day?
Get out from under the bed and help your fellow man overcome injustice. |
|
|
| liberal_loosh |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I would not change my ways, regardless of the law, in regard to sex.
Do you admit that there are serious concerns about allowing gay marriage? Normalizing the behavior and making it on par with a marriage or relationship between a man and a woman?
It is one thing to decriminalize the behavior, quite another thing to elevate it to just as normal as a relationship between a man and a woman.
I would think that people would respect that there may be a problem with that. |
I don't even want to get married. It makes no difference to me if it is legal or not.
If a straight person thinks I can weaken their marriage, they already have a weak marriage.
Get your own house in order, before worrying about my house. |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I don't understand why Gays do not seek a Constitutional Amendment. |
maybe because they don't need it. problem solved.
I am sure it is the influence of those mud colored people anyway :drool: |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Of course it is a defect. I would consider it less of a defect than retardation, but a defect still.
It is a form of mental illness. Gay Marriage would just be a way to normalize the illness.
Gays should be equal in the eyes of the law. Just because marriage is between a man and a woman that does not mean all things are not equal in that regard. |
I don't see gayness as a defect or form of mental illness.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by liberal_loosh
I don't believe in public shows of affection either.
And I don't talk funny or wear pink shirts. |
But, the creep factor is my problem. That shouldn't effect a gay couple's right to display that affection. |
|
|
| WillowGlen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
The California Supreme Court has just opened up a can of worms. The residents of the State will overturn this ruling via a State Constitutional Amendment.
|
No we wont and you really should stop speaking for people you dont know, have never met and think youre an idiot.
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Marriage is, as far as the State goes a way to ensure or facilitate offspring. That is the State interest in the institution of marriage.
It is more than a simple contract. One of the complaints of those against gay marriage is that it will change the definition of marriage to the one you have described. Just a contract... |
And now your speaking for 'the State"? I dont know whats more ludicrous, your idiocy or your hubris. That is already the definiton. Marriage is moderated by the govt. Not the church. Its the religous whackos that not only want to "change the definition" but like to pretend that they already have. |
|
|
| Anogram |
Quote: Originally posted by WillowGlen
No we wont and you really should stop speaking for people you dont know, have never met and think youre an idiot. |
Agreed. If you look back into the history of the American Psychiatric Association APA not getting to know gay people was the big reason they thought it was a pathology. The research that they did on gays was on people from the armed forces who got outed somehow and those who were mentally ill to begin with. They never went out of their way to get normal people.
When they finally did because someone challenged the APA on this the results were interesting. A lady said she would get a group of people and said since being gay is a pathology they should be able to pick out the gays from the normal people. They couldn't do it. They ended up labeling some straight people as gay and gays as straight. The results were all mixed up. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by WillowGlen
No we wont and you really should stop speaking for people you dont know, have never met and think youre an idiot.
And now your speaking for 'the State"? I dont know whats more ludicrous, your idiocy or your hubris. That is already the definiton. Marriage is moderated by the govt. Not the church. Its the religous whackos that not only want to "change the definition" but like to pretend that they already have. |
We shall see, perhaps you are right and the people of California will welcome gay marriage.
I'm not speaking for the State. I gave a link that explains the history of marriage laws in regard to the State Interest involved. |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I gave a link that explains the history of marriage laws in regard to the State Interest involved. |
which is unrelated to the issue of whether this law should stand |
|
|
| WillowGlen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
We shall see, perhaps you are right and the people of California will welcome gay marriage.
I'm not speaking for the State. I gave a link that explains the history of marriage laws in regard to the State Interest involved. |
And as usual theres only black and white with you. If were not rewriting the constitution to discriminate against people we must be "welcoming it". Its no mystery why youre wrong so often. The fact that there might be somewhere where inane unimportant issues that only surface during election years as wedge issues might not be a black and white do or die propositions is just too tough a concept for sheep like you to understand isnt it.
But please continue to state what people you dont know or will ever meet will do. The only thing funnier than someone who knows absolutey nothing is someone who knows absolutey nothing but thinks they know anything. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by WillowGlen
The only thing funnier than someone who knows absolutey nothing is someone who knows absolutey nothing but thinks they know anything. |
....he's taught others that little trick too....
NC-Stupid-Mark
Confused Member
Meltingdown |
|
|
| Marinolaw |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
It reminds me of Massachusetts and the series of events that their State Supreme Court set into motion across the U.S..
Now the issue will be decided in Nov., right beside the question of who they will pick for President.
I wonder how many other State ballots will include that question this time around? |
not many, people will be pissed if any candidates try to tale the focus off of issues that really matter.
It's been legal here fro 4 years. and not one person who is against "gay marriage" can tell me what has changed for them or any one else, or what negative effect it has had on society |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
Quote: Originally posted by Marinolaw
not many, people will be pissed if any candidates try to tale the focus off of issues that really matter.
It's been legal here fro 4 years. and not one person who is against "gay marriage" can tell me what has changed for them or any one else, or what negative effect it has had on society |
Wait a second...Massachusetts still exists? I thought legalizing gay marriage was going to open a chasm from the fiery pits of Hell that would consume the entire sinful state. |
|
|
| Marinolaw |
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler
Wait a second...Massachusetts still exists? I thought legalizing gay marriage was going to open a chasm from the fiery pits of Hell that would consume the entire sinful state. |
I'm still waiting to do my first gay divorce :D |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by WillowGlen
And as usual theres only black and white with you. If were not rewriting the constitution to discriminate against people we must be "welcoming it". Its no mystery why youre wrong so often. The fact that there might be somewhere where inane unimportant issues that only surface during election years as wedge issues might not be a black and white do or die propositions is just too tough a concept for sheep like you to understand isnt it.
But please continue to state what people you dont know or will ever meet will do. The only thing funnier than someone who knows absolutey nothing is someone who knows absolutey nothing but thinks they know anything. |
Thanks for sharing. It's always good to have someone around to give criticism.
I must disagree, of course. It's not unusual for people to have opinions on how a State may vote on a certain issue. I'm not sure if you are aware of that or not. Don't be surprised if, this being an election year, if you turn on the TV and people will be doing what I just did, making a guess of what others might do in an election year. Don't get upset when you see this, it's nothing personal, it's just conversation and their opinion.
Hang in there... |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler
Wait a second...Massachusetts still exists? I thought legalizing gay marriage was going to open a chasm from the fiery pits of Hell that would consume the entire sinful state. |
You better check with Pat Robertson. The gay marriage law in Mass might've caused God to give Ted Kennedy his seizure. |
|
|
| Marinolaw |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
You better check with Pat Robertson. The gay marriage law in Mass might've caused God to give Ted Kennedy his seizure. |
Ted was probably trying to bang his wife, now if they make it illegal for Kennedy's to marry and procreate, I'm right there with ya :D |
|
|
| its-just-a-ride |
Quote: Originally posted by NoName
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. |
Thats the gayest thing i ever heard.... i feel gay just saying it
... seriously though, who cares if some gays want to get married. Live and let live. It shouldn't even be an issue
America's a curious country. So progressive in many ways yet so backwards in others. |
|
|
| zimmie |
| I've never met a gay person that wasn't a compulsive liar. |
|
|
| MLBoros72s |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
I've never met a gay person that wasn't a compulsive liar. |
Gay=Compulsive liar=Republican=You! :bigup: |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by its-just-a-ride
Thats the gayest thing i ever heard.... i feel gay just saying it
... seriously though, who cares if some gays want to get married. Live and let live. It shouldn't even be an issue
America's a curious country. So progressive in many ways yet so backwards in others. |
I wonder if allowing gay marriage is considered making progress?
I'm not even sure if it is a good idea.
It is curious that people believe all of these things means we are moving ahead and making a better world. Perhaps we are actually devolving. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
I've never met a gay person that wasn't a compulsive liar. |
Wow. You're hanging with some strange gay folks.
Most of the gays I know are embarrassingly honest. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
I wonder if allowing gay marriage is considered making progress?
I'm not even sure if it is a good idea.
It is curious that people believe all of these things means we are moving ahead and making a better world. Perhaps we are actually devolving. |
Of course it's a good idea...and a necessary idea.
Gays must be given all the same legal rights and access that straight couples have.
Give it time, Stoney. Once you get used to the fact that gays are people, too, you'll find another cause du-jour to get your shorts in a bunch over. |
|
|
| NickNuke |
| Somehow, I don't think that the thousands that died on the beaches of Normandy fighting for our way of life did so in order for John to marry Bill. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
Of course it's a good idea...and a necessary idea.
Gays must be given all the same legal rights and access that straight couples have.
Give it time, Stoney. Once you get used to the fact that gays are people, too, you'll find another cause du-jour to get your shorts in a bunch over. |
:)
Gays should have the same legal rights as anyone else. This is not about that. Gays are people. I have nothing against a person just because they are Gay.
The Left is always so happy to jump into things without thinking about the consequences. The Welfare State. Social Security. The list is endless.
The main part of the debate that I do not like is that people who are against gay marriage are branded by the PC people. Not only is that a foul way to debate but it also has led to a bad result for those on your side who want such a thing. Gay marriage being banned across the U.S.. Except for a couple pockets gay marriage has been rejected by the American people.
And, you don't get people on your side by suggesting they are backward and have bad intentions. I have not seen one good argument that this should be allowed except that everyone are bigots and backward if they do not sign on. And, I am one who might even vote for such a thing or at least not vote against it. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
:)
Gays should have the same legal rights as anyone else. This is not about that. Gays are people. I have nothing against a person just because they are Gay.
The Left is always so happy to jump into things without thinking about the consequences. The Welfare State. Social Security. The list is endless.
The main part of the debate that I do not like is that people who are against gay marriage are branded by the PC people. Not only is that a foul way to debate but it also has led to a bad result for those on your side who want such a thing. Gay marriage being banned across the U.S.. Except for a couple pockets gay marriage has been rejected by the American people.
And, you don't get people on your side by suggesting they are backward and have bad intentions. I have not seen one good argument that this should be allowed except that everyone are bigots and backward if they do not sign on. And, I am one who might even vote for such a thing or at least not vote against it. |
But, in the case of gay marriage, I truly see no reason to be against it other than the discomfort that's caused by fear based in intolerance and ignorance. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by NickNuke
Somehow, I don't think that the thousands that died on the beaches of Normandy fighting for our way of life did so in order for John to marry Bill. |
Sure they did although, I'll admit, they probably weren't thinking of this specific cause at the time. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
But, in the case of gay marriage, I truly see no reason to be against it other than the discomfort that's caused by fear based in intolerance and ignorance. |
Would that be true if siblings wanted to marry too? |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Would that be true if siblings wanted to marry too? |
Siblings who marry increase the chances of birth defects to the off-spring. There is no such risk when gay people marry.
So, I would say, "No. It's not the same." |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
Siblings who marry increase the chances of birth defects to the off-spring. There is no such risk when gay people marry.
So, I would say, "No. It's not the same." |
There are birth defects anyway. Surely we cannot discriminate against people over what might happen. Plus there is abortion. And, birth defects? Is there something wrong with that? Are they not people too? What about the same-sex siblings? Birth defects would be impossible in that situation.
What about polygamy? |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Great another religious smokescreen to keep people from addressing larger issues in life. |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Great another religious smokescreen to keep people from addressing larger issues in life. |
So, does that mean you are against these other things?
If you are I would ask why are you against them? |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
So, does that mean you are against these other things?
If you are I would ask why are you against them? |
Why are you without principle and why do you hate logic so? |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
Why are you without principle and why do you hate logic so? |
These are fair questions because I am trying to figure out what people who are without a doubt for sure on the side of gay marriage, what would be the reasoning in not allowing these other things?
Where is the line drawn and what reason would people have for saying "no" to this other class of people. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonedwall
These are fair questions |
....and your favorite corrupt toad Justice Antonin Scalia wants to know.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Follow the Stumpy "lojik" and shameless intellectual cowardice....:
Quote: Originally posted by StumpyNumbNutz
The State interest is procreation. Impossible for gay couples. |
Fdub: "But even Justice Scalia said that he rejects the notion that procreation has any bearing on the issue of gay marriage."
Quote: Originally posted by StumpyNumbNutz
That means nothing. There is plenty of case law that shows what the State interest is. |
....repeat and repeat, over and over and over again, in a mindless drooling loop....
:crazy::drool::freak:
And that dumbfuck PNStupid actually has the gall to say this freak is an "honest debater"...?!?!?!
:jj:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!!!
Fucking Idiot.
NC-Stupid-Mark
Confused Member
Meltingdown |
|
|
| JTProcess |
Imagine that... California ahead of the curve again... there's enough sane people in the populated states to render the tiny factions of religious zealots gov't lobbies meaningless.
a big (ky lubed) middle finger to religious wackjobs who (will love it because they're gay and...) feel like it's their job to force their stupid neanderthal dipshit beliefs on everyone but themselves. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
There are birth defects anyway. Surely we cannot discriminate against people over what might happen. Plus there is abortion. And, birth defects? Is there something wrong with that? Are they not people too? What about the same-sex siblings? Birth defects would be impossible in that situation.
What about polygamy? |
Take up the cause of sibling sex, if you want. I'm okay with gay marriage.
Regarding polygamy: If you're willing to torture yourself with multiple wives, who's to stop you? You have enough problems.
That could be argued as a legitimate religious right. (no pun intended) |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by ArivacaCharlie
Take up the cause of sibling sex, if you want. I'm okay with gay marriage.
Regarding polygamy: If you're willing to torture yourself with multiple wives, who's to stop you? You have enough problems.
That could be argued as a legitimate religious right. (no pun intended) |
That is about it. If you are for gay marriage than there really is not any reason to reject these other things. |
|
|
| nikkyo |
| Individual rights are grounded in the nature of human beings as human beings, homosexuals do not deserve any more or less rights than heterosexuals. |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by NickNuke
Somehow, I don't think |
yet unfortunately you still draw breath |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
I've never met a gay person that wasn't a compulsive liar. |
 |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
:)
Gays should have the same legal rights as anyone else. This is not about that. Gays are people. I have nothing against a person just because they are Gay.
The Left is always so happy to jump into things without thinking about the consequences. The Welfare State. Social Security. The list is endless.
The main part of the debate that I do not like is that people who are against gay marriage are branded by the PC people. Not only is that a foul way to debate but it also has led to a bad result for those on your side who want such a thing. Gay marriage being banned across the U.S.. Except for a couple pockets gay marriage has been rejected by the American people.
And, you don't get people on your side by suggesting they are backward and have bad intentions. I have not seen one good argument that this should be allowed except that everyone are bigots and backward if they do not sign on. And, I am one who might even vote for such a thing or at least not vote against it. |
so why do you oppose gay marriage? :drool: |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by mingmen
so why do you oppose gay marriage? |
[StumpyNumbNutz] ....because procreation is in the "State Interest"!!! Duuuhhh....even though procreation has nothing to do with gay marriage! Which of course means that by my OWN definition of "State Interest", "State Interest" has nothing to do with gay marriage either! Don't you see??? :crazy:
So basically I've debunked MY OWN premise! :freak:
This should come as no surprise because, as I prove in here everyday, SELF-EXPOSURE is the god given right of every cocksucking conservative cockroach.[/StumpyNumbNutz]
:drool:
________________________________________
"Let us cross over the river and corn-hole each other under the shade of the trees." Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Whackson...jerkin' it since 1869:jackoff::ass2mouth:69::slapcum::bruno::blow: |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
So, does that mean you are against these other things?
If you are I would ask why are you against them? |
I am not aginst it nor am I for it.
There are bigger issues that need to be addressed and the Neo Cons will use this to camoflage them and keep the ones that affect all of us in far greater detail hidden from discourse.. |
|
|
| ArivacaCharlie |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
That is about it. If you are for gay marriage than there really is not any reason to reject these other things. |
Sibling sex causes birth defects and long-lasting medical conditions. At one point in history, sibling sex was allowed. It wasn't until we discovered the health issues involved that it became discouraged and, finally, disallowed.
There are NO negative public health issues associated with gay marriage!
If you can't see the difference, there is no use trying to explain it. You keep trying to make a totally invalid comparison. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Stumpy "Off Into the Sunset" Troll:
Punked Member
Off With His Panties In a Bunch...
*FLUSH*
:crapper: |
|
|
| Stonewall |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
[StumpyNumbNutz] ....because procreation is in the "State Interest"!!! Duuuhhh....even though procreation has nothing to do with gay marriage! Which of course means that by my OWN definition of "State Interest", "State Interest" has nothing to do with gay marriage either! Don't you see??? :crazy:
So basically I've debunked MY OWN premise! :freak:
This should come as no surprise because, as I prove in here everyday, SELF-EXPOSURE is the god given right of every cocksucking conservative cockroach.[/StumpyNumbNutz]
:drool: |
With any law there is a State Interest. With gay marriage it just won't be procreation. It'll be something else. Or, multiple things.
I'm glad you have finally debunked someone... even if as you say it is only yourself.
:) |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonedwall
With gay marriage it just won't be procreation. |
:lol:
FAIL. |
|
|
| mingmen |
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
With any law there is a State Interest. |
debunked |
|
|
|
|
|
