# 2% of the population is gay



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.

Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 25, 2013)

all of 2%

so


----------



## Baron (Aug 25, 2013)

Wow, if I watch some TV-channels I think there are 40 % of population gays.


----------



## Vox (Aug 25, 2013)

> How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life.



because they are screeching in falsetto


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 25, 2013)

and those 2% think everyone should bow to them and their demands...they are special


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Ok so no real serious answer yet..

How are 2% a threat to society...feel free to leave out silly hyperbole


----------



## Vox (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> 
> How are 2% a threat to society...feel free to leave out silly hyperbole



by turning upside down the policies.

and as I have said - too screechy in falsetto.

it is ANNOYING


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> 
> How are 2% a threat to society...feel free to leave out silly hyperbole



they are asking that their DEMANDS be bowed down to or they will SUE YOU..

That's a threat to peoples livelihoods in society


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

2% who DEMAND to indoctrinate elementary school children.. Who demand the Olympics be moved.. it goes on and on.. and it's a segment of society that bases their entire lives upon a sexual act. A Jewish mother has a son or daughter, they are born Jewish.. A lesbian uses the sperm of a man to have a kid, is that kid born a lesbian? I'm asking AGAIN to prove to me how Darwinism and Homosexuality scientifically coexist?? HOW??


----------



## AquaAthena (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



Who feels gays are a threat to their life? I don't and I run into many of them, as they are tourists who flock to art galleries. They are fun to be around, especially when sampling wine..lol. They usually come in, with their friends and we all have a good time. They are just people, people. 

Also I have employed people who are gay. What matters to me when selecting an employee, is not their sexual preference but their ability and desire to do the job that is waiting for them. I hold all applicants equal and may the best man or woman for the job, receive it.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

The Homosexual cult of fanaticism  make demands as a tiny minority on the entire world - and yet there's no proof--- NONE.. no matter how far science has evolved that there is a "gay" gene.. in fact, if we take Darwin at his word, "Survival of the Fittest," homosexuals COULD NEVER survive were it strictly a biological chromosome.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 25, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



he's just looking to stir up shit...


----------



## Mr Natural (Aug 25, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> and those 2% think everyone should bow to them and their demands...they are special



Not everyone, just you assholes.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 25, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > and those 2% think everyone should bow to them and their demands...they are special
> ...




see you can't talk about them without being called some vulgar name in anger
next it will be we are all homophobes and bigots


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

So is evolution a lie? You can't have it both ways.. Which is a lie???


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> ...



And how did the courts rule? People sue all the time in this day and age. Why is it if a gay sues you its that much worse?


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> 2% who DEMAND to indoctrinate elementary school children.. Who demand the Olympics be moved.. it goes on and on.. and it's a segment of society that bases their entire lives upon a sexual act. A Jewish mother has a son or daughter, they are born Jewish.. A lesbian uses the sperm of a man to have a kid, is that kid born a lesbian? I'm asking AGAIN to prove to me how Darwinism and Homosexuality scientifically coexist?? HOW??



Hypberbole..moving on.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



According to stepth, they sue people.....it would seem being sued by a gay is serious business, but being sued by a straight person is not.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



I didnt force you to post. I asked a simple question. I havent seen a legit answer yet.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

You have the OP whining about gays and yet it's the librul LIE of homosexuality being an inherited gene- it's the DEMANDS of an absolute TINY minority who when any other group such as Christians or Jews, were they to DEMAND their religious dogma be taught in elementary schools would scream the loudest. 

LMAO It's a joke.. the entire argument and emotional blackmail of the lie..  Militant homosexual cultists demand their way or none.


----------



## Mr Natural (Aug 25, 2013)

What percent of the population is handicapped (aka, physically challenged)?

Are the haters here all pissed off about that group getting all the good parking spaces?


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> You have the OP whining about gays and yet it's the librul LIE of homosexuality being an inherited gene- it's the DEMANDS of an absolute TINY minority who when any other group such as Christians or Jews, were they to DEMAND their religious dogma be taught in elementary schools would scream the loudest.
> 
> LMAO It's a joke.. the entire argument and emotional blackmail of the lie..  Militant homosexual cultists demand their way or none.



What? Stop deflecting and answer the simple question..jesus why is everything such a chore with you.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

I'm still waiting.. WHICH IS THE LIE?? Homosexuals born that way through biological science- SHOW US... or Evolution- Darwinism.. No LIBRUL propagandist will touch it.. they can't.. it's game, set match.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

And yet the Anti-God leftist who touts Evolution mocks and perverts the very science he claims to embrace. LMAO ILLOGICAL INSANITY = LEFTISM


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> and those 2% think everyone should bow to them and their demands...they are special



What demands are you referring to?


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Great you are spamming now...look go start a thread about your inane question. 
Till then you still havent answered the question.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



In England they are already suing the churches for not letting them get married in the church.

We understand this has nothing to do with equality.  Why don't you?


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



We are not England.  Moving on.


----------



## Mr Natural (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> And yet the Anti-God leftist who touts Evolution mocks and perverts the very science he claims to embrace. LMAO ILLOGICAL INSANITY = LEFTISM



Maybe they came about via creationism then.

Which makes your god one conflicted character.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

Mr Clean said:


> LadyGunSlinger said:
> 
> 
> > And yet the Anti-God leftist who touts Evolution mocks and perverts the very science he claims to embrace. LMAO ILLOGICAL INSANITY = LEFTISM
> ...



You tell me.. Which do you believe? If you say evolution then you have no scientific support for homosexuality.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 25, 2013)

Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.



Exactly.. and it's all based upon lies the left spews thru Academia, the media, Hollywood.. Once more, is it ok for Jews to demand Judaism be taught in schools, be shown in films, television shows.?? IS IT??


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> ...



People have a right to challenge a law that they think is unconstitutional; see Loving vs. Virginia.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

Pheonixops said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



Loving was based upon bigotry- race based. If people can start suing over a sexual act, can Zoophiliacs sue over not being able to fuck animals and marry them also?


----------



## Katzndogz (Aug 25, 2013)

2% of the population is forcing 98% of the population to make changes to their own lives to suit that 2%.


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> You have the OP whining about gays and yet it's the librul LIE of homosexuality being an inherited gene- it's the DEMANDS of an absolute TINY minority who when any other group such as Christians or Jews, were they to DEMAND their religious dogma be taught in elementary schools would scream the loudest.
> 
> LMAO It's a joke.. the entire argument and emotional blackmail of the lie..  Militant homosexual cultists demand their way or none.



What's the big deal if it's not an inherited gene and just a  a person's choice?


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

Pheonixops said:


> LadyGunSlinger said:
> 
> 
> > You have the OP whining about gays and yet it's the librul LIE of homosexuality being an inherited gene- it's the DEMANDS of an absolute TINY minority who when any other group such as Christians or Jews, were they to DEMAND their religious dogma be taught in elementary schools would scream the loudest.
> ...


Then tell the fucking truth.. Stop saying Homosexuals cannot help the way they were born.. and being it's a lifestyle choice, DO NOT demand that your fucking choice must be forced upon the rest of society.. any more than Christianity or Judaism should be..


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Sure they can sue, but will they win? If they win, how would it effect you?


----------



## Geaux4it (Aug 25, 2013)

That explains 2% of the 51% dummies that voted for tyranny in Obama.

So by default it was a 49%/49% tie

I want a recount!

-Geaux


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

Pheonixops said:


> LadyGunSlinger said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...



Finally a liberal who admits the SCIENTIFIC truth.. there is no gay gene.. NOT TRUE, a fabricated lie and propaganda campaign to FORCE Americans in to emotional blackmail and guilt.. and yet you hear this LIE constantly..  Even Bodey and Wtchey compare themselves to Jews.. IT'S A LIE.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 25, 2013)

Pheonixops said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > and those 2% think everyone should bow to them and their demands...they are special
> ...



they sued a photographer because she didn't want to work their wedding..it's posted on here


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > LadyGunSlinger said:
> ...



Whoa! Were did I ever say that "Homosexuals cannot help the way they were born"? I definitely will agree that it's a lifestyle choice that doesn't affect me. If consenting adults want to love each other, that's their choice. The fact that homosexuals can marry each other doesn't mess up my heterosexual marriage. I'm not demanding that heterosexuals should have same sex marriage! I'm not demanding that people should be married, I think people should do what they want to do, as long as it's legal and not hurting anyone. 
What if someone created a homosexual religion and they have marriage as one of their sacraments, do you want to have the government outlaw that?


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

See Chick-Fil-A where Mayors and Government officials THREATENED to shut down a private entity based upon the DEMANDS of 2% of our population, DEMANDING it.


----------



## LadyGunSlinger (Aug 25, 2013)

Homosexuals use the lie and the POLICE STATE to forcefully demand acceptance and compliance of their chosen lifestyle. THOSE ARE THE FACTS.


----------



## novasteve (Aug 25, 2013)

Trannies are fewer a d we are for Ed to accept their bullshit. You will be charged with a hate crime for kicking a tranny out if the wrong bathroom


----------



## Antares (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



Expand your focus....why should 2% be able to force ANYTHING on 98%?


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

Stephanie said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Yeah, I thought that was a pretty bogus lawsuit, it made me want to brush up on my photography skills and cater to homosexual marriages.  I don't know about the outcome of the case, but I hope that they lost and had to pat damages to that photographer.  I don't care if the photographer didn't want to preform their duties for racial, religious, or other reasons, that's their choice.


----------



## novasteve (Aug 25, 2013)

Why are gay men so susceptible to HIV? Can you admit it?


----------



## Geaux4it (Aug 25, 2013)

novasteve said:


> Trannies are fewer a d we are for Ed to accept their bullshit. You will be charged with a hate crime for kicking a tranny out if the wrong bathroom



No kidding. No wonder fags hangout waiting for George Michael to show up

-Geaux


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> See Chick-Fil-A where Mayors and Government officials THREATENED to shut down a private entity based upon the DEMANDS of 2% of our population, DEMANDING it.



I disagree with that.


----------



## Geaux4it (Aug 25, 2013)

Pheonixops said:


> LadyGunSlinger said:
> 
> 
> > See Chick-Fil-A where Mayors and Government officials THREATENED to shut down a private entity based upon the DEMANDS of 2% of our population, DEMANDING it.
> ...



So did the thousands that came out in support of Chic Filet. Lines were around the block.

Homo's are good for business

-Geaux


----------



## jgarden (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.


*- 2% of population (98th percentile; 1 person out of 50; IQ 130) is considered gifted and eligible for membership in the  Mensa International

- 2% of the world population has green eyes

- 2% of adults in the world own more than half the world's wealth

- 2% of Americans live on farms although less than 1% claim farming as their major occupation

- 2 percent of the earths population are natural redheads

- 2% of the population is affected by compulsive hoarding

- 2% (620,000+) of US population died in the American Civil War

- approximately 2% of the world's households have internet access (http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2011.pdf)

- 2% of Americans consider themselves "vegans" 

The point is that in some way we all belong to a 2% category that is part of a larger society - but we still want and except to be treated as equals. *


----------



## Antares (Aug 25, 2013)

novasteve said:


> Why are gay men so susceptible to HIV? Can you admit it?



It's not about susceptability....it's about behaviorable issues.

Anal sex causes bleeding...


----------



## Geaux4it (Aug 25, 2013)

jgarden said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Then don't be queers

Next

-Geaux


----------



## novasteve (Aug 25, 2013)

Tons of libs on huffpo said they deserved it when some faggot tried to shoot up the frc


----------



## Katzndogz (Aug 25, 2013)

novasteve said:


> Tons of libs on huffpo said they deserved it when some faggot tried to shoot up the frc



Do they think the gays that get beaten to death deserve it too?


----------



## novasteve (Aug 25, 2013)

Of course not


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.



Well that didnt happen...moving on.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Yes


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Roo said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



If you believe that then California should have more power than maine in the senate.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.
> ...



In your mind, perhaps.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

So far nobody really has given a good answer...lots of other stuff...


----------



## TemplarKormac (Aug 25, 2013)

And one wonders why we let 2% of the population dictate the morality of the other 98%? Sound familiar?


----------



## Antares (Aug 25, 2013)

Nope....I agree with the Founding Fathers.....Ca stupidity isn't my problem.....neither is yours.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...


Will my mind is in the real world so. 

Challenging laws in court is a core principle of this nation. Without it we would loose balance.

Tough shit you didnt like the outcome.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> So far nobody really has given a good answer...lots of other stuff...



They are all good answers.  Just because you have your head up your ass so cant see it is not our problem.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



First you say it didnt happen then you admit it did.  Brilliant.

Yes, the 2% minority made up of perverts forced the citizens of California to do something they voted against.  It wasnt a poll, it was an actual referendum, curiously a device pushed by Progressives to further democracy.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...


They didnt force anyone. They used the courts the way it should have been used and won. 
Thats not forcing, this is how the system works. 
So no it didnt happen at all rabbi. You are lying as usual.

Perverts. .lol....shut up bigot


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > So far nobody really has given a good answer...lots of other stuff...
> ...



Yawn...


----------



## novasteve (Aug 25, 2013)

To liberals, race baiting and ass fucking are the most important issues.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 25, 2013)

TemplarKormac said:


> And one wonders why we let 2% of the population dictate the morality of the other 98%? Sound familiar?



Has someone been forcing you to live life as a gay person? Don't understand...


----------



## Two Thumbs (Aug 25, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



Sticking your head in the sand so you don't see the truth is no way to go through life.

you know damn well that's the future here


----------



## Luissa (Aug 25, 2013)

TemplarKormac said:


> And one wonders why we let 2% of the population dictate the morality of the other 98%? Sound familiar?



They are not dictating your morals, they are not letting your morals deny them equal rights.


----------



## birddog (Aug 25, 2013)

What a queer thread!


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 25, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



If I knew the future id play the correct lotto numbers and win big. We are not England. .


----------



## Noomi (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



Still, they are paranoid, thinking that if gays have equal rights and all, they will turn their children gay as well.


----------



## Noomi (Aug 26, 2013)

TemplarKormac said:


> And one wonders why we let 2% of the population dictate the morality of the other 98%? Sound familiar?



The 98% is trying to force their view on the 2% by preventing the 2% from being married and treated equally.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Aug 26, 2013)

TemplarKormac said:


> And one wonders why we let 2% of the population dictate the morality of the other 98%? Sound familiar?



Nonsense. 

Seeking ones civil liberties is not dictating morality to anyone. 

In fact, the two percent would be more than happy to just quietly live their lives if it werent for you and other social conservatives attempting to deny them their civil rights.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.



More stupidity from the right. 

The advocates of Proposition 8 have only themselves to blame, existing case law already made it clear that the referendum was an Equal Protection rights violation, and subject to being invalidated. 

But they pressed on nonetheless, blinded by their hate and ignorance.


----------



## auditor0007 (Aug 26, 2013)

Vox said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> ...



I would imagine that we wouldn't even know what gay pride was if gays had all the same rights that we as heterosexuals take for granted.


----------



## Luissa (Aug 26, 2013)

Vox said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> ...



Because they are annoying?


----------



## squeeze berry (Aug 26, 2013)

auditor0007 said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



50% of all gay marriages will end in gay divorce.

That's equal rights fer ya


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.




Well, if in fact, 2% is true, that means 98% of the population ISN'T gay. So why then are we, the 98%, bending over backwards to accomodate these "people"?

We have allowed them to change the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the Military and have just began to see the effects of gay "marriage".

All of tht for a lousy 2% of the population.  Makes sense to me.


----------



## theHawk (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



So I guess this means you're a "two-percenter".


----------



## Politico (Aug 26, 2013)

Don't worry it'sll be a lot more soon. It's cool now You know like being Vegan and gluten intolerance.


----------



## Political Junky (Aug 26, 2013)

Politico said:


> Don't worry it'sll be a lot more soon. It's cool now You know like being Vegan and gluten intolerance.


Why would you care what someone else eats?


----------



## theHawk (Aug 26, 2013)

Noomi said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > And one wonders why we let 2% of the population dictate the morality of the other 98%? Sound familiar?
> ...



This is a total and flat out lie.  No one is preventing these "2%" from being married.

Homosexuals can get married in any state.  There is no such thing as a "gay marriage ban" anywhere in the US.  The laws that get labeled as such simply say the State will not recognize it.  No one cares what Jack and Bill do in the privacy of their own homes.

But that's not good enough for queers, they want to force the rest of society into accepting "gay marriage" as if it is legitimate, when its not.   They want us to accept homosexuality as if it were perfectly normal and healthy, when it is not.  They want us to allow them to adopt children, when we know queers are more likely to commit sexual abuse as well as violence.

But, I know you don't want to hear any of that.  You want to believe what Hollywood movies and TV fictions tell us about "normal" gays.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.
> ...



That's why it won overwhelmingly in the most liberal state in the country, twice?


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

theHawk said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



The fag lobby would have you believe gays are getting hauled off to jail after they have a marriage ceremony with Pastor Bruce.  It is pure propaganda.


----------



## The2ndAmendment (Aug 26, 2013)

There's a group called "Gay for Guns."

?* Gays with Guns *?

The moment they arm themselves, every internet and radio tough guy will stop threatening to kill them. Also, violence against gays will drop about 99%.

You Gays want your rights? Arm yourselves. End of story.

You want to keep associating with the Far Left and delivering a massive electoral block to the Marxists? Just look where Marxist ideology has led for all groups, not just gays, you won't raise yourself to equality, you'll drag the rest of us down to inferiority, like the old feudal days, the Lords and the serfs. 

And once they have us all in their grasp, the eugenicists will turn on you, and go Far-Right Fascists and exterminate, just like Hitler, in fact Gays and Trannies will probably be exterminated before particular races.

Thankfully I won't be around to see that future, because Libertarians will either take this country back, or die trying.


----------



## aaronleland (Aug 26, 2013)

I have never understood the argument that gays are forcing anybody to accept anything. Nobody is asking you to marry somebody of the same sex. All they ask for is that right. Don't approve of homosexuality for all I care. But until two men or women getting married negatively affects you, stay out of their business.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Non answer. ...


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

theHawk said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Non answer


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

theHawk said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



Alrighty well this doesnt explain how 2% is killing our society.
I mean I know there really isnt a good legit answer out there. Its mostly just bigotry and second class shit...


----------



## Geaux4it (Aug 26, 2013)

Homos live a lifestyle that is in opposition to mainstream culture. If they want equal rights, then why not allow bigamy in all states? 

It's a sinful lifestyle

-Geaux


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

aaronleland said:


> I have never understood the argument that gays are forcing anybody to accept anything. Nobody is asking you to marry somebody of the same sex. All they ask for is that right. Don't approve of homosexuality for all I care. But until two men or women getting married negatively affects you, stay out of their business.



That is why gays have gone to court to overturn referenda?  Isn't that forcing acceptance?


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...


No it was a good answer.  You just dismiss it because it isnt the answer you want.  That and the fact that you're stupid.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



Give me a break Rabbi - accommodate? Gays were being actively kicked out of the military for their sexual orientation and were simply asking for that to stop - because it's ridiculous.

They weren't asking for any special gay barracks, or gay shoes, or gay food, or any other sort of additional accommodation that wouldn't be accessible by straight people; they were simply asking for the right to *exist* in the military.

Was that "crossing the line" for you?


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



Gay people come primarily from straight parents.....Parents such as Dick Cheney, Alan Keyes, Phyllis Schafly.


----------



## editec (Aug 26, 2013)

People who obviously FEAR homos are losers.

My goodness, folks, being afraid of gays..._.how pathetic_


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

Baron said:


> Wow, if I watch some TV-channels I think there are 40 % of population gays.



Well, yeah...if you are watching LOGO.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...


It is good to see that you don't buy into this "OH NOES!  TEH GHEYS!" hysteria.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> So is evolution a lie? You can't have it both ways.. Which is a lie???



Fun Evolution items:

Gays come from straight parents.

Evolution means lettings all babies born with defects die.

Evolution means letting nature take its course with illnesses.

Evolution means allowing people to suffer and die if they live in unsafe environments.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> You have the *OP whining about gays *and yet it's the librul LIE of homosexuality being an inherited gene- it's the DEMANDS of an absolute TINY minority who when any other group such as Christians or Jews, were they to DEMAND their religious dogma be taught in elementary schools would scream the loudest.
> 
> LMAO It's a joke.. the entire argument and emotional blackmail of the lie..  Militant homosexual cultists demand their way or none.



Oh, the Irony!


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Oh...do they have the 1st Amendment in England?


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Well, 2% of the population just forced the most populous state in the nation to abrogate its own referendum.  So yes I'd say they're a threat.



Because.....to you, if a group is only 2% of the population, the Constitution need not apply.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

LadyGunSlinger said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



^Another RWr who is incapable of discerning the difference between consenting adults and animals.   Oh dear....stay away from the Zoo.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> 2% of the population is forcing 98% of the population to make changes to their own lives to suit that 2%.



How have we forced YOUR life to change?


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

jgarden said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



I guess LGS is advocating that those 2%rs NOT be treated as equals.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

novasteve said:


> To liberals, race baiting and ass fucking are the most important issues.



Ah...the Race Card Card AND thinking more about gay sex than gays do......all in one post.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



What planet are you on?  No gays were kicked out, especially under DADT, unless they just wanted to be.
I notice the first result of the new policy is Bradley Manning.  Or should I say Chelsea Manning?


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> What planet are you on?  No gays were kicked out, especially under DADT, unless they just wanted to be.



Really - the only gay people that discharged from the military under DADT were guys/gals that "wanted to be"? Can you back up that claim?



The Rabbi said:


> I notice the first result of the new policy is Bradley Manning.  Or should I say Chelsea Manning?



Yea and she really got off easy, right?


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...


Oh?   Gay vets discharged under DADT can sue for full severance | Suits & Sentences blog


----------



## Katzndogz (Aug 26, 2013)

bodecea said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > 2% of the population is forcing 98% of the population to make changes to their own lives to suit that 2%.
> ...



They forced that photographer to change her life.  Gays tried to force my life to change but it didn't work.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Which one?


----------



## longknife (Aug 26, 2013)

And they want to shove it up the A***s of anyone who isn't!!!


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

longknife said:


> And they want to shove it up the A***s of anyone who isn't!!!



Who wants to do what?


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

longknife said:


> And they want to shove it up the A***s of anyone who isn't!!!



^ Another RWr who thinks more about gay sex than gays do.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> 
> How are 2% a threat to society...feel free to leave out silly hyperbole



Why even bother to bring it up here, Plasma. The gay bashing usual suspects just have one more opportunity to preach their hate and bigotry. It is absoluetly nexecssary to their self esteem to have someone to look down upon.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > What planet are you on?  No gays were kicked out, especially under DADT, unless they just wanted to be.
> ...



That claim is the truth.  Only people who were in yer face were discharged.  The military largely looked the other way on gays.
Yeah, Manning got off easy.  Sold secrets to Wiki and got only 37 years and gets a free sex change operation.  He should have gotten the firing squad.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> That claim is the truth.  Only people who were in yer face were discharged.  The military largely looked the other way on gays.



Well, what about the times the military didn't look the other way? Do you think it's fair for an officer to have his/her career ended simply because it's known that they are attracted to members of the same sex, in the absence of any other offenses? Gay soldiers had to keep stories of their significant others to themselves, whereas straight soldiers could talk freely about it. Do you think that's a fair situation? 



The Rabbi said:


> Yeah, Manning got off easy.  Sold secrets to Wiki and got only 37 years and gets a free sex change operation.  He should have gotten the firing squad.



I'm not too involved in his case, but I know he's mainly known for leaking documents that shows US soldiers killing innocent civilians. I personally believe his intent was to show people that (at least a portion of) their tax dollars do go towards killing innocent people. 

My question is, who pays the price for the tens of thousands of innocent civilians and US soldiers that have been killed in the past 10 years as a result of the US invading Iraq? You can give Manning the 35 years - sure, that's the law I suppose - but what about the folks who got us into this mess in the first place, misleading the US public with a false premise, resulting in well over 6k US deaths?

.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > That claim is the truth.  Only people who were in yer face were discharged.  The military largely looked the other way on gays.
> ...



Please show me the officers who were relieved because it was discovered they were gay.  There aren't any.
As for Manning, why do you deflect to a war that was voted on by Congress and the vast majority of Americans supported?  A war that was justified entirely, btw.  Is it because you have no answer to the basic question?


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



As I understand it, over 10,000 soldiers have been officially discharged under the DADT law. Are you saying all those individuals committed additional offenses (besides being gay) to warrant being kicked out?

Secondly, I'm fully aware that the war was voted on by Congress, and I'm fully prepared to hold every single Congressperson who voted on that war accountable for their actions. Are you saying that we shouldn't be held responsible for an action if we... eh... voted on it? 

If the US Gov't voted on burning up the Constitution and instituting a Monarchy, as well as the execution of anyone who disagreed, would you be "ok" with that just because there was an official vote?

Also, the American people supported the war because they were actively lied to by our President and other officials on why we were entering the war. If there was no WMD lie, and no media hysteria surrounding that lie, the people would not have supported that war. How many people would be on board if our politicians would have taken the honest route and explained that *"we're going to a war with a country that poses no threat to the United States right now, nor was involved to any degree with Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks*. Who would buy that? 

Which basic question do I not have an answer to, by the way?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



I just did a quick check and although I didn't find evidence of any Officer being relieved for being gay, I, (interestingly enough) DID come across this:

REVERSE Don?t Ask Don?t Tell for Christians? Air Force Sergeant REASSIGNED for disagreeing with gay marriage » The Right Scoop -

Gee...Who'd a thunk it would happen.........

Additionally, I ran across this - which actually surprised the heck out of me. I thought the French were so "liberal"???

http://angelqueen.org/2013/06/12/fr...-marry-homosexual-couple-risks-years-in-jail/


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> I just did a quick check and although I didn't find evidence of any Officer being relieved for being gay, I, (interestingly enough) DID come across this:
> 
> REVERSE Don?t Ask Don?t Tell for Christians? Air Force Sergeant REASSIGNED for disagreeing with gay marriage » The Right Scoop -
> 
> ...



So wait, one guy got _reassigned _while over 10,000 (on the other end of the spectrum) were discharged? 

Now, is that what you call a strong argument?


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



If you want to suck another man's dick - no one should have an issue with it. 
Suck away, asswipe. 
Be sure to wipe/wash up.


----------



## Spoonman (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> 
> Well slim if you dont actively go seeking it.



idk, you libs  seem to be awefully worried about the 1%.   just how many exclusive country clubs do you belong to and how many gated communities do you reside in?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > I just did a quick check and although I didn't find evidence of any Officer being relieved for being gay, I, (interestingly enough) DID come across this:
> ...



The only "argument" I'm making is that speak out now - and watch what happens. Your "career" in the military will be over. Those fudge packers that were discharged - can sue for relief. 

Open your mouth about a subordinate being punished too harshly for DISAGREEING with fags - and you lose your career. 

If you can't discern the difference, then I don't know what to tell you....


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



OK, that's 10k "soldiers", not officers.  So right there you've contradicted your post.
Second, my contention is that people got kicked out for being gay because they wanted to get kicked out.  I see nothing to contradict that in your post.
Congress voted for the war and they acted constitutionally.  Are you really comparing a constitutional exercise of power to an unconstitutional one?  It wouldn't surprise me.  The wookie-suiters dont exactly live in reality-land.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



Your example is someone speaking out AGAINST a fellow soldier, which is an action that causes disunity amongst a group and probably not a good thing for an army division. 

My example is someone having the ability to telling the truth and speak on their OWN life with honesty (instead of being forced to lie when it comes to the topic of significant other). 

If you can't discern the difference, then I don't know what to tell _you_...


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



^Another RWr who talks/thinks about gay sex more than gay people do.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Geaux4it said:


> Homos live a lifestyle that is in opposition to mainstream culture. If they want equal rights, then why not allow bigamy in all states?
> 
> It's a sinful lifestyle
> 
> -Geaux



non answer


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



Gay vets discharged under DADT can sue for full severance | Suits & Sentences blog   They are.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



nobody is bending over backwards for these people. People are accessing the situations and judging the fact that these policies are not needed anymore. Not allowing gays to be open in the military was simply bigoted and not needed. 

Blacks at this moment in time are 10-12% of the population and yet we felt the need to bend over for them to fight for our nation or get married to white folks.


----------



## Luissa (Aug 26, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Why are you so obsessed with gay sex?


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Vandalshandle said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Ok so no real serious answer yet..
> ...



because i found what LGS said to be amusing. How can these people get that up in arms over 2% of the population. I knew their answers before they even posted. 

For the most part these people are on the extinction line. They will die off and us younger folks will accept these societal changes. 

The whole idea about how enraged they get over 2% is hilarious.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



you are the expert lot lizard. you talk about more dick than a gay male porn site.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Spoonman said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



no i don't. why would i worry about that?


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



Yeah actualy people are being bent over for these people. People are being forced to accomodate their needs.  People are being forced to do business with them against their beliefs.
You just dont want to hear that or pretend it isnt' true.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



No, you didnt.  You assumed their answers and then twisted or dismissed ones that deviated from your pre-arranged script.
IOW you acted like a total liberal.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



nope...


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



nothing you've stated is new. i look forward to your ilk dying off


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Oh, I see. You're the moronic fool who classifies "soldiers" as "Officers". And, you're wrong again. The AIRMAN in question was speaking out against a POLICY you uneducated twit.

So, to encapsulate: It's perfectly FINE for one Service member to engage in oral or anal sex with another Service Member of the same sex, but it is a punishable offense for a Service member to speak out against the policy that allows it. 

Gotcha!


Brave new world you have there sonny!


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> OK, that's 10k "soldiers", not officers.  So right there you've contradicted your post.
> Second, my contention is that people got kicked out for being gay because they wanted to get kicked out.  I see nothing to contradict that in your post.


Admittedly, I don&#8217;t have any evidence. However, neither do you (haven&#8217;t seen anything but your opinion). Stalemate I suppose. 



The Rabbi said:


> Congress voted for the war and they acted constitutionally.  Are you really comparing a constitutional exercise of power to an unconstitutional one?  It wouldn't surprise me.  The wookie-suiters dont exactly live in reality-land.



Again, if Congress voted to go to war with Mexico because it wanted to 'take all of their resources' would you still support it *IF* it was voted on? I believe the American public was mislead on the reasons why we were going to war with Iraq (ie something that didn&#8217;t exist), and someone needs to be held accountable for that mistake.

Question; did you/did you not support the Iraq War in 2003, and do you still uphold that same opinion?


----------



## Luissa (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > OK, that's 10k "soldiers", not officers.  So right there you've contradicted your post.
> ...



I tried to find someone, and found this. I find this interesting. 

"Washington Post Staff Writer 
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
The financial costs to the U.S. military for discharging and replacing gay service members under the nation's "don't ask, don't tell" policy are nearly twice what the government estimated last year, with taxpayers covering at least $364 million in associated funds over the policy's first decade, according to a University of California report scheduled for release today."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021302373.html


So allowing them to serve openly is saving us millions. Hmmmm


----------



## Spoonman (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



yet you libs are up in arms over 1% of the population.  hilarious


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> Oh, I see. You're the moronic fool who classifies "soldiers" as "Officers".



Big f&#8217;ing deal, Randall. It&#8217;s a mistake &#8211; I admit. Didn&#8217;t realize you were a dickhead (thought you were capable of a back and fourth without insult), and glad to see you taking the civility of our conversation down a notch....



RandallFlagg said:


> And, you're wrong again. The AIRMAN in question was speaking out against a POLICY you uneducated twit.


Twit? Thanks again. Didn&#8217;t your mom/pops ever teach you how to respectfully engage with other individuals, or did you just grow hostile with age? 

Is this the FIRST time in military history that someone was reprimanded for speaking out against an official policy? And are you up in arms EVERY TIME this occurs, or only when the policy is regarding gay soldiers? 



RandallFlagg said:


> So, to encapsulate: It's perfectly FINE for one Service member to engage in oral or anal sex with another Service Member of the same sex, but it is a punishable offense for a Service member to speak out against the policy that allows it.
> 
> Gotcha!


Not sure what the policy is on actual intercourse amongst servicemen/women, but I would like that policy to be applied in the same fashion to both straight and gay couples. If two gay officers have sex in an _inappropriate _situation, then discharge their asses - I'm fine with that.



RandallFlagg said:


> Brave new world you have there sonny!


My generation&#8217;s just coming of age; the world is currently as YOU&#8217;VE left it. Looks like we'll be sorting out this debt situation for about the next 100 years. I'm up for the challenge. 


.


----------



## Luissa (Aug 26, 2013)

Spoonman said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



And why is that? 
Be honest now.


----------



## Spoonman (Aug 26, 2013)

Luissa said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



you tell me.  I'm still waiting for a valid reason why


----------



## rrb017 (Aug 26, 2013)

I believe that people do not have a fear of accepting it, but a fear of it being incorporated into their everyday life, as it is today. I am not sure if the 2% is accurate but whether it is or not, the lifestyle is praised by the media and in movies and film. Actors, actresses, singers and other performers performers have considerable influence due to their talents, and when they are shown on the television promoting their beliefs, it seems as if there is no one promoting the beliefs of the other 98% because those are not the type of people given the opportunity to share their beliefs with the public. A prime example is last night on MTV's Video Music Awards Macklemore won an award for the social message of his song "Same Love" and when he was accepting his award, he proclaimed his beliefs to the millions of viewers. It just appears to be unfair because the only people given a platform to speak with millions of people at a time are the ones who have the same opinion.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, I see. You're the moronic fool who classifies "soldiers" as "Officers".
> ...



*Yeah. I have to cop to that. And what the hell are YOU going to do to reverse this nonsense that you have been saddled with? You ready to step up? Or are you pleased with this destruction of the country that YOU will be left with?*


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> Yeah. I have to cop to that. And what the hell are YOU going to do to reverse this nonsense that you have been saddled with? You ready to step up? Or are you pleased with this destruction of the country that YOU will be left with?



I'm not happy. I try to be as active as I possibly can in local politics, I read, watch the news, and currently thoroughly dislike the President for more reasons than you can imagine. Just heard today that the POTUS is likely going to appoint Larry Summers as the next Head of the Fed, which is unsettling to say the least given he's an insider who shares much of the responsibility for the recent economic collapse our WORLD went through just a few short years ago, and the inevitable one to come (because the system remained unchanged, and the culprits went unpunished).

I've not run for office or anything like that, lol, but I like to do my part and educate many of my Obama supporting friends to think twice about supporting the man. 

How to reverse the non-sense?
I think it's simple in concept but difficult in execution; stop voting garbage into Congress and into the office of the Presidency. You put in garbage and you will get garbage in return (not hard to understand). I think we need to place emphasis on the family unit and education, as well as a reduction in the millions of "distractions" (like TV, sports) that have seemed to become "our lives" over the course of maybe 50-60 years. Overall, people need to get themselves at least marginally informed, and stay away from the major news networks.

Most of all, we need to stop bickering over nonsense. The "divided we fall" saying will hold true, I'm certain.


----------



## Politico (Aug 26, 2013)

bodecea said:


> Baron said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, if I watch some TV-channels I think there are 40 % of population gays.
> ...



And NBC, CBS, ABC Syfy, BBC, HGTV....anything from channels 2 through 1000.

Speaking of that, Bob and Tom are looking for a new home on House Hunters.....


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah. I have to cop to that. And what the hell are YOU going to do to reverse this nonsense that you have been saddled with? You ready to step up? Or are you pleased with this destruction of the country that YOU will be left with?
> ...



Look, one thing I've learned over my lifetime is that these "presidents" come and go. Hell, I had to endure that idiot Jimmy Carter.

There has been a direct "seed-change" in this country. Liberals actually believe that they are a "force" in American politics (and they are). Why? Americans, for the last 20-25 years have been working like crazy (both parents) to merely put food on the table, Frankly they (1) haven't had time to "get involved" the way they did at one point and (2) the Liberals (who, believe it or not, used to be decent people) have adopted a Marxist-Communist view point with this latest generation of slackers that have flooded our society from colleges and universities. Their idea of "society" is something akin to early Nazi Germany. If they could, Barry would be appointed Supreme Commander and never leave. So much for history repeating itself, huh?

Next - the conservatives have completely lost their collective way. They have fallen prey to the crap that the left throws out there "Either become like us - or perish". Frankly, I see a liberal, I see a clown who needs his ass spanked. Nothing more than spoiled children who have been given too much leeway.

Conservatives need to return to their "roots" with financial conservatism, societal conservatism and moral conservatism.  Quit trying to "please everyone all the time". You simply can not do it. Next - stop taking the damned "high road" ala John McCain. That old farts time was over 25 years ago. Be willing to get down and dirty with these idiots. You MUST fight their fire with a BIGGER FIRE until this nonsense is stamped out.

The Republicans MUST find candidates that will STAND for something - and stick to it. This country is in dire straits. This economy is holding on - but barely (contrary to what the left is telling you). It will soon be tested hard. Once Barry stops this policy of "propping up the fake economy" by buying bonds - to the tune of 85 BILLION per month - this thing is going to come to a head. I hope you are prepared.

Whoever the next slob  that inhabits the White House is going to face something that will make 2008 look like a picnic. It's coming.

Now, in the words of Mother Abigail from Stephen King's "The Stand"...


Are YOU ready to make YOUR stand??


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Spoonman said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



are you fucking stupid or something? you already stated this and i said no, no i am not.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



Sounds like the kind of complaints I used to hear against having to associate with or do business with or accomodate people in wheelchairs.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > OK, that's 10k "soldiers", not officers.  So right there you've contradicted your post.
> ...



You have no evidence because there is no evidence. I have many active, former and retired servicemen among my customers and I ask about this periodically.  Pretty much all of them have told me that unless someone was just asking for a discharge it didnt happen. But as long as someone behaved himself no one was looking to cashier him out of the military.  And even the one guy who did make a big deal about it, some airman who won the Bronze Star in Vietnam, he got a general discharge so kept his benefits.


Your hypothetical about Mexico once again confuses good policy with valid policy.  Would I support an annexation of Mexico?  Probably not.  But if Congress voted for it then it was a legitimate policy decision, even if I think it's wrong.  That's your problem: every policy you disagree with is criminal.  Which supports my contention that there's little difference between liberals and narco-libertarians.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> You have no evidence because there is no evidence. I have many active, former and retired servicemen among my customers and I ask about this periodically.  Pretty much all of them have told me that unless someone was just asking for a discharge it didnt happen. But as long as someone behaved himself no one was looking to cashier him out of the military.  And even the one guy who did make a big deal about it, some airman who won the Bronze Star in Vietnam, he got a general discharge so kept his benefits.



Interesting, thanks. 



The Rabbi said:


> Your hypothetical about Mexico once again confuses good policy with valid policy.  Would I support an annexation of Mexico?  Probably not.  But if Congress voted for it then it was a legitimate policy decision, even if I think it's wrong.  That's your problem: every policy you disagree with is criminal.  Which supports my contention that there's little difference between liberals and narco-libertarians.



No, I don't think every policy I disagree with is criminal (where'd you draw up that idea?). I was specifically speaking about a act of war that was qualified over evidence that didn't exist. 

Barely 5 hours after the 9/11 attack, Rumsfeld was throwing around the idea of invading Iraq:
Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11 - CBS News

With zero evidence linking Saddam to the 9/11 attacks then and now, I think we should take a deeper dive into who and what was pushing so hard for us to get into that country. Why? Because hundreds of thousands of people died, and are no longer existing because of that decision. Because the evidence that was put forth as FACT by our United States officials turned out to be NON-FACTUAL after the war was initiated. You have to be incredibly naive to assume everyone pushing to invade Iraq had noble intentions; especially given the enormity of our defense budget and how many politicians rely on donations from that sector to remain in office. 

There are many policies that I disagree with that I wouldn't consider "criminal", however when it comes to the Iraq War I feel as if we were intentionally misled, and intentionally coaxed and I think someone aught to be held responsible. 

Who are you trying to defend here? 


.


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Yeah, that's pretty much what those bigots were saying about 10% of the population during the Civil Rights Era and before the Civil Rights Era. Wow...........really?


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 26, 2013)

Geaux4it said:


> Homos live a lifestyle that is in opposition to mainstream culture. If they want equal rights, then why not allow bigamy in all states?
> 
> It's a sinful lifestyle
> 
> -Geaux



Aren't you part of the crowd who wants limited government and government to get out of Our business? Aren't you in favor of religious freedom? I have no problem with polygamy, didn't they have that in the Bible? If consenting adults want to engage in polygamy or same sex marriage; more power to them, it doesn't affect me and my heterosexual monogamous marriage. At one time inter-racial marriage was against the law in not a few states.


----------



## Pheonixops (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> > I have never understood the argument that gays are forcing anybody to accept anything. Nobody is asking you to marry somebody of the same sex. All they ask for is that right. Don't approve of homosexuality for all I care. But until two men or women getting married negatively affects you, stay out of their business.
> ...



In my opinion it's not, it's them fighting for their rights through the proper channels aka the court system. That's the American way.


----------



## Intense (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Aug 26, 2013)

The2ndAmendment said:


> There's a group called "Gay for Guns."
> 
> ?* Gays with Guns *?
> 
> ...



And yet more stupidity from the right. 

Gays seeking their civil liberties has nothing to do with the left, there are many conservative homosexuals who also desire to marry and otherwise have their states acknowledge and respect their personal liberty.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Pheonixops said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > aaronleland said:
> ...



Not according to these losers. Its forcing america to accept it.


----------



## Cenotaph (Aug 26, 2013)

I actually believe that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals in the American population. You have to take into account those who are not open about their sexuality. I'm also going to go ahead and assume that this statistic (where's the source by the way) doesn't include bisexuals (who are fairly prevalent throughout the world).

Of course, this is purely speculation...


----------



## Cenotaph (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Not according to these losers. Its forcing america to accept it.



If the purpose of this thread is to make a convincing argument, then insulting and antagonizing the opposing side (the side you're trying to win over) isn't going to help.


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > You have no evidence because there is no evidence. I have many active, former and retired servicemen among my customers and I ask about this periodically.  Pretty much all of them have told me that unless someone was just asking for a discharge it didnt happen. But as long as someone behaved himself no one was looking to cashier him out of the military.  And even the one guy who did make a big deal about it, some airman who won the Bronze Star in Vietnam, he got a general discharge so kept his benefits.
> ...



That's a clown question, bro.

You start with an incorrect assumption and then proceed to fault the administration because they couldn't support your incorrect assumption.
I would explain it but after 10 years if you haven't understood what happened there's no chance I can reach you.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true based on someone here stating it. Why all the worry about being forced to accept it? Are you that worried about 2%? Regardless if you feel its abnormal, a choice or whatever. How can 2% Really be that mich of a threat to your way of life. At 2% the odds of you running into a gay person are rather slim.
> ...



Its hard to believe anyones truly this stupid and hateful, but given your other posts, that seems to be the case. 

The irony is homosexuals dont want to be accommodated, or tolerated, they want simply to be left alone, allowed to privately conduct their lives in anonymous dignity  to go to school where they wish, to work where they wish, to love whom they wish, and to marry whom they wish, free from interference by ignorant social conservatives such as you.


----------



## LittleNipper (Aug 26, 2013)

What percent of prison mates are homosexual? And do many learn the ropes while in prison?


----------



## PixieStix (Aug 26, 2013)

2% down 98% to go


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



The stupid is strong in this one.
Tell me, who is proposing to keep homosexuals from being left alone to conduct their lives privately?  No one.  There is not one state in the union that prohibits gay marriage.  Not one.  So why do gays continually howl, protest, sue, and otherwise make themselves obnoxious to the public at large?  So no one will notice them?  Why not just shut the fuck up?  I'll bet if they just shut the fuck up no one will notice them.


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



It's my opinion, yes. Would you care to explain your interpretation?


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...


Here's a hint: No one suggested that we go to war in Iraq because of 9/11.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



Uppity gays!


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



I never claimed the US gov't claimed that Saddam was behind 9/11, and used that lie to get us in Iraq (my apologies if my posts were interpreted as such). 

I claimed that _someone _had an agenda to get the US into Iraq (which is seen partially via the Rumsfeld memo story I linked to), and that the 'evidence' they presented to us (to convince us to back that agenda) was a load of hog-wash. 

When someone pushes you into a war over a FALSE PREMISE, they should be held accountable - right? 

The FALSE PREMISE being the existence of WMDs, and the gravity of the threat they posed to the United States. 

.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Actually, every intel operation in the world KNEW that Saddam had WMDs. There was no doubt. It was speculated that knowing an invasion was imminent, he had them shipped to Syria for safe-keeping. There were too many empty garrisons found with NBC equipment and too many depots found with MASSIVE NBC capabilities for there not to have been.

Doesn't matter at this point in time, but like Syria, Saddam had used these same weapons on HIS people that are now being employed in Syria against their people. 

To the best of my knowledge, there was never any concrete evidence that this is what happened, but it's not terribly hard to connect the dots - and, all provided by Russia.

I will be interested to see what the communist left has to say when Barry lobs a Cruise or two into Syria. And, more importantly, I'll be especially interested to hear Vladimir Putins "response". Interesting times ahead.....


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



It was the Israelis and their Amen Corner in Congress, right?


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Cenotaph said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Not according to these losers. Its forcing america to accept it.
> ...


Who said I wanted to win them over?


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...




I think war is a racket, and the primary reason we entered into Iraq (and soon to be Syria) is that there's money to be made.

The soldiers - without a doubt - care about the well being of the countries we blow apart. They're just following orders. But the leaders? They'd sacrifice children to achieve their goals in a heartbeat.. So long it's not their own (of course).


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

The Rabbi said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



I don't know what you're talking about, and what's with the coaxing?


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 26, 2013)

Luissa said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> > Why are you so obsessed with gay sex?
> ...


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 26, 2013)

Luissa said:


> Why are you so obsessed with gay sex?



Why are you so obsessed with being a fucking ding bat?


----------



## freedombecki (Aug 26, 2013)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...


That never crossed my mind, Clayton.






















Whatever was I thinking?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

freedombecki said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



You have to understand the paralegal. He/she/it lives in another world. Anything to bring down the status quo.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

freedombecki said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



Tough shit..take it up with the local city that gives them the permit to have such parades.
Till freedom of speech!


----------



## KevinWestern (Aug 26, 2013)

freedombecki said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



At the end of the day your showing us a few pics of just a handful of people. Most all the gay people I know don't look or act like that. Just sayin...


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 26, 2013)

The guys pictured probably dont look or act like that.  All of them are probably systems analysts or accountants somewhere.  But there are parades similar to this in all major cities and displays like this pretty commonly.  How is that "wanting to be left alone"?


----------



## Cenotaph (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Cenotaph said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



Then what is the purpose of this thread?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

Navy permits uniformed sailors to march in San Diego Gay Pride




Welcome to the new, improved Navy. I will sleep much better tonight. When I was in the Army, if I went off Post in my fatigues I would receive an Article 15. Now, these "seamen" (pun intended) are allowed to represent the Navy in a gay pride parade. My opinion? You want to march with that bunch of perverts in civilian clothes - who cares?

But in Navy Uniform?!?!?


May God have mercy......


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



There are some pretty bizarre straights at Spring Break and Mardi Gras.....I understand all straights are like them.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

Cenotaph said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> > Cenotaph said:
> ...



Amusement?  I was curious to see if people could explain why 2% is a huge threat to society
Once you remove the sensational crap you dont have much.


----------



## bodecea (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> Navy permits uniformed sailors to march in San Diego Gay Pride
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yep...and they got a tremendous ovation.   The gay community supports our military!


----------



## Cenotaph (Aug 26, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Cenotaph said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



I see.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Aug 26, 2013)

bodecea said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Navy permits uniformed sailors to march in San Diego Gay Pride
> ...




Yet this young Corporal nearly faced Court Martial:


Ron Paul Supporter Likely Violated Military Regulations By Speaking At Rally


But as long as your butt buddies get to prance about, all is well. This country is doomed.


----------



## Plasmaball (Aug 26, 2013)

RandallFlagg said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > RandallFlagg said:
> ...



The fact things need to be explained to as to why this isnt the same thing is fucking sad..


----------



## The Rabbi (Aug 27, 2013)

Plasmaball said:


> Cenotaph said:
> 
> 
> > Plasmaball said:
> ...



So it was a troll thread.  Thanks for admitting as much.
Doofus.


----------

