# Tennessee Seeks tonBar Same Sex Marriage



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights


I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?

My guess is that they are anticipating and provoking a court fight, but even if it gets to SCOTUS there is no certainty that Obergefell will be overturned. Never in our history a right-once established- been revoked. A Roberts, who seems to have become the new swing vote, is aware of the outrage that would insue and the stain on his legacy that it would inflict.



> Nearly four years after the Supreme Court made same-sex marriage legal throughout the U.S. in its landmark Obergefell v. Hodges decision, Republican lawmakers in Tennessee are attempting to turn back the clock with legislation aimed at barring gay marriage in the state.
> 
> 
> The "Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act," which was first proposed in 2016, seeks to "defend natural marriage between one man and one woman regardless of any court decision to the contrary." The bill, which was reintroduced on Friday, would deem the high court's Obergefell decision "unauthoritative, void, and of no effect."



And that is not all



> The reintroduced "natural marriage" law, however, "isn't the only anti-LGBT bill on the docket right now," noted Sanders. He said there are at least five other bills in the state legislature that may threaten the rights of LGBTQ people in Tennessee. One of these bills, which was introduced in both the state House and Senate (Pody is the sponsor of the Senate bill), seeks to allow private adoption agencies to decline to participate in any child placement services that would "violate the agency's written religious or moral convictions." This type of legislation, which can already be found in 10 states across the U.S., creates barriers for LGBTQ individuals and same-sex couples looking to adopt or foster.



These people have to be, and will be stopped.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 12, 2019)

There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".

You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.



Yes, you are correct that there is not "right" to be married.  However, if the gov't offers benefits to citizens, they must be offered equally.

The 14th Amendment is the law of the land.  The equal protection clause applies here.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

I still do not understand why same sex marriage is an issue.  It is consenting adults entering into the state of matrimony.  It has no effect on anyone else except those who marry someone of the same gender.


----------



## Pete7469 (Feb 12, 2019)

Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...

Because they're not.

Change the fucking record parasite.



.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> 
> Because they're not.
> 
> ...



Ok, don't accept them as normal.   That does not change the SCOTUS ruling.

And whether you accept them as normal is irrelevant.   I am straight, and I don't know many people who consider me "normal".   Someone else getting married and enjoying the hundreds of gov't benefits bestowed on married couples has nothing to do with being normal.

Same sex couples getting married does not effect you at all.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 12, 2019)

The amount of time, energy, and state money these state legislators spend on this stupidity is astonishing. Don't they have any real responsibilities?

The 14th Amendment exists, _Obergefell _is precedential, and it would do a great deal of damage to our country and legal system to allow the passing of legislation that is totally ideological in origin and has nothing to do with any legitimate government interest.

Are the people who try to pass these laws "normal"?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Feb 12, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...


It’s rightwing political theatre, grist for stump speeches next year.

And it’s further confirmation of the fact that most on the right have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 12, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...


You whities once had the right to own black slaves.


----------



## mdk (Feb 12, 2019)

No reason to be alarmed. This will fail like the two other times it was introduced.


----------



## Pete7469 (Feb 12, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> You whities once had the right to own black slaves.



Whites were slaves also, and one of the first slave owners in the US was black.

White people were captured in opium dens in Seattle and shipped back over the pacific.

Heather Dugmore: The White Slaves of Africa


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 12, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > You whities once had the right to own black slaves.
> ...


Whities once had the right to own slaves.

I demand he retract his erroneous assertion immediately.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> I still do not understand why same sex marriage is an issue.  It is consenting adults entering into the state of matrimony.  It has no effect on anyone else except those who marry someone of the same gender.


Because once you redefine what marriage is, you’re fucked. Pretty soon, muslims will demand the “equality” for _their_ form of marriage. Guess what that means for your company-provided health insurance when they - by law - have to provide healthcare benefits for 14 fucking wives? It means the company says “fuck this shit” and you lose _your_ benefits.

And that’s not all. By law, a spouse gets access to their S.O. in an ICU and has decision making powers. Which means, a hospital will have to let a damn harem of wives into an ICU. And on top of that nightmare, what happens legally when 7 wives want to pull the plus and 7 wives don’t?

Our entire way of life was built on marriage being 1 man and 1 woman. The moment you redefine marriage to be anything else, you open Pandora’s Box.


----------



## Pete7469 (Feb 12, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> Whities once had the right to own slaves.
> 
> I demand he retract his erroneous assertion immediately.



Good luck with that, RegressiveParasite only posts erroneous bullshit.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 12, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > Whities once had the right to own slaves.
> ...


He married an illegal homo who left him when he got his green card.

True story.  lol


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 12, 2019)

mdk said:


> No reason to be alarmed. This will fail like the two other times it was introduced.



Exactly.  And, probably for the same reason that they failed to repeal it in CA.  The judges in that case said that since the right to marry had already been extended to gay couples, and had been in effect for a year, it was not right to take those rights back.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 12, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> And it’s further confirmation of the fact that most on the right have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, its *case* *law*, and the rule of law.


You’ve got one thing right...I’ve got nothing but the deepest contempt for your fantasy “case law” bullshit. When fascists little pricks can’t get the votes they need to amend the U.S. Constitution for their oppression, they resort to “case law” to get around it.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 12, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> mdk said:
> 
> 
> > No reason to be alarmed. This will fail like the two other times it was introduced.
> ...


Well there is some brilliant liberal “logic”. It had been illegal for 240 years before that. So using that same line of “logic”, it was never right to take that back and make it legal.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > I still do not understand why same sex marriage is an issue.  It is consenting adults entering into the state of matrimony.  It has no effect on anyone else except those who marry someone of the same gender.
> ...



Wow..................had to go straight for the scary Muslim angle right off the bat, didn't you?  Why didn't you mention those who are Mormon who believe in polygamy?  They have been trying for YEARS to get the right to marry more than one wife.

As far as what Islam says about polygamy?  Well, it says that you can have up to 4 wives (not the 14 you are asserting), but if you are unable to be fair to all your wives, then you are to marry only one. 

Polygyny in Islam - Wikipedia

*Opinions of classical Islamic scholars on polygamy
Whilst traditional Islamic scholarship upholds the notion that Islamic law permits polygyny and furthermore enforces the divine command to "marry only one" where the man fears being unable to fulfil the rights of all his wives in a fair manner, a substantial segment of the Islamic scholarship elaborates further on the ruling regarding men who are able to ensure complete equality amongst the multiple wives.[9]

Their opinion was derived from performing ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) which determined their belief that it is to be deemed preferable (even for the male individual who is capable of delivering justice to the multiple families) to refrain from joining more than one wife in the marital bond. 

This opinion has been codified into the official positions of the Hanbali and Shaafi’i schools of jurisprudence which assert that it is held recommended for a Muslim male to have only one wife, even if he may act equitably with more than one woman. 


Ash-Shirbeeni from the Shaafi’i School of jurisprudence, said: "It is a Sunnah not to marry more than one wife if there is no apparent need." [Mughni al-Muhtaj 4/207].[10]


Al-Maawardi, from the Shaafi’i School of jurisprudence, said: "Allaah has permitted a man to marry up to four wives, saying: {…two or three or four…}, but Allaah advised that it is desirable for man to marry only one wife, saying: {…But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one}" [al-Hawi al-Kabir 11/417].[10]


Ibn Qudaamah from the Hanbali School of jurisprudence, said in Ash-Sharh Al-Kabeer: "It is more appropriate to marry only one wife. The author of Al-Muharrar [i.e. Abul Barakaat Al-Majd ibn Taymiyyah] said this, based on the saying of Allaah (which means) {…But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one}." [Ash-Sharh Al-Kabeer authored by Shams-ud-deen Ibn Qudaamah].[10]


These scholars felt that adherence to monogamy would minimise the risk of oppression because the requirement of meting out justice amongst a plurality of wives would be immensely challenging for any man. Therefore, they opined that it is preferable to avoid polygamy altogether, so one does not even come near the chance of committing the forbidden deed of dealing unjustly between the wives.[9]


Imam Ahmed ibn Naqib al Masri, from the Shaafi’i School of jurisprudence, said ‘’It is fitter to confine oneself to just one’’ [Umdatu Salik].


Imam Ghazali, from the Shaafi’i School of jurisprudence, stated: "It does not call for two wives, [since] plurality may render life miserable and disrupt the affairs of the home." [Kitab al Nikah, Ihya Uloom ud Din].


Imam Shaafi’i offered an additional exegesis for the final clause of the pivotal verse discussing the divine legislation of polygyny and the divine limitations imposed upon this ancient institution.[9] He espoused that the closing clause of verse 4:3, usually interpreted as ‘that is more suitable that you may not incline to injustice’ should be understood as ‘that is more suitable that you may not be financially strained by numerous children’. 

Imam Shaafi’i reasoned that divine decree had already listed fear of committing injustice as a reason to not wed more than once, hence it was pointless for the same reason (for not wedding more than once) to be expounded twice in the same verse. 

His alternative interpretation pursued the perception which held that the presence of a plurality of women in a man's conjugal life would produce undesirably large numbers of offspring, which could be a potential cause of financial hardship and poverty in the future. 

Given the emphasis that Islamic law stipulates on the welfare of children and nurturing children with permitted means of income, Imam Shaafi’i opined that it was legislated for a man to marry just once as an increase in the population of a family due to multiple marriages could potentially harbour harmful monetary consequences for the man who marries more than once.[9]


Ash-Shaafi’i is of the view that it is desirable to confine oneself to marrying only one although it is permissible for him to marry more than one. This is to avoid being unfair by being more inclined to some of them than others, or being unable to financially support them. [al-Hawi al-Kabir 11/417].[10]*


----------



## mdk (Feb 12, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> mdk said:
> 
> 
> > No reason to be alarmed. This will fail like the two other times it was introduced.
> ...



This issue is pretty much settled with the exception of a small, but vocal minority. Bills like the aforementioned pop up from time to time, but they have very little, if any, chance of passing. They serve to appease a part of the base and nothing more.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > mdk said:
> ...



Actually, it is because once a right is given, it cannot be taken back.  And, if something is illegal, it is not a right.  Might wanna work on your comprehension and grammar.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 12, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


They follow mohamed. One of his wives was still in Pampers.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 12, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> As far as what Islam says about polygamy?  Well, it says that you can have up to 4 wives (not the 14 you are asserting), but if you are unable to be fair to all your wives, then you are to marry only one.


And yet all of them have way more than 4 wives. Dumb ass. 

Besides, your argument that all of this will be “better” because it’s “only” 4 wives rather than 14 is as laughable as it is absurd and immature.

If you have to change the subject, you really shouldn’t comment at all.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 12, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> Actually, it is because once a right is given, it cannot be taken back.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 12, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> Actually, it is because once a right is given, it cannot be taken back.


Remind us again where that federal law can be found...?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.


It's not about rights vs. privilege  . It about equal protection under the law and due process. Debating right vs. privilege  is just  a red herring logical fallacy to diverge from the real issue, which is, you cannot arbitrarily discriminate and deny to one group,, what another can take for granted. In order to do so, the government must provide a compelling state interest, or at minimum a rational basis for doing so, and the states failed miserably . Deal with it smiley.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > I still do not understand why same sex marriage is an issue.  It is consenting adults entering into the state of matrimony.  It has no effect on anyone else except those who marry someone of the same gender.
> ...


Slippery slope logical fallacy, the sky is falling idiotic horseshit. Obergefell made it clear that  the same at same sex couple would afforded the same rights as opposite sex couples -nothing more and nothing less-than opposite sex couples. Opposite sex couples cannot marry more than one person and if any wish to, they would have to go through the legal/ legislative process and justify it on it's own merits. So your post is complete and utter fear mongering bullshit.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


Thank you for that brilliant and most appropriate commentary and a subject that involves real human beings. As always you raise the bar on the level of intellectual discourse on the USMB


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > And it’s further confirmation of the fact that most on the right have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, its *case* *law*, and the rule of law.
> ...


Your knowledge of constitutional law is truly impressive. We can all learn so much from you.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > mdk said:
> ...


No it wasn't The law was previously silent on same sex marriage. It was only when gay people began to try to get married that states began to pass laws against same sex marriage. Again, equal protection under the law....a concept that you are apparently unable to grasp.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > As far as what Islam says about polygamy?  Well, it says that you can have up to 4 wives (not the 14 you are asserting), but if you are unable to be fair to all your wives, then you are to marry only one.
> ...


Who gives a fuck what the Quran says. Muslims like everyone else in this country are bound by US  law. Why aren't you bitching about the Mormons who were practicing polygamy long before Muslims were on anyone's radar? Do tell us, how many people, in the years since Obergefell have attempted plural marriage, citing that case as precedent?


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, it is because once a right is given, it cannot be taken back.
> ...



A law could be rescinded.  What changed is that the SCOTUS rules that the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment applied to marriage.  So, unless you do away with gov't benefits and sponsorship of marriage, you cannot exclude same sex couples.  Personally, I think the gov't should not be involved in the marriage business.  The fact that we willingly line up to purchase a marriage license is a sign of the ever invasive nature of the gov't.

But all of that aside, there is no logical reason why the laws should be changed to exclude same sex couples.  Their marriage has no effect on you whatsoever.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > And it’s further confirmation of the fact that most on the right have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, its *case* *law*, and the rule of law.
> ...



It was not "case law" that ended the prohibition of same sex marriage.   It was the SCOTUS ruling whether or not a law was unconstitutional.  That is their expressed purpose.

Votes are not needed if a law is unconstitutional.   We are not a democracy.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...


They are offered equally to those who meet the criteria of potential parenting. Procreation. Hetero relationships. Homos can’t procreate as homos. 
This is the same worn out, lost argument that close minded homofascists won’t give up on.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 12, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Good to see you admit you were wrong. Or lying.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



If procreation were a criteria of marriage, you might have a point.   It isn't.  You don't.
I have been married twice.  No where in any license was there mention of children.  Hetero couples who are sterile are allowed to marry.  How many women who have had their uterus removed have gotten married?  Homosexual couples have children via other means, just like many, many heterosexual couples.

The "marriage is for procreation" is what is the same worn out, lost argument.  It doesn't hold water.  The proof is in the fact that those who cannot possibly have children are still allowed to marry.

As I said, same sex marriage has no effect on you.  Why do you care?


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


We’ve been through this too many times; the people who invented marriage, legal or otherwise, never thought they’d have to explain that marriage exists for the purpose of creating families and survival of the species.
Like the guy who invented the latex glove wouldn’t think that he’d be compelled by law to explain that it’s not a synthetic cow udder.


----------



## Crepitus (Feb 12, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...


Yet you can still marry your first cousin there.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 12, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.


They have the same right as either you or I

And yes, the courts have declared it a right


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 12, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


Then why are 70 year olds allowed to marry


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 12, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...


The courts declared blacks sub-human, too.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



And the origins of marriage include multiple spouses, brothers standing in for dead brothers, women being killed because they weren't virgins.

We are discussing the legality of same sex marriage.  And claiming that marriage is expressly for the purpose of procreation is nonsense.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 12, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


They probably shouldn't be. Unless they’re in a position to obtain custody of children whereby they would provide the necessary mother/father structure. Being that old should usurp that, too.
But citing an example of a legal marriage that shouldn’t be doesn’t justify another.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 12, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...



No, actually they want exclusive rights, on the basis of a psychological dysfunction. Marriage is defined by God as a holy union between one man and one woman, and that's the way it should be.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



I have never found any legal definition of marriage that include the concept that procreation is a criteria.   Not one.  And this "they didn't write it down because they never thought they’d have to explain that marriage exists for the purpose of creating families and survival of the species" is just a dodge.  

Same sex marriage does not effect anyone but those in the marriage.    It does not destroy traditional marriage.   

And yes, citing an example of legal marriages that do not include procreation does just fine at justifying another.

I remember reading that married couples enjoy something like 1,400 benefits bestowed on them by federal, state and local gov't.  Most have absolutely nothing to do with procreation.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

JGalt said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



If you want it to be that way in your church, that is fine.   But for laws for the citizens of this nation, your religious rules cannot be the sole source.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> ...


Funny how the definition of marriage had to be changed though


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


I already explained the dilemma of presumption of procreation as the impetus. Too many times.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

Manonthestreet said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pete7469 said:
> ...



It was expanded to include same sex couples.   Besides, it wasn't the first time it was changed.   It was changed in 1967 to include interracial marriages.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



There isn't a single religion in this world that doesn't believe marriage is between men and women.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Feb 12, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Ergo changed….no spin ...just the facts


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



Your explanation of presumption has no legal standing.

And as long as heterosexual couples who cannot have children are allowed to marry, denying homosexual couples who can have children with the help of science get equal protection under the law.

Because your argument not only hinges on the entire purpose of marriage being expressly for procreation.  It hinges on procreation via only natural means.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

JGalt said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



It is still irrelevant per the US Constitution.   But you might check on what the Hindus think of same sex marriages.  Their belief in reincarnation means they accept that two souls could come back as the same genders.   And, if I am not mistaken, many neopagan and pagan religions have not issue with same sex marriage.   I think here are even legends of Native American cultures that didn't have a problem with them long before white people arrived.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 12, 2019)

Manonthestreet said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Manonthestreet said:
> ...



Eh, no spin needed.  The definition of marriage has changed several times in history.  It still has no effect on anyone but the couple who marries.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


Same sex couples do create families like anyone else and our species, unfortunately, is in no danger of extinction


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 13, 2019)

JGalt said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


Which exclusive rights would those be?


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.


It became a right when big brother got involved


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


They dont create, they merge. They need outside help, unlike a heterosexual.
Its a stupid argument.
Gays should be able to adopt and get married but with ridiculous arguments like that, you look dumb.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


What the fuck are you blathering about. That isn't even coherent. What do you have to say about hetero couples who" need outside help" There are many you know.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


2 queers cant create a human,  you imbecile.
They cant create a family. They can only merge one. Or seek outside help.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...



The best thing that could happen is to remove ALL gov’t involvement in marriage.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


Absolutely. Its also discriminatory.


----------



## miketx (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> ...


List those hundreds of government benefits you are claiming. We'll wait....


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pete7469 said:
> ...



Keep waiting.    Google it.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 13, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> The amount of time, energy, and state money these state legislators spend on this stupidity is astonishing. Don't they have any real responsibilities?
> 
> The 14th Amendment exists, _Obergefell _is precedential, and it would do a great deal of damage to our country and legal system to allow the passing of legislation that is totally ideological in origin and has nothing to do with any legitimate government interest.
> 
> Are the people who try to pass these laws "normal"?



They are using the legislative process to voice their views, as is proper.

Obergfell overstepped the bounds of constitutionality, plain and simple. At best what they should have done is force all States to recognize valid Marriage licenses from other States as they always have under full faith and credit, regardless of if the license met the in-state requirements.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 13, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...



So why does it take me 3-6 months and $500 just to get a revolver permit in NYC?

Rights can't be taken away? LOLOLOLOLOL


----------



## miketx (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


You made the claim. Unless you were lying show it.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


All spin. Vast difference in what was done and any honest person knows it. Look what happens when we start changing definitions for political gain, now what is a male what is female what is a citizen what is a country and more are up for redefining sowing chaos in their wake.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 13, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.




so

you are actually saying......

we really don't have many RIGHTS at all?

guns.....
free speech......
and religion....

and that's it.....?

everything else is a PRIVILEGE?


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 13, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.




You have no right to marry, either.

it is merely a privilege.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...




i always like to insert the GREED/conservative socialism aspect of these situations;

gays can't marry or adopt means they don't get those tax breaks while heteros DO get those tax breaks.

so gays pay MORE in taxes (to support a hetero culture) while heteros pay less.......is that technically "socialism"?


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 13, 2019)

martybegan said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > The amount of time, energy, and state money these state legislators spend on this stupidity is astonishing. Don't they have any real responsibilities?
> ...


The court was slow in enforcing the fourth amendment


----------



## miketx (Feb 13, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


Why are you so obsessed with gay?


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 13, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...


Courts ruled otherwise


----------



## martybegan (Feb 13, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



The Court wrongly extended equal protection to something that up until a few decades ago wasn't even considered.

Inter-racial/tribal marriage has been with us for millenia, same sex marriage as a legal or even moral concept is only a few decades old. 

With no precedent comes no reason for equality under the 14th.


----------



## Pete7469 (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Ok, don't accept them as normal.   That does not change the SCOTUS ruling.
> 
> And whether you accept them as normal is irrelevant.   I am straight, and I don't know many people who consider me "normal".   Someone else getting married and enjoying the hundreds of gov't benefits bestowed on married couples has nothing to do with being normal.
> 
> Same sex couples getting married does not effect you at all.



That's true, and to be honest I don't give a half a shit. I am really just tired of hearing about it. If Tennessee or Texas want to outlaw it, I don't care, if most of the people in those states don't want queers running around and prefer to make life less than hospitable by outlawing their silly twisted "families", then so what? IF NY and Commiefornia want to compel people to try perverse lifestyles, I don't care.

The thing is, the queer mafia has mad life harder for people who don't want to participate at all in gay celebrations and parties by forcing them to provide services for them against their will. So as long as they're doing that, I'll support a hard line against them every chance I get. Shutting down bakeries and demonizing Pizza shops who prefer not to cater to them is where I drew the line. Now they have freaks going into schools to indoctrinate small children about how freaks are normal, and people who like to be normal are bigots.

We've become extremely tolerant of gays in the US, possibly more so than anywhere else I've been. That wasn't good enough though. They weren't after tolerance or equality though, they were after special treatment.


.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> anynameyouwish said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




I am trying to protect and defend your privileges.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 13, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, don't accept them as normal.   That does not change the SCOTUS ruling.
> ...




So....
what you are actually saying is.....

if any state wants to kill gays.....or any other desirable.....you have NO PROBLEM with it......


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



When I’m not on here via my phone I will find a link.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 13, 2019)

martybegan said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > The amount of time, energy, and state money these state legislators spend on this stupidity is astonishing. Don't they have any real responsibilities?
> ...


Obergefell did not overstep any bounds of constitutionality. Please review the 14th Amendment.
Outside of any constitutional argument, just what is your beef? The question of legal marriage is a CIVIL matter.  Now, LGBTs can get married under CIVIL law and enjoy the LEGAL benefits of doing so.
Please recognize the difference between CIVIL  LAW and the rules of whatever religion you have freely chosen to follow. Being legally married is under our U.S. civil  law. 
What being married means to you, under your chosen religion or ideology is up to you.
One of my uncles married a woman and had one child with her, my cousin. They divorced, and he married another, and had three children with her. They were never married in the Catholic Churrch with full ceremony, but they were married under civil law.
Marriage under civil U.S. law is so different than the concept of marriage that exists in the religious law that you choose to follow.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...


Looks like TN is working hard to be classified as  third world.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> 
> Because they're not.
> 
> ...


Quite a disturbing post.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

mdk said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > mdk said:
> ...


A smaller and smaller group of anti-gay marriage losers.....but they get more vocal and more desperate.....I find that most of that core are really homovoyeurs.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

P@triot said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, it is because once a right is given, it cannot be taken back.
> ...


Ok, give an example in our nation's history of when a equal right was extended to a group, it was taken away again.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 13, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



The issue is the creation of rights because people feel like it over sound principles. The 14th amendment isn't an open book that allows anything under "equal" to be inserted into it. 

The issue is marriage contracts have always been the responsibility of the States. Using the courts to all of a sudden say a new concept such as SSM is now somehow a right is an end run around the constitution on dubious legal grounds. Obergfell would have been on much more sound legal footing if all they did was say even if  a State doesn't want to issue SSM licenses, they had to recognize SSM licenses issued by other States (that passed it legislatively) under full faith and credit.

And your protestations about letting people be and do what they want falls hollow considering you are one of the "BAKE THAT FUCKING CAKE PEASANT" mafia members.

We all know your true goal is forcing acceptance as opposed to tolerance, and you will use government as a bludgeon to do it. 

Also, I always find it comical when progressive thugs like you read into amendments to three of four layers to get what you want while ignoring the 2nd amendment's blunt assurance of the people's right to keep and bear arms. Of course expecting honestly and fairness out of a progressive hack like you is asking too much.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

JGalt said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


Ironically, gay couples have been able to get holy marriages decades before legal marriages.   I suppose since you believe that marriage is a holy union, you have never bothered to get a legal marriage license because it means nothing to you.......right?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

JGalt said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


There are many religions that were marrying gay couples decades before legal marriage occured.


----------



## miketx (Feb 13, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > anynameyouwish said:
> ...


More like your perverse habits.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pete7469 said:
> ...


Rights and responsibilities of marriages in the United States - Wikipedia


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> anynameyouwish said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


Ah...a homovoyeur.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


So what if they need outside help.   Many heteros do too.   Are you going to insist they don't have "real" marriages also?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> anynameyouwish said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Ah...a homovoyeur.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I didnt say it wasnt real. You did.
I was just saying gays cant create.
I fully support gay marriage and adoption. So shove your strawman.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



How Marriage Works


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


They're so stupid that they even get that wrong. People get tax credits for having dependents. Gays do in fact have dependents. The only thing that marriage gets you is the ability to file a joint return.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> anynameyouwish said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I'm not obsessed with gays and the fact that you make that assumption does not speak well for your level of intellectual functioning or emotional maturity. I am obsessed with social justice and human rights


----------



## miketx (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > anynameyouwish said:
> ...


You aren't? It's all you ever talk about.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

miketx said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



No it’s not Check out my profile


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, don't accept them as normal.   That does not change the SCOTUS ruling.
> ...


Very disturbing post.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...




Never was. Existing right disappear all the time. This isn’t even a real issue. All it is is polititions pandering to a group of dumb white apes who are confused about biology.


----------



## candycorn (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...



Isn’t TN the same state that has a State Park named after the founder of the KKK?


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Homos cannot procreate. They still require the opposite gender which makes it hetero.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


So?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Calling me an imbecile does not make you sound smart'

I'm well aware of how babies are made

I'm also aware of the fact that two people being able to create a child in the usual "approved " manner does not in itself qualify  them tp be parents

What exactly is your problem? You claim to support gay marriage and adoption, but continue to denigrate them with slurs and pursue  this stupid issue about procreation as a means of setting gay couples apart as inferior.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



You might be right.   Considering there are documented examples of homosexuality and same gender pairings in numerous species, perhaps the Tennessee legislators are simply confused about biology.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



And procreation is still not a legal requirement for marriage.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...




You made my point. Killing is also documented in multiple species, so is  cannibalisem and incest, yet there are no specal voting advocates for that stuff. At least none that are taken seriously.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



And all of those things cause harm.  

What harm does a same sex marriage cause? In fact, what effect does it have on you at all?


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Stating facts isnt denigrating them.
I never said having babies made a couple superior.
You are arguing shit i never said


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 13, 2019)

martybegan said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Equal treatment under the law stands under the 14th Amendment.
Once a right is established, it is established for all.
I am not a "thug." 
Laws created only to please adherents of a particular ideology are not acceptable in the United States.
"Mafia members"?  What is a "mafia member" to stand up for our public-public-accommodation laws and insist that they be followed as a condition of being licensed to do business in our communities?
Since the Muslim term "sharia 'law" has now become to stand for "religious law" in general, to which form of sharia law do you adhere? You seem to be in agreement that a state in the United States of America should be entitled to enforce some form of sharia law on its citizens.
CIVIL LAW is very different than the law that you accept when you choose a religion. Remember that choosing a religion is choosing a lifestyle. From your post, it appears that you have chosen, freely, a lifestyle that involves some mixture of the "Christian faith," guns, and hatred of LGBTs. It is a bizarre cult..


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Does any of that cause harm? All of them can be practiced in a peaceable non violent manner by humans.  How would cannibalisem hurt you? Or incest? And murder? A few weeks ago we had thousands cheer the legalization of birthing a child, naming forceps in its head and sucking outnumbered its brain with an industrial suction device, yet you refuse to recognize to Fay’s need to be affirmed and all the sudden your Pol Pot?


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



he actually said he doesn't care which minority group they kill.....

now THAT is the essence of modern conservatism!


----------



## jillian (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...


Someone should tell them that ship has sailed.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Using slurs is denigrating them . No you  never said having babies made a couple superior. But your harping on the baby thing implies it  I'm going to call bullshit on your claim of supporting gay rights


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...


Spare us  your bullshit false equivalency logical fallacies and red herring that you use to try to hide the fact that you discuss the issue intelligently like an adult.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




You forgot to point out that you are Jewish Capo.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...




Killing people harms those people (and others).
Cannibals typically kill people to eat them.  See above.
Incest drastically increases the chances of severe birth defects, and can cause psychological problems in the child.  Similar to abuse.

As for the late term abortion laws, I have no voiced any opinion on them at all.   I am talking about same sex marriage.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Jewish Capo?    WTF does that have to do with the topic?


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Term of endearment. Nothing more.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



You forgot to point out that you are not only a Christian, but a member of a right-wing cult that calls itself "Christian."


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Lol, if it makes you feel good.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




1.Not if the people want to die. 

2.see above. Who are you to say?

3.but it’s consenting adults. If they are willing, who are you to say?

4. Marriage is just a thing. In the case of same sex marriage as it’s argued here, it’s nothing but a thing to get little Halley face “thank hous” on USMB. It’s not even a real issue.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I said queer. Whoopty do 
I was simply correcting you. They cant create a family. You said they could, which is wrong.
I dont give a damn whether you think i believe gays should be married or not.
I dont believe in govt discrimination in any form. So GFY.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...





What the hell are you talking about?  What was the matter with B. Hussein O in 2012, when he advocated against Gay Marriage as well?

Gay Marriage is a new institution, society lived without it for millennia.    Almighty God established the institution of marriage when he put the first man and the first broad into the Garden.     I was watching TV several years ago, the greatest theologian of our time, Jerry Falwell Sr. was giving a sermon.   He studied the Holy Bible extensively and discovered that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the Garden, NOT Adam and Steve.   I checked my own Bible, Falwell was sport on accurate.


----------



## August West (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


You and Falwell are both nuts. Are you and Falwell on board with slavery and stoning adulterers too? It`s in the Bible!


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 13, 2019)

August West said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



I'm not in favor of slavery or stoning adulterers, and neither was the late Dr. Falwell.   You really need to study history.  Gay Marriage has never worked before.   How did it work out in Sodom?    How about in Gomorrah?


----------



## August West (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Ezekiel 16:49 mentions the inhabitants` refusal to care for the poor, despite their prosperity is seen as evidence that homosexuality was not the cause of their damnation....if you believe this sort of nonsense.
Sodom and Gomorrah | Description, Summary, & Controversy


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...


If it's not an issue why are you here with your idiotic horseshit


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


How is it working out in the Netherlands where it's been legal since 1996? Tell us all about how they are headed for doom. Tell us about all of the social problems it is cause here? Commmon big guy!!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> I was simply correcting you. They cant create a family. You said they could, which is wrong.


What the fuck do you call this?   IF not families what are they.? What is your definition of a family? Again, I calling bullshit on your claim that you support gay rights. 




[URL='https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=same+sex+families+photos&id=33DA3BDFF1FF3BE8A3EB12FAC6521882D4B0DCC3&FORM=IQFRBA']
	

[URL='https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=same+sex+families+photos&id=737D2555541A5898968185623F0C8D46E5B2D7EE&FORM=IQFRBA']
	

[/URL]
[/URL]


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...



In America, we've had Gay Marriage in our penal system for many decades.  It really hasn't created peace. 

And if you look at the historical records in Sodom, as well as Gomorrah, it hasn't worked out ideal


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > I was simply correcting you. They cant create a family. You said they could, which is wrong.
> ...


They didnt CREATE. Good gawd man. Are you that stupid?
I believe in equal rights for everyone from the govt. Idc if you believe me or not.
If i was against gays getting married, i wouldnt say it.
You think im scared to say what i feel?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Oh not that prison crap again!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...





Sure, its an issue.   Gay Marriage is very contentious issue.   When votes have been held people have been against it.


But I don't think its good for the homosexual community, and I'll tell you why.   Gay Marriage was invented to outrage and offend "straight arrows" or normative folks.   It was established as the ultimate in camp.   Accepting the institution as normative, forces gay people to seek even crazier stuff to offend Normative Americans.   That's transsexuality is becoming big, and other things even crazier and more dangerous will be coming.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Homosexuality is big news in the big house, PP.    Bigger than it is here on the outside.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

If it's not about a man sticking something in his ass or cutting off his dick, progpat isn't interested.

#HeteroPride.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Why you gott announce your Jewish all the time? If you don’t like it then ignore if. No go fuck your self capo.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...




Don’t care what side says what. A stupid blue piece of paper is nothing more then proof you payed a tax. Its a non issue. Or better yet, it IS an issue, one that’s used to gun up the members of each tribe and get them pounding drums.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Then there is no need for any legal recognition of or acquiescence to their homo relationship. It’s 100% personal.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


You are aggravatingly obtuse or your just playing a sick and dishonest game.  YOU said that they did not/ could not create a family? A family is created when people form a* family unit* and function as a FAMILY. The fact that they did not create those child as a couple does not change that Would you also say that a straight couple who adopted, or where a child is from another marriage did not create their family. Your pursuit of this issue has me convinced that your a bigot because it emphasizes how they might be different, when they are the same in so many more important ways. Yet you are too dishonest to admit it.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 13, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...





A person can stand in any church or house of worship to recite all the marriage vows they want.

They are no more married than they were before they recited those vows. 

People are married when they sign that marriage license and it's filed with the state. 

Until that legal document is signed, those involved aren't married. They have none of the legal rights that come with marriage.  

Marriage is a legal contract that people enter. They agree to share and build their lives together. They are legal equal partners in everything they do. If the marriage fails, like so many do, both have equal rights to what they built together. 

What happens in any church that doesn't include a legal marriage license isn't legal and has absolutely no legal standing in our nation. 

So a person can think that their marriage is about religion but it's not and they have absolutely no right to force those religious beliefs on anyone in this nation.

I find it sick that some christians believe that they have the right to force their religion on our nation and expect those of us who aren't christian to have to follow their religious laws. We don't. Religious laws have absolutely no legal standing in our nation. No one can use religion as a reason to violate our laws and our laws aren't based on any religion. 

I wonder how those christians would feel or react if I tried to force my faith on them? Or how about if someone tried to force islamic faith and law on them? I'm sure they would be screaming about freedom of religion and separation of religion and government. However, when it comes to christian laws they are the first to scream that they have the right to force it on our nation.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 13, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> I find it sick that some christians believe that they have the right to force their religion on our nation and expect those of us who aren't christian to have to follow their religious laws. We don't. Religious laws have absolutely no legal standing in our nation. No one can use religion as a reason to violate our laws and our laws aren't based on any religion.
> 
> I wonder how those christians would feel or react if I tried to force my faith on them? Or how about if someone tried to force islamic faith and law on them? I'm sure they would be screaming about freedom of religion and separation of religion and government. However, when it comes to christian laws they are the first to scream that they have the right to force it on our nation.




What you fail to realize is that most of America's laws are based upon our Judeo-Christian faith.    Almighty God said "thou shalt not bear false witness", the state uses that as the reason to prohibit Perjury.   Likewise Almighty God said "thou shalt not steal", the basis of our laws today against larceny and embezzlement.    Should we legalize those things as well?   they are religiously based too.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Yes i would say that. Am i bigoted against straits as well?
Everyone is a bigot. Even you


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Shrill for someone who "dont give a damn".


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


They have children in their care. Children benefit from the legal protections, social status and financial advantages of having two legal guardians who are married. To deny that is just plain stupid


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > I find it sick that some christians believe that they have the right to force their religion on our nation and expect those of us who aren't christian to have to follow their religious laws. We don't. Religious laws have absolutely no legal standing in our nation. No one can use religion as a reason to violate our laws and our laws aren't based on any religion.
> ...


No....most of our laws are NOT based on judeo-christian faith.   Almost none of them are.  People were against lying way before this judeo god came along.....people all over the world were against stealing before Moses said it was bad.   And so on and so forth.....Every culture has a version of a golden rule...that doesn't need to have come from a backwater tiny culture from the Middle East over 3000 years ago.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Apparently you are bigoted against people who, for whatever reason, can't produce a child as a couple. It doesn't get any more idiotic than that.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> If it's not about a man sticking something in his ass or cutting off his dick, progpat isn't interested.
> 
> #HeteroPride.


Actually, it's more like #homovoyeurism


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...


That tiny backwater culture still exists while the others have gone the way of Babylon.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

I cant even support qat marriage without you faggots riding my ass. You damn bigots.
Do i have to suck a cock to get some recognition around here?


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > If it's not about a man sticking something in his ass or cutting off his dick, progpat isn't interested.
> ...


We get it you like to watch.

At your age there's not much else you can do.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Lol you got to be fuckin joking


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...


Two of the funniest doom and gloom stories I've heard over the years about "if we allow gay marriage"

1.  If we allow gay marriage, waves of women will divorce their husbands to marry each other. (from an interview of the president of the CWA)

2.  By allowing gay marriage, we have caused a rise in out-of-wedlock children.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...


Own it, gayvoyeur.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Rub it, Golda.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> I cant even support qat marriage without you faggots riding my ass. You damn bigots.
> Do i have to suck a cock to get some recognition around here?


Hey buzz off. I have better things to do than to engage in a pissing match with some who plays sick and childish games. What the fuck is "qat" marriage?


----------



## Pete7469 (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


>



Then shut the fuck up you stupid piece of shit.

You're certainly at the highest level of stupid on the whole forum with endless pro-deviant, pervert freak and anti-Christian bigot cut/paste troll threads.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > I cant even support qat marriage without you faggots riding my ass. You damn bigots.
> ...


You must be a bigot against typos! You asshole!


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...


I guess that's all you got now....age-ism.   Sad.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


Another disturbing post.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


You are indeed.

But I still remember the good old days when you used to hit on me and I would scorn you lol.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



He is disturbed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pete7469 (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Hey buzz off. I have better things to do than to engage in a pissing match with some who plays sick and childish games. What the fuck is "qat" marriage?



That's bullshit... ALL YOU DO is get into pissing matches with people who reject your deviant agitprop and anti-religious hate threads.

Go pack some fudge or something you sick fuck.


.


----------



## lantern2814 (Feb 13, 2019)

Why do lefties ALWAYS conveniently forget that the original ruling okaying this overrode the will of the people? EVERY time gay marriage was on a ballot it was defeated handily by the VOTERS. You know, the people who live there and cast the votes. Nice to know you lefties love ignoring the will of the voters.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> Why do lefties ALWAYS conveniently forget that the original ruling okaying this overrode the will of the people? EVERY time gay marriage was on a ballot it was defeated handily by the VOTERS. You know, the people who live there and cast the votes. Nice to know you lefties love ignoring the will of the voters.


Screw the will of the people. The people do not get to decide matters of civil rights. If they did, there would be yahoo states that still outlaw interracial marriage. his is a Constitutional Republic Bubba. Try to learn what that means. Oh and by the way, currently, the will of the people is marriage equality.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...


Oh...that's right....I remember you fantasizing that.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> Why do lefties ALWAYS conveniently forget that the original ruling okaying this overrode the will of the people? EVERY time gay marriage was on a ballot it was defeated handily by the VOTERS. You know, the people who live there and cast the votes. Nice to know you lefties love ignoring the will of the voters.


And people voted to keep interracial marriage illegal too.    How about we have a vote about whether we get to keep guns or not..in NYC?   How about we have a vote about whether muslims get to practice their religion or not....in Alabama?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Pete7469 said:
> ...


I want to be one of the ones putting out the clear warning in case we end up with another James W. Von Brunn in our midst.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Why do you start every post with“I’m Jewish”? No one cares, you are probably lying anyway. So go fuck your self an pick some olives or something.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Hey buzz off. I have better things to do than to engage in a pissing match with some who plays sick and childish games. What the fuck is "qat" marriage?
> ...


A disturbed post from a homovoyeur.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...



Good grief! Jerry Falwell was a great theologian??? Of just what religion? He was a major asshole. Because of a job assignment, I was actually present in the courtroom of the U.S. Supreme Court for the oral argument of the case between Falwell and Larry Flynt. It was scum versus scum. It took a long, hot shower to wash the two of them off of me. At least Flynt was up front about who and what he was, whereas Falwell pranced around pretending to be something "holy" and "Christian," when he was neither.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...




I don’t think trannys will get the respect gays do. Honestly, I have yet to meet a gay person who’s hand I wouldn’t but my kids it. Not so for trans freaks. Remember all these trans weirdos running for office? Not one made it. Matter of fact they were smashed.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...






TNHarley said:


> I cant even support qat marriage without you faggots riding my ass. You damn bigots.
> Do i have to suck a cock to get some recognition around here?



Yes.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


I'm surprised you remember anything at your age.

When dementia knocks, memory leaves.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 13, 2019)

What religion do these posters belong to?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Crixus said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Crixus said:
> ...



Apparently you’re psychotic. My thought and prayers 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bodecea (Feb 13, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...


...considering that both my parents died of Alzheimers.....very conservative republican of you.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



Same sex couple provide the same positives to the community that opposite sex couple do.  They made The same commitment to each other.  They feel the same love for each other.

They should get equal protection under the laws and gain the same hundreds of federal, state and local gov't benefits.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> My guess is that they are anticipating and provoking a court figh


That they will lose. Let them.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> ALL YOU DO is get into pissing matches with people who reject your deviant agitprop and anti-religious hate threads.


Right!

People, don't you know that only Pete is allowed to be a hate monger?


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Wow that must have been back when they still called it senility.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > I find it sick that some christians believe that they have the right to force their religion on our nation and expect those of us who aren't christian to have to follow their religious laws. We don't. Religious laws have absolutely no legal standing in our nation. No one can use religion as a reason to violate our laws and our laws aren't based on any religion.
> ...



Lying is not again the law except in specific circumstances.  And every culture has had laws against stealing. Cultures that had no contact with the 10 commandments had laws against left.   The Code of Hammurabi had laws against stealing, and it predates the 10 commandments.

Also, there are very good reasons for outlawing theft.  So the law is not based solely on the "thou shalt not steal".


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> I cant even support qat marriage without you faggots riding my ass. You damn bigots.
> Do i have to suck a cock to get some recognition around here?



Sorry for not speaking up sooner.  I have seen you argue in favor of same sex marriage.   Some people just get defensive.  Ignore them.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> Why do lefties ALWAYS conveniently forget that the original ruling okaying this overrode the will of the people? EVERY time gay marriage was on a ballot it was defeated handily by the VOTERS. You know, the people who live there and cast the votes. Nice to know you lefties love ignoring the will of the voters.



If we were a democracy, you would have a point.   We aren't.   You don't.

A simple majority cannot overrule the US Constitution.  They should have covered that in civics class.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Muslims like everyone else in this country are bound by US  law.


Wow, you’re sharp. Thank you for that keen legal insight. 

Like all low IQ liberals, you believe every left-wing action happens in a vacuum. It doesn’t. Quite the contrary, they cause profound chain of events in response. Once you redefine marriage and claim it is not just one man and one woman, you have no leg to stand on preventing any other form of “marriage”. Any attempt to stop any other form becomes “bigotry”.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Again, equal protection under the law....a concept that you are apparently unable to grasp.


Again...any homosexual man can marry _any_ woman he wants, and _any_ homosexual woman can marry any man she wants. They absolutely have *equal* rights. Want you want are special rights. And you want to mask them as being “unequal” when those special rights are denied.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Again, equal protection under the law....a concept that you are apparently unable to grasp.
> ...



They do not want special rights.  Since same sex marriage is legal, straight men can marry any man he wants (who will have him) and any woman can marry any other woman she wants.   The laws does not limit it to just gays.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 13, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> Why do lefties ALWAYS conveniently forget that the original ruling okaying this overrode the will of the people? EVERY time gay marriage was on a ballot it was defeated handily by the VOTERS. You know, the people who live there and cast the votes. Nice to know you lefties love ignoring the will of the voters.





You are a liar.

Gay marriage was on the ballot in my state in 2012.

The issue was to make it legal for homosexual people to get married. Not to outlaw homosexual marriage. That never would have passed in my state. Ever. 

It passed with over 60% of the vote. I vote in the majority. 

The people of my state voted to legalize gay marriage 3 years before the Supreme Court correctly ruled all those laws against it were unconstitutional.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 13, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims like everyone else in this country are bound by US  law.
> ...


Except that it doesn't. Please do some research about states that allow adult persons to "marry" underage children, some as young as 12 or 13. This form of sexual child abuse has gone for a very long time;


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


The ability to or at least the female/male condition necessary for procreation should be. I guess they figured they wouldn’t have to explain that part.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> Gay marriage was on the ballot in my state in 2012


And every time that has succeeded,it qas overturned as unconstitutional. Come on man,puzzle this shit out for yourself.

So no, hes right, and you are wrong.


RoshawnMarkwees said:


> The ability to or at least the female/male condition necessary for procreation should be.


Haha, how fucking retarded. Sorry ladies, menopause mwans divorce, because this Bible thumping moron is uncomfortable with you....


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Children need a mother and a father. Empirical data of a unique post-1960’s period in our culture bears this out. Creating alternatives contributes to social demise. Progress a little and get over it.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Feb 13, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...



Blacks had the rights to own slaves too, and did.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


No idiot, those are studies on single parent homes. You know, exactly what gay marriage would not be.


----------



## Aba Incieni (Feb 13, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> > Pete7469 said:
> ...


Not no mo'.

They had that right taken away. Progpat was lying.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Wrong. Kids need a mom and dad. It’s innate and is especially born out over the past 50 years of diminishing family structure among blacks and the resulting social demise.
Deal with the reality. Stop with the Marxist duping.


----------



## Crixus (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




If you need to.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 13, 2019)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Gay marriage was on the ballot in my state in 2012
> ...


Wrong, Mr ultra-conservative backwards leftover. This is based on recent data of the past fifty years. Kids need a mom and dad, not two of either or only one of either. Get out of your echo chamber and open your outdated eyes.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


Lets see your empirical data smiley. And even if that were true , please explain how banning same sex marriage will ensure the all or most children will  a mom and a day. Gay people have children . Would you advocate sterilizing them?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims like everyone else in this country are bound by US  law.
> ...


Once again you clearly demonstrate your ignorance of constitutional law and the concept of compelling government interest or at minimum a rational basis , in prohibiting certain practices . Instead, you dishonestly and ignorantly peddle these slippery slope logical fallacy scare tactics,


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Again, equal protection under the law....a concept that you are apparently unable to grasp.
> ...


I have heard this ignorant, insensate and flat out stupid shit too many times before

•When one makes the absurd statement that “gays already have equality “because they can, like anyone else, marry someone of the opposite sex,* they are presuming that a gay person can decide to live as a straight person and have a fulfilling life with someone of the opposite sex. *The other possibility is that you do not believe that fulfillment or love in marriage is a right or a reasonable expectation., at least not for gays. In any case they are,* in effect dehumanizing gay people, portraying them as being devoid of emotion and the ability to love and desire another person as heterosexuals do.*

In addition, they are reducing the institution of marriage to a loveless business arrangement while for the vast majority of people it is much more. *It devalues marriage in a way, much more profoundly than feared by the anti-equality bigots, who bemoan the demise of traditional marriage simply because it is being expanded to include gays.*

*Heterosexuals are able to choose a marriage partner based in part on sexual attraction and romantic interests. That is a choice, that gay people do not have, if denied legal marriage. *Sure they can choose to forgo marriage in order to be with the person who they desire, but to do so would require that they forfeit the legal security, economic benefits and social status that goes with marriage That, is really not much of a choice at all and many courts have agreed.

One of the best illustrations of that is the opinion of the 10th Circuit Court of appeals ruling to uphold the lower court which invalidated Utah’s ban on same sex marriage. Selected passages follow:

*APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH (D.C. No. 2:13-CV-00217-RJS)*

*Kitchen V. Herbert Utah Gay Marriage | Fourteenth Amendment To The United States Constitution | Defense Of Marriage Act*


On cross motions for summary judgment, the district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. It concluded that *“[a]ll citizens, regardless of their sexual identity, have a fundamental right to liberty, and this right protects an individual’s ability to marry and the intimate choices a person makes about marriage and family.” *Kitchen v. Herbert, 961 F. Supp. 2d1181, 1204 (D. Utah 2013).


Two landmark decisions by the Supreme Court have undermined the notion that the question presented in Baker v. Nelson ( which was overturned by the Obergefell decision) is insubstantial. Baker was decided before the Supreme Court held that “intimate conduct with another person . . . can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring *The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice.”* Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, (pg. 17)

* Windsor is the other case referred to above*

DOMA “impose[d] a disadvantage, a separate status, and so a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages . . . .” Id. The statute “undermine[d] both the public and private significance of state-sanctioned same-sex marriages” by telling “those couples, and all the world, that their otherwise valid marriages are unworthy of federal recognition.” Id (pg.21)

*It is already apparent that the courts see marriage as much more than a impersonal business arrangement. Even prisoners have the right to marry:*

The Turner Court’s description of the “important attributes of marriage [that] remain . . . after taking into account the limitations imposed by prison life,” 482 U.S. at 95, is relevant to the case at bar: First, inmate marriages, like others, are expressions of emotional support and public commitment…………. (pg 29)


*We must reject appellants’ efforts to downplay the importance of the personal elements inherent in the institution of marriage, which they contend are “not the principal interests the State pursues by regulating marriage.”*

We nonetheless agree with plaintiffs that in describing the liberty interest at stake, it is impermissible to focus on the identity or class-membership of the individual exercising the right. See De Leon, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26236, at *58-59


* A state “cannot define marriage in a way that denies its citizens the freedom of personal choice in deciding whom to marry, nor may it deny the same status and dignity to each citizen’s decision” (quotations omitted)). “Simply put, fundamental rights are fundamental rights. They are not defined in terms of who is entitled to exercise them.” Pg.37)*
In summary, we hold that under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the United States Constitution, those who wish to marry a person of the same sex are entitled to exercise the same fundamental right as is recognized for persons who wish to marry a person of the opposite sex, and that Amendment 3 and similar statutory enactments do not withstand constitutional scrutiny.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...


You deal with the reality that no legitimate  research supports your claim. I think that you know that or you would have posted a link by now


----------



## Death Angel (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Yes, you are correct that there is not "right" to be married. However, if the gov't offers benefits to citizens, they must be offered equally


They are. A homo I man can marry. But MARRIAGE means a man and a woman. Marriage doesn't mean whatever the hell you Want it to mean. Words mean things.


----------



## TNHarley (Feb 13, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > I cant even support qat marriage without you faggots riding my ass. You damn bigots.
> ...


Thanks man.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 13, 2019)

Death Angel said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, you are correct that there is not "right" to be married. However, if the gov't offers benefits to citizens, they must be offered equally
> ...


See post 201 Dude. Your saying that marriage is a man and a women is just an appeal to ignorance logical fallacy.  It does not make it true. In addition, no one has said that marriage can be anything that anyone wants it to be. The Obergefell decision makes it clear that same sex couples are to be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples-no more and no less.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



Actually, a fairly comprehensive study on children raised by straight couples and gay couples showed no significant difference in the children.  The biggest problems were with the unwanted children.   That isn't an issue with same sex couples.

If I recall, the pairings that produce the best kids were the lesbian couples.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> This is based on recent data of the past fifty years.


It's based on studies of single parent households. Not that you know what it's based on, as you are merely parroting talking points from Bible beater websites. 

And, try to remember: nobody gives a shit what you think is best. You make decisions for yourself. Stop sucking dick, and don't get gay married. Problem solved.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Instead, you dishonestly and ignorantly peddle these slippery slope logical fallacy scare tactics,


That’s funny shit...the entire left-wing ideology is built on the *reality* of slipper slope. Just keep “progressing” inch by inch by inch. Get what you can now, take more later.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 13, 2019)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Gay marriage was on the ballot in my state in 2012
> ...





It was on the ballot for us voters to approve to make homosexual marriage legal.

It passed with a good margin of voters. I voted in the majority.

No one took it to any court. Homosexual people have been getting married in my state legally since 2012.

No I'm not wrong.

Please provide credible proof that anyone disputed the law we passed at the ballot and took it to court to over turn it and that it was over turned.

It didn't happen.

I'm not wrong.

I find it very strange you could make that claim without even knowing what state it happened in or how it happened. It's never a good idea to make statements before you know all facts of the situation.

This happened in Washington state in 2012.

I'm not going to do your work for you but here are some facts:

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Washington state since December 6, 2012.

On February 13, 2012, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire signed legislation that established full marriage rights for same-sex couples in the state of Washington. Opponents mounted a challenge that required voters to approve the statute at a referendum, which they did on November 6. The law took effect on December 6, and the first marriages were celebrated on December 9. Within a couple of days, more than 600 same-sex marriage licenses were issued in King County alone.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...


Without checking...i believe you...

But it will be ruled unconstitutional.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 13, 2019)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...





No one has taken it to court. No one has challenged it.

For it to be ruled unconstitutional someone has to challenge it.

It's been over 6 years. Not one challenge. No court has ever heard any case in regard to the law.

Just admit that you're wrong. The person I replied to was very wrong.

I've lived here for 58 years. I know what happened and what I did a short 6 years ago.

You don't live here in Washington. I would be surprised if you even know what happens here.

We are a real liberal state. We didn't like that homosexual marriage was illegal here. So we elected politicians who would change the law here. They did. Then stupid homophobic people forced it to be put to a vote by the people. The people spoke and loudly, homosexual marriage has been legal here since 2012.

As a side note, I'm a professional photographer and have made a lot of money off photographing homosexual weddings since December 2012. There were a lot of holiday weddings that year. Business was very good at first since so many who had been denied the right to marry finally had that right.

Are you now going to tell me I didn't do those jobs and those people didn't legally get married here starting in 2012? I didn't take photos of those couples signing those marriage certificates? I didn't take photos of their hands with rings on their fingers on those marriage certificates? I didn't take photos of wedding bouquets next to those certificates?

It's interesting that you would post that since you don't know me and don't know anything about the law in Washington State that gave homosexuals the right to marry in 2012.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> No one has taken it to court. No one has challenged it.
> 
> For it to be ruled unconstitutional someone has to challenge it.





Dana7360 said:


> The people spoke and loudly, homosexual marriage has been legal here since 2012


So...what is there to challenge?

It has been legal everywhere since 2015, as ruled by the supreme Court.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 13, 2019)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > No one has taken it to court. No one has challenged it.
> ...




You said it would be ruled unconstitutional would be over turned. You said I was wrong without even knowing the situation. 

I showed you that you were wrong and don't know the situation and circumstances how it became legal. 

If you acknowledge that it's been legal everywhere then you know there's no reason to challenge it in court and it won't ever be ruled unconstitutional. 

You also know it was strange for you to post it would be ruled unconstitutional and over turned. 

Just admit you were wrong or just don't reply back.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 13, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> You said it would be ruled unconstitutional would be over turned


I was confused about what law and state you were talking about, it appears.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 14, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You need to look beyond mostly-white locales where the predominance of structured families positively influences those raised by alternatives and look instead where the lack of structure is the norm and the influence is negative.
Vet your info and progress a little.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Feb 14, 2019)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > This is based on recent data of the past fifty years.
> ...


I base my position on info accrued having lived and worked in a middle class ‘hood for 34 years, including 35 years in the public schools here.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 14, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



I need to vet my info?   So you want me to reject the families in the mostly white areas, and focus on ghettos?    Sorry, but straight couples don't do particularly well when you filter it that way.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 14, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > RoshawnMarkwees said:
> ...



So you base your position on your own experiences, and time in public schools, in one limited area?   How many married same sex couples did you deal with?   Same sex marriage, on a federal level, has only been around for 3 or 4 years.  Same sex couples represent about 5% of the population.  And you propose a national policy based on your own limited experience?   lol    Okey dokey.


----------



## theHawk (Feb 14, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...



The state not recognizing queer marriages isn’t “banning” them.

Get a grip.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 14, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.



By that logic, there is no right to a gun, free speech, due process of law, the religion of your choice.  

Just ask Japanese-Americans in 1942.  Or the Branch Davidians. 

There are no "rights" at all, whether enumerated in the constitution or by court ruling. There are only privileges that the majority thinks you should have.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 14, 2019)

theHawk said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...



For practical purposes it is.   They are not granted the hundreds of benefits married couples get.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...




I believe you misunderstood what the conservative meant.

CONSERVATIVES have RIGHTS!

everyone else has PRIVILEGES granted by conservatives.


----------



## theHawk (Feb 14, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Not should they be.  Show me the extensive studies that have shown that gay couples are just as good at parenting.  We already know that gays have a much higher tendency to be violent, as well as child molesters.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 14, 2019)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > You said it would be ruled unconstitutional would be over turned
> ...




Ok.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 14, 2019)

theHawk said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > theHawk said:
> ...




"Not should they be. Show me the extensive studies that have shown that gay couples are just as good at parenting. We already know that gays have a much higher tendency to be violent, as well as child molesters."


show me the studies that have shown gays to be more violent or child molesters.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 14, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


The Hawk is a lying sack of shit. If he comes up with anything it will be some anti gay propaganda crap, probobly from the Family Research Council  , or from 1950


----------



## bodecea (Feb 14, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...


You must be one of those conservative republican christians we hear about.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 14, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Again, equal protection under the law....a concept that you are apparently unable to grasp.
> ...


I love that argument....just like this story:

_During the Cold War, a Soviet soldier in Berlin met an American soldier at a bar.....they started talking.   The American bragged about American freedom of speech.  "In America, I can call the President of the United States a son of a bitch and I will not get arrested."   The Soviet laughed and said, "In Soviet Russia, we too have freedom of speech.  I can call the President of the United States a son of a bitch and I also would not get arrested."_


----------



## bodecea (Feb 14, 2019)

theHawk said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > theHawk said:
> ...


One in four girls are sexually abused before they reach 18......that is NOT by gays...and sadly, in many cases it is by hetero male FAMILY members and friends.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Feb 14, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> 
> Because they're not.
> 
> ...



Pathological hate ^^^ all dressed in blue.  This ^^^ is abnormal.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 15, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



The 14th amendment isn't some open ended thing that allows progressive hacks like you to force other people to accept your morality. 

Yet you support laws that appease your moral codes, and FUCK everyone else, right? Progressivism is more of a religion these days anyway. 

How is a baker asking someone to please go to another baker for one specific item "Sharia Law"?


----------



## Biff_Poindexter (Feb 15, 2019)

Pete7469 said:


> Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> 
> Because they're not.
> 
> ...


I don't consider this guy normal -- but I don't think that gives me the right to prevent him from being married if there is an adult with the vast amount of low self esteem necessary to marry him..


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Biff_Poindexter said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Another cut/pasted regressive parasite thread pissing and moaning because normal people don't give a shit about warped sexual deviants and perverts not being accepted as normal...
> ...


Tho it shudders to make me think of some poor woman being attached to him.


----------



## Biff_Poindexter (Feb 15, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Aba Incieni said:
> ...


Really? OMG!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

martybegan said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


It's not about morality or religion , it's about due process and equal protection  under the law. You people can't seem to understand that granting rights to others does not detract from your rights.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...




How about the Right of bakers in Oregon NOT to participate in Gay Marriage?  Or county clerks in Kentucky?  The right to free practice of religion is enshrined in the Constitution, the right to take it up the ass is not.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



"BAKE THAT FUCKING CAKE, PEASANT"


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



The SCOTUS ruling has nothing to do with the Oregon bakers.    The bakers lost because of anti discrimination laws.   

And I would suggest being careful claiming that selling someone a cake is participating in the wedding.   Because that could lead to someone selling a gun and being held liable because they participated in a murder.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


.
A person in business must follow the laws regulating business. A public official must do his/her job of serving the public. Your opinion of someone else's sexual practices means absolutely nothing. I would not dare to discuss, say, whether karen pence gives BJs to mikey.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




If someone goes to a gun dealer and tells them he is looking for a weapon appropriate to kill his old lady, and the merchant helps him pick a weapon based upon that intended use, the merchant SHOULD BE held at least partially liable.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Homosexuality violates people's religion.  That's the problem.   I can't force a Jihadi Butcher to sell me bacon or butcher a hog either.
He's entitled to his Heathenistic beliefs, just as the Oregon bakers are entitled to follow their Christian beliefs.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...





"If someone goes to a gun dealer and tells them he is looking for a weapon appropriate to kill his old lady, and the merchant helps him pick a weapon based upon that intended use, the merchant SHOULD BE held at least partially liable."

That's not the same thing at all!


WInterborn said "And I would suggest being careful claiming that selling someone a cake is participating in the wedding. Because that could lead to someone selling a gun and being held liable because they participated in a murder."


In YOUR narrative you MADE the gun seller complicit by TELLING him your intention.

In the ORIGINAL narrative the gun seller did NOT know the intention.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



The bakers were told the intention of the cake they were asked to create.   If the homosexuals just asked for a plain cake that they would decorate themselves, or even bought flour, sugar and eggs to make their own from scratch, it would have been a different story.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



But the “Jihadi Butcher” can’t refuse to sell you a product he carries.   If he has beef for sale, he cannot refuse to sell it to you because you are an infidel.


----------



## Biff_Poindexter (Feb 15, 2019)

TNHarley said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Actually they can -- if one of them is willing to take one for the team and either impregnate someone or be knocked up...

You may consider that outside help, but I consider it an extended family, sort of like Arnold  Schwarzenegger's kid...


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 15, 2019)

Would someone please explain why right-wingers are so obsessed with what other people, who they don't know,  are doing in their bedrooms? It has only been since "Christian" protestant fundies came on the scene that the American people's private sexual lives have become a topic. Let us get our right to privacy back!


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


So...you are so confused that you think this is about forcing businesses to provide you with products they don't sell in the first place?       Let me guess....you voted for trump.....


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Would someone please explain why right-wingers are so obsessed with what other people, who they don't know,  are doing in their bedrooms? It has only been since "Christian" protestant fundies came on the scene that the American people's private sexual lives have become a topic. Let us get our right to privacy back!


They are what I call _homo-voyeurs_.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...




The Oregon Bakers were asked to provide a Gay Wedding Cake- a product they do not make.     Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the business,but there are any number of "Adult bakers" across the country that will bake a cake in the shape of any body part you can think of, or portraying anything, really.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> anynameyouwish said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Don't follow business law when you get your business license, lose your license.  Simple solution.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > anynameyouwish said:
> ...



If business law violates the 1st Amendment, what takes precedence?


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



You are trying to force people outside your religion to practice yoiur religion. That is the problem.This "anti-gay" religion is not my religion. I do not adherent  what religion you adhere to.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 15, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



What involves more force, the couple having to go to another baker or the baker having to bake the cake under penalty of ruin?

Which involves the use of government force?


----------



## Pilot1 (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...



Why do you and your Boyfriend need the blessing of the State? Just get married.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 15, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...



The govt offer hundreds of benefits exclusively to married couples.   They want those benefits. 

(A link I posted earlier in this thread talk about 1,100 benefits)


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Pilot1 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




A marriage, by definition, is between one man and one broad.  Not a housekeeping arrangement between Butt Buddies.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...




You totally evaded the sum and substance of his post, either that or you did not understand it.... or perhaps its over your head ?  - Quite probable that it's over your head ... given your intellectual caliber one would have to assume that Sesame Street is more your level ....  so lets do it this way ... why should big bird have to bake cookies for the cookie monster when all the cookie monster really wants is to fuck big bird up the ass ... does that simplify things for you ?


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pilot1 said:
> ...



Marriage has been defined as different things throughout history.   One man and numerous women, one man & one woman of the same race etc.  

For religious purposes, your definition works.  For gov’t purposes it does not.  

Want an easy cure?   Get the govt out of the marriage game completely.    Cut out all the benefits the govt reserves strictly for married couples.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 15, 2019)

You may view human sexuality in any way that you wish. We are talking civil law here, not your "religious" (sharia") law, as you like to call it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 15, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Part of the problem is that you see straight couples getting married because they love each other, and gay couples getting married because they want to fuck each other up the ass.

Gay and lesbian couples marry for the same reason straight couples marry.  Because they love each other and want to commit to a life together.  Saying it is all about fucking up the ass is like saying Fred and Martha want to get married because Fred wants to fuck Martha's pussy.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


They make wedding cakes...in fact the wife was on board...it was the husband who went ballistic and then doxxed the gay couple on Facebook, etc.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


I see another homo-voyeur is here.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



They made wedding cakes, they just don't make Gay wedding cakes.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pilot1 said:
> ...


Not legally.  
*marriage*
noun
mar·riage | \ ˈmer-ij  , ˈma-rij\
*Definition of marriage*


1asee usage paragraph below : the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law
b: the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK
c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effectedespecially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close unionthe marriage of painting and poetry— J. T. Shawcross


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


What exactly is a "gay wedding cake"?


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...




A Gay wedding cake is a baked item designed to celebrate a Gay marriage


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Hello?  What exactly is a "gay wedding cake"?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


So there is such a thing as a straight wedding cake?  What is the difference in how they are made or look?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Apparently a hard question?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Homosexuality violates people's religion.


Then people who believe that should not practice homosexuality.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> That's the problem. I can't force a Jihadi Butcher to sell me bacon or butcher a hog either.


Brilliant.!! No one can be forced to sell anything that they don't normally sell. That is just another of your false equivalency logical fallacies,


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

Apparently it's a hard question to  answer as to the difference between a gay wedding cake and a straight wedding cake.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > That's the problem. I can't force a Jihadi Butcher to sell me bacon or butcher a hog either.
> ...


It's like he doesn't even know that......


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Still obsessing about ass fucking I see.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pilot1 said:
> ...


'
where is the delete button so that nothing is said in  my name. A person who writes about entering a marriage with a "broad" is himself a a dirty lowlife.  Did you actually wed some person knowing that you were not pure? Are you '"pure"?  Were you?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

Tennessee generally sucks when it comes to LGBT issues

Tennessee


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Tennessee generally sucks when it comes to LGBT issues
> 
> Tennessee



Not just Tennessee Patriot, ANYWHERE in the Bible Belt sucks when it comes to LGBT issues.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > That's the problem. I can't force a Jihadi Butcher to sell me bacon or butcher a hog either.
> ...




Christian bakers don't ordinarily sell Gay Wedding Cakes.  An entirely different confection than a Normative Wedding Cake.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Tennessee generally sucks when it comes to LGBT issues
> 
> Tennessee




There are a lot less homosexuality going on in Tennessee than there is in more permissive areas.    The state made a decision to become more family orientated.

OTOH, places like San Francisco and West Hollywood made a conscious effort to promote the lifestyle.  As a result, a lot bigger percentage of the population in San Francisco made a decision to come out for sodomy.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


So cakes have a sexual orientation? I love those cheese cakes. Know any hetero female cheese cakes?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> There are a lot less homosexuality going on in Tennessee than there is in more permissive areas. The state made a decision to become more family orientated.


Geeeezuz Fucking Christ on a Cracker!!!  "Homosexuals " Have families just like everyone else.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> OTOH, places like San Francisco and West Hollywood made a conscious effort to promote the lifestyle. As a result, a lot bigger percentage of the population in San Francisco made a decision to come out for sodomy.



Too bad, get  the fuck over it. And stay the fuck out of San Fran, you might catch the gay bug. I think you must already be incubating it.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I love when the left goes _reality_ an "argument".


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > There are a lot less homosexuality going on in Tennessee than there is in more permissive areas. The state made a decision to become more family orientated.
> ...


They do? That would be one *hell* of a trick...


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> And stay the fuck out of San Fran


Believe me....every single rational person in the _world_ stays the fuck out of San Francisco. The streets are flowing with human feces thanks to the left (which promotes indecency and promiscuity while removing God and personal responsibility from society).


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> It's not about morality or religion , it's about due process and equal protection  under the law. You people can't seem to understand that granting rights to others does not detract from your rights.


That is fucking hilarious coming for the side that promotes and defends a "protected class". The very definition of *unequal* protection under the law.

One can count on the left to fuck up EVERYTHING. Even basic things like anatomy, reproduction, and equality.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Do you have your head so far up that place where the sun don't shine as to not know that being parents to children regardless of where they came from, being a spouse, being part of the community, is HAVING A FUCKING FAMILY.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Even if that were true, very angry hippie, it's still *not* "_just_ like" everyone else.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > It's not about morality or religion , it's about due process and equal protection  under the law. You people can't seem to understand that granting rights to others does not detract from your rights.
> ...


That is really stupid. The law does in fact protect everyone equally. When the law prohibited same sex marriage -that was inequality. Try thinking before you blather.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


It _is_ really stupid. And yet you wing-nuts support it. A protected class is an egregious violation of the U.S. Constitution. But then, you people never did like the constitution. Too many restraints on your deep desire for unlimited power over others.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 15, 2019)

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 15, 2019)

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> I base my position on info accrued having lived and worked in a middle class ‘hood for 34 years


So, your personal anecdote. Sorry bro, that means exactly jack shit. And how many gay married families did you deal with? None, so STFU.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



They have children that came to be in their care by a variety of means
They are parents to their children
They maintains homes
They have jobs
They pay taxes
They pay bills and sometimes struggle to make ends meet
The volunteer in the community
They drive kids to soccer or whatever.
They attend PTA meeting
They have a commitment to their partner
They have neighbors and friends
They try to save for college and retirement
They shovel their walks when it snows and tend the lawn in the summer
They worry about  the state of the world, the environment and the future for their kids and others
They worry about health care insurance and  about their health
They love their families and others. They have fears and doubts. THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS
They vote and sometimes participate in the political process
They sometimes run for and  hold office
They attend wakes and funerals and morn their losses
They have health issues and are aware of their mortality 

_HOW THE FUCK ARE THEY NOT JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE?!_


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 15, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Tennessee generally sucks when it comes to LGBT issues
> ...



When does a "state" or a "place" make a decision? What constitutes being "family oriented"? What does this mean? What do you mean by saying that someone is "promoting a lifestyle"? It seems that the Tennessee government is "promoting a lifestyle".


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...




You really don't understand very much - "Sad" as T-Rump would say . Protected classes are created for groups who have been historically discriminated against to level the playing field . That status is obviously unnecessary for others because they are not targets of discrimination

*Protected Class | Practical Law*
https://content.next.west*law*.com/Document...
*Protected Class*. A group of people with a common characteristic who are legally *protected* from employment discrimination on the basis of that characteristic. *Protected classes* are created by both *federal* and *state law*. For more information, see Practice Notes, Discrimination: Overview and Recruiting and Interviewing: Minimizing *Legal* Risk:...


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Tennessee generally sucks




Yeah, but California swallows.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> _HOW THE FUCK ARE THEY NOT JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE?!_


Well...angry hippie...where to begin?

They are unable to procreate (while everyone else can)
Their children are not biological (while everyone else's is)
They prefer the same sex (while everyone else doesn't)
Their children are raised in a home with two members of the exact same sex (while no other children are)

They _are_ different no matter how desperately you wish to believe otherwise.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Protected classes are created for groups who have been historically discriminated against to level the playing field . That status is obviously unnecessary for others because they are not targets of discrimination


Yeah...I get the entire premise...genius. Now, let's see if we can dumb this down for you. You're so blinded by your ideology, this is going to be a challenge. But I'll give it my best shot.

If the government is creating classes and then treating those classes differently from other citizens, that is the very definition of inequality and an egregious violation of the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment makes it crystal clear that the government must treat all citizens 100% equally.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


We do....in fact our daughter is getting married this summer.   And we know many other families with gay parents.   I know you are ignorant of such things.......but, you know....deplorables aren't very bright.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

bodecea said:


> We do....in fact our daughter is getting married this summer.   And we know many other families with gay parents.   I know you are ignorant of such things.......but, you know....deplorables aren't very bright.


Forgive me Bode...but I don't know you outside of USMB. That means the term "we" doesn't mean a whole lot. Are you claiming that you and another woman produced a child? If so, I *definitely* want to hear this.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights ....Never in our history a right-once established- been revoked.



Windsor 2013 says that the right to define marriage is wholly up to states; with the caveat that it can’t violate civil rights.

You are aware that lower courts are finding that the word “sex” in the Civil Rights Act means only gender; a static noun. The intent is that Act was not & is not about sexual behaviors or kinks. If it was, polygamists & others could have been getting married since 2015.

That Civil Rights Act was never amended by the legislature. (Congress) to include homosexual practitioners. 

The Judicial Branch cannot write new laws.

Tennessee has a damn strong case. Good luck lefties.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Protected classes are created for groups who have been historically discriminated against to level the playing field . That status is obviously unnecessary for others because they are not targets of discrimination
> ...


Oh Christ! You are to Obtuse to deal with. Is it remotely possible that the point that I made is lost on you? Sadly, it appears to be true.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> They are unable to procreate (while everyone else can)
> Their children are not biological (while everyone else's is)


Everyone else can? Are you really that far out of touch with reality ? Sadly it appears that you are. How do you feel about hetero coupes who adopt because they cant have their own children? Never mind, I don't expect an honest or rational answer,


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> They prefer the same sex (while everyone else doesn't)


So what? Interestingly and very telling, You fail to address most of the points that I made about how same sex couple are the same as others. That is a typical bigoted and divisive tactic that emphasis  differences-real or made up , and in this case fabricated-  in an  attempt to dehumanize others for political purposes. You should be ashamed but I doubt that you have the integrity and self awareness to be.


----------



## White_MAGA_Man (Feb 15, 2019)

Outlawing same sex marriage is the right step in making America great again.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > They are unable to procreate (while everyone else can)
> ...


Oh...you mean that 0.001%? Yeah, I feel they are absolutely different as well. It’s interesting that you automatically take “different” to mean “bad”.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > They prefer the same sex (while everyone else doesn't)
> ...


Who is “dehumanizing” _anyone_? Man, Drama Queen much???


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > They prefer the same sex (while everyone else doesn't)
> ...


Well, for the most part, I agree with you 100%. But you asked how they were different. I answered, and now you lose your shit over the facts.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Most of those things you aren't true of the Homosexual community around here.   The Homos I have met don't have children at all- the no children thing is one of the selling points for the homosexual lifestyle.  They are neurotic, like to party with other homosexuals, hang out in adult theaters, gay bars, bath houses, highway rest stops.  Always looking to recruit new people into their orientation.  Those who are relatively good are usually nice and devoted to their mothers.  What they really like to do, what they really go for is to "get campy" and do things to outrage Straight Arrows, Squares and Normative people.   This is why they started getting sex change operations, just being "gay" really didn't get that many squares frazzled as it did in the past.


----------



## SweetSue92 (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > They prefer the same sex (while everyone else doesn't)
> ...



Conservatives: is anyone at all affected by this nonsense anymore? Anyone? When they rant at you about bigoted, divisive, "you should be ashamed", "you lack integrity and self-awareness"?

I don't even bother with an eye-roll anymore. For me, it's like a gnat buzzing around your ear but it's too hot to shoo it away. 

PP: that stopped being effective...I don't know....10 years ago at least. Your Overlords know this, which is why they've ratcheted up to taking people's jobs, homes, and livelihoods. Happy?


----------



## Pilot1 (Feb 16, 2019)

Government shouldn't be in the marriage business for anyone.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


You just made that up!! Don't lye. In any case its beside that point . As I said, That is a typical bigoted and divisive tactic that emphasis differences-real or made up , and in this case fabricated- in an attempt to dehumanize others for political purposes. You should be ashamed but I doubt that you have the integrity and self awareness to be.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


You are either a shameless liar or a psychotic who is listening to the voices in his head, Which is it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Homosexuality violates people's religion. That's the problem. I can't force a Jihadi Butcher to sell me bacon or butcher a hog either.



No, but if he sells bacon to other people but refuses to sell it to you because you are Christian, he is in violation of the law.



martybegan said:


> What involves more force, the couple having to go to another baker or the baker having to bake the cake under penalty of ruin?
> 
> Which involves the use of government force?



What involves more force, the Feds sending in the Army or those uppity negros going to the back of the line like we told them to?  

If Mr. Wifebeater refused to bake a cake because he hates black people, we would not be having this discussion no matter how many racist bible verses he trotted out.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

White_MAGA_Man said:


> Outlawing same sex marriage is the right step in making America great again.


Right ….and while we're at it let's also:

Take their children away
Repeal Women's suffrage
Ban interracial marriage
Bring back slavery
Ban all non whites from entering the country
Bring back public executions for all crimes including blasphemy with little or no appeal
Close down the free press
Make Christianity the state religion and institute a religious test to hold public office

Yea slick....that would be a real great America


----------



## mdk (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Imagine being such a self-centered twat to actually think another person being gay is really all about you. 

Here’s the inside scoop: you’re not as important as you think you are. True story.


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Feb 16, 2019)

I wish Tennessee much success.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

AvgGuyIA said:


> I wish Tennessee much success.



Why??


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> > I wish Tennessee much success.
> ...


Well...for one thing...the 10th Amendment clearly states that anything outside of the 18 emumerated powers delegate to the federal government are left to the states and the people. And since marriage *isn’t* one of those powers, it’s completely up to the people of Tennessee whether or not they want to approve gay marriage.

I know. I know. You fascist statists hate the limitation of power the U.S. Constitution creates. But....deal with it.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > AvgGuyIA said:
> ...



So by that reasoning then, the issue of interracial marriage should have been left up to the state of Virginia. Right?

The tenth amendment does not mention "18 enumerated rights" and is not superior to other amendments nor does it allow states to trample on people rights or discriminate

The 14th Amendment bound the states to the bill of rights

Your knowledge of constitutional law is abysmal


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > They are unable to procreate (while everyone else can)
> ...





I know many gay women who have been pregnant and had children. I know of a couple male gay couple who paid a surrogate to carry a child for them. I know one gay couple who adopted and a few heterosexual couples who have adopted.

I know a few heterosexual couples who are infertile.

Just because someone can't grow a child inside them doesn't mean they are less of a human being. If it was all men would be less than human.

And just because a child wasn't grown in their parent's body doesn't mean that child isn't their own child. Adoptive children are just as much as the own child of their parents as any parent who grew that child in their body.

That adoptive parent had to go through hell to become a parent. Just having sex doesn't mean a person is fit to be a parent. There's a couple in Texas right now who had 4 kids and kept them in cages. They didn't feed those children or take care of them. The oldest one is 6 years old. That heterosexual couple could produce children but they can NEVER be parents. They don't have the capacity to be parents.

Meanwhile a parent who didn't grow a child in their body who loves that child and gives that child everything of themselves they have is the real parent. That is their own child.

Blood and DNA are liquid. That doesn't make family. What makes family is unconditional love, commitment, trust, honesty and a lifetime of giving of one's self.

I know homosexual couples who are much better parents than that heterosexual couple in Texas and the millions more who do such monstrous things to children.

I know adoptive parents who gave up everything they knew just to love a child and be a parent.

People who condemn others just because they don't live a lifestyle that is considered "normal" by a religion or anyone else, have no idea what real unconditional love and family are.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Whether a gal is white, black, oriental or a squaw, she is still a woman.

And marriage was defined by Almighty God as a relationship between a man and a woman.  Not two dudes.  To equate the novel new abomination of Gay Marriage with mixed marriages is obtuse.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 16, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Homosexuals don't "go through hell" to adopt at all.   They relish the fight as their goal is to outrage Straight Arrows and Squares and the reaction they get is the payoff.    The vast majority wouldn't be interested at all if they didn't think it would get a rise out of Normative Folks.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


I am not interested in what you think that your god says. The point that was previously made - which I responded to- was that states have the absolute right to define marriage-which is bunk..


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Still making shit up and listening to voices in your head I see/. Tell what makes you such an expert on what gays want and what motivates them> By the way , I previously worked n an adoption agency and facilitated adoptions by gay people. So shut up!


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 16, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Well...for one thing...the 10th Amendment clearly states that anything outside of the 18 emumerated powers delegate to the federal government are left to the states and the people. And since marriage *isn’t* one of those powers, it’s completely up to the people of Tennessee whether or not they want to approve gay marriage.
> 
> I know. I know. You fascist statists hate the limitation of power the U.S. Constitution creates. But....deal with it.



Naw, we just don't want our lives run by the clowns who end up in state government.  Especially since we don't know who most of these people are.  

My district finally got rid of the horrid woman with the war on her face that won every election.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Tennessee generally sucks when it comes to LGBT issues
> 
> Tennessee



Unlike your "Queer Loving Northeast"  Tennesse still has some dignity - you venereal infested degenrates in whatever fag hole you crawled out of are another issue altogether


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Tennessee generally sucks when it comes to LGBT issues
> ...


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...



So you facilitated handing over Children to degenerates, perverts and baby boinkers ... there's a special place in hell for scum like you.   Gays are prolific child molesters and by all sane logic need to be kept at a safe distance from kids ...  Gay couple accused of molesting two of their 9 adopted children withdraw guilty plea and decide to go on trial to fight allegations | Daily Mail Online 

Gay couple accused of sexually abusing adopted Russian boy for years

Gay couple jailed for abusing their foster children


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...




No matter how professionals in our society extol the virtues of ‘science,’ if empirical evidence goes ...


When a 16 year-old foster son was molested and raped by two gay foster parents in Vermont [Your 'Queer Loving Northeast' ], Tom Moore, Deputy of the State’s Social and Rehabilitation Services, told me on June 25, 2002 that neither he nor the Commissioner knew of any evidence about the molestation rates of children by homosexual foster parents. He was apparently echoing his boss, Commissioner William Young, who the papers quoted as saying “I don’t know of any screening instrument for [sexual molestation]. Certainly, sexual preference doesn’t have anything to do with it, or religious beliefs or socioeconomic status. It’s so frustrating because there isn’t a predictor.” (Rutland Herald 6/21/02)against their beliefs, they often ignore it or avoid it. The employment of homosexuals as foster parents is a perfect case in point.   Gay Foster Parents More Apt to Molest


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Keep Reading Cum Guzzler - although most of it is not for you - it's requires an IQ higher than 30 ...  but kindly do your best


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




I can't take you seriously sonny boy.


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...





Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


I have to ask, why do you have such hatred for LGBTs and have to go after them? What is this within you? I'm heterosexual, female, of European ethnic origin. 

BTW: you do NOT refer to a female person of Native American background as a "squaw". 

Just what is eating you?


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 16, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > _HOW THE FUCK ARE THEY NOT JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE?!_
> ...



Actually, gays CAN procreate if they go with artificial fertilization.  Dudes can be fathers to donated eggs, and women can get donated sperm. 

Their children aren't biological?  Neither are the kids that live in foster families, or those who were adopted at birth.

So what if they prefer the same gender?  What does that really have to do with a loving relationship?

And, a kid being raised in a gay family doesn't really get influenced one way or the other.  I rented from a lesbian couple for a few years, and they had a daughter.  The daughter was a normal 13 year old girl who liked boys.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 16, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



I don't hate homosexuals at all, I just have observed and see what they are up to.  In fact, being stern with gay beaus will actually help them as they won't be as tempted to really push the envelope, if you'll remember their goal is to provoke or outrage Normative square Straight Arrow folks.

Squaw is the generally accepted way of referring to American Indian women, just like "Papoose" is the accepted terminology for a Indian baby.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Wrong.  "Squaw" is NOT the generally accepted way of referring to Native America, or for that matter, ANY woman.  Here............let me help you out with a definition from Dictionary.com............

*squaw*
[skwaw]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR squaw ON THESAURUS.COM
*noun*
Older Use :  Disparaging and Offensive . a  contemptuous term used to refer to a North American Indian woman, especially a wife.
Slang :  Disparaging and Offensive .

a  contemptuous term used to refer to a wife.
a  contemptuous term used to refer to any woman or girl.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Tell us more about what homosexuals go through to adopt.  You seem to be quite "knowledgable."


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


^ homo-voyeur


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I am SO stealing this! It is too funny!


----------



## mdk (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Homosexuals don't "go through hell" to adopt at all. They relish the fight as their goal is to outrage Straight Arrows and Squares and the reaction they get is the payoff. The vast majority wouldn't be interested at all if they didn't think it would get a rise out of Normative Folks.



This arrogant twat thinks gay people adopt simply to piss him and the other retards off. Too funny. I am going to make this quite plain: You’re just not as important as you think you are in the Iives of gay people.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Here is a crazy motherfuckers who you might know and like:

GOP Lawmaker Eric Porterfield Says He Would Drown His Children If They Were Gay



> Christian hate: Trump-loving GOP lawmaker Eric Porterfield says he would drown his own children if they came to him and told him they were gay.
> 
> Porterfield, a West Virginia lawmaker and Baptist preacher is under fire after making derogatory and false statements about the LGBT community.
> 
> Earlier this week Porterfield appeared on WVVA TV, an NBC affiliate, to discuss his recent inflammatory comments. At one point in the interview the GOP lawmaker was asked what he would do if his young children came to him one day and told him that they were gay.



What would YOU do if you had a gay child?


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


What is a "normative square strait arrow"? What is 'pushing the envelope"?
 Calling a person a "sqauw" is like calling a person a "n*gger."  Who are you, anyway, to think that you should be "stern" with anyone? Shouldn't some one be "stern" with you?

You write as if you are some sort of a king and all the rest of the world's human beings are under you and owe you loyalty. Ain't so. The rest of us are here with you and you are no more important than any of the rest of us.

In the end, Just who do think you are?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

To whoever said that gay people can't naturally reproduce, please tell that to Jody Foster who has two sons she carried and delivered. And, they're also full brothers because she used the same sperm donor for both boys.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



He is one of the more bizarre and arrogant asses that I have across here.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Here is another crazy fuck that you might want to get to know, if you don't already.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate: No Difference Between Homosexuality And Bestiality



> Dangerous conservative Christian extremist: Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Brian Hagedorn believes there is no legal difference between same-sex attraction and bestiality.
> 
> Judge Hagedorn is a Republican currently serving as a state appeals court judge. Before that he served as Republican Governor Scott Walker’s legal counsel. Now he’s running for the state Supreme Court.
> 
> ...


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


Saw that guy....wanna talk about the product of in-breeding......


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




You can't take me PERIOD   .....    As previously stated you need an IQ above room temperature and yours little fella ... lol .... makes the recent arctic blast look global warming  Your inability to respond with anything other than ad hominems speaks volumes.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 16, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> To whoever said that gay people can't naturally reproduce, please tell that to Jody Foster who has two sons she carried and delivered. And, they're also full brothers because she used the same sperm donor for both boys.



How artificial insemination- which Ms. Foster received- qualify as "natural reproduction"?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Here is yet another, albeit not a prominent person. Still, you should look him up.

Racist Homophobic Trump Supporters Brutally Attack ‘Empire’ Star Jussie Smollett



> Actor Jussie Smollett, star of the hit television series “Empire,” was the victim of a homophobic and racially charged attack by Trump supporters.
> 
> Smollett was apparently attacked and beaten by two white men wearing ski masks while hurling racial and homophobic slurs at the actor and musician who happens to be black and gay.



Maybe someday, you too will be showcased on *Progressive Secular Humanist - Page 3 of 238 -*


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Holly shit! Seriously?? Better look in the mirror slick


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...




Re: 'No diff. between homosexuality and beastiality'      While the basic statement is factually wrong - there most certainly is a difference between homosexuality and beastiality ...  the paralells are undeniable... there is also a strong correlation between the two in that both are deviant sexual dysphoric psychosis  .... mental abnormalities ....so although the headline is factually incorrect  the underlying premise is on point


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



I can always count on you for a low intellect dumbass response -


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


 You're fucking kidding me !!!???  Please tell me you're not Serious right ??!! Even a scumwad like you can't in the furthest reaches of the imagination be THAT STUPID - you actually believe the Jussie Smollett, story


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


The authoritarian right will never stop in their efforts to discriminate against gay and transgender Americans and deny them their rights and protected liberties – even though it violates the Constitution to seek to do so.

It’s further confirmation of the fact that conservatives have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > To whoever said that gay people can't naturally reproduce, please tell that to Jody Foster who has two sons she carried and delivered. And, they're also full brothers because she used the same sperm donor for both boys.
> ...


How does IVF qualify as "natural reproduction?"


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > To whoever said that gay people can't naturally reproduce, please tell that to Jody Foster who has two sons she carried and delivered. And, they're also full brothers because she used the same sperm donor for both boys.
> ...


Oh give it a god damned rest! So she didn't get fucked by a guy. So what? Is she any less of a parent? Is that child any less valuable as a human being? Should she not be allowed to marry a woman so that her child has the legal and financial security of having  two parents who are her legal guardians- so that if something happens to Jody, she won't be an orphan? Do you harbor the same animosity towards hetero women who resort to artificial insemination because their husband has a problem of some sort.? They are all parents and it matter little how they became parents. You are truly insufferable!!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> View attachment 246262 View attachment 246262
> 
> 
> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Then refute it Slick!


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


I can see that English is not your first language.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


What does that have to do with legal marriage?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


They're also blathering on and on about how a child needs both a mother and a father. I have a friend whose husband died of cancer a couple of years ago and they had a 5 year old daughter. By their logic, she should grab the first man who comes along to marry or give her daughter to a couple to raise instead of raising her alone. Real life doesn't work that way. Her daughter does all of the things any other kid does and she's the one who takes her to dance, takes her on vacation, helps her with her homework, etc. Her husband had been sick for a few years and even though they were still married, he couldn't do any of those things. The daughter is a healthy, happy, normal child.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Nothing, but he said that Jody's pregnancy didn't qualify as "natural reproduction" because she got pregnant through artificial insemination. I just pointed out that neither did IVF.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Nothing. But these bigots use that "Unable to procreate" crap as a means of questioning the validity same sex marriage. They tried that shit all through the marriage equality litigation, as well as trying to claim  that gay people are inferior parents, and got their ass kicked in court every time.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 246262 View attachment 246262
> ...




Your cognitive dissonance blinds you to reality little fella ... facts are for quacks as per your libtard dogma but here's a few for other than YOU 

Smollett’s claim that he was attacked by two men yelling “MAGA country” - MAGA Country in Rahm Emanuel /Barrack Obama land - CHICAGO ...  Realy - lmao

He said he was walking home after eating out  [ 2AM in sub zero weather, coldest Obamaland has seen in 30 years - Hmmm]. 

And 2 violent white homophoboc trump supporters wearing MAGA hats just happenned to be wandering around risking their asses on the streets of Chicago at 2AM in temps near 20 below zero with MAGA hats on -  realy :> ?

Not only were they walking around in MAGA hats - they just happenned to have a pre made noose and bleach with them - imagine that - how convenient. Bleach freezes at 20 F - but these guys had bleach with them in Negative 20 degree weather that was still liquid - HMmmm


Smollett claims that they kicked him, punched him, poured bleach on him, and put a noose around his neck, but he was holding his samwich and cell phione the whole time ... HMmmm

According to surveillance videos, there was only a 60-second window duriing which this could have conceivably possibly and maybe had an outside chance of happenning.

Smollett initially refused to hand over his cell phone, the theory is because he claimed to have been talking with his manager [at 2AM] and the phone would prove it to be another lie ... he eventually handed over  “heavily redacted” phone records from the night of the alleged attack. Chicago Police said the submitted documents did not meet the criteria of a criminal investigation and were tampered with. [Investigators already received Smollett’s complete phone records via a subpoena served on his service provider, according to a source quoted by CWBChicago on Feb. 4.]


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


Apparently they are not aware that one doesn't have to be married to have children nor have to have children to be married.

Tho I admit, my favorite misconception they have is that gay people are sterile.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


What does that incident where Smollett should compensate NYPD for have to do with legal gay marriage and Tennessee?  (the topic of this thread)


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


 

You're confusing two issues - nobody ever said gay people are sterile ?  Well not so far as their eggs or sperm count is concerned - morally sterile maybe.  I believe what you read is that Gay people should be sterilized and in some cases euthanized - is that what you meant ?


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...




Gay marriage and gay parenting are 2  seperate issues - Fags and dikes have every right to co-miserate in the sanctity of Marriage and it never should have been denied in the first place . Gay Parenting is an entirely different topic Gays as all perverts - and I include large swarms of the religous realm in that statement should allways be kept at arms length from degenerates - its a duty we as human beings owe to our youngest members.  .... progressive I don't include you in that statement - that part about being a human being that is :>


----------



## SaxxyBlues (Feb 16, 2019)

I'm in TN.  It's kinda odd the United Methodist Church is having a conference this month to discuss human sexuality and the church.  Now we have Nashville politicians working to end it in the state.  These people can't get a break.  It will be interesting to see what the church decides.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Your guess is right - it is one of 7 languages I converse in - how many do you speak / write ?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


I've had about enough of your bullshit! I know of two gay men who became fosters of newborns. they are white and both babies are black. One was born drug addicted and the other with fetal alcohol syndrome. No one else wanted them, but these men took them into their home. They walked the floor with them as they screamed in pain, they took them to the doctor for treatment, they spent loads of money on these boys not knowing if they would ever get to adopt them. They introduced them to a black woman friend who had a daughter and would teach the boys about their culture. And then one day, they were granted the right to adopt them.They cried like babies and hugged them and had a family party to celebrate. NO ONE else wanted these babies....do you understand that? Many,many times gay couple will take special needs children that no one else wants. Do you think those children shouldn't be allowed to have a home where they are wanted and cherished and cared for? 
Funny how it's always the "straight" couples who only take fosters for the money who are the ones abusing the kids. There was a couple here who tied a small girl up to the porch with a chicken tied around her neck and she died of starvation and hypothermia. She was a foster. They were a MAN and a WOMAN! 
So stick your indignation and hate up your hateful ass!


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


^ ghost post?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Oh yes, many HAVE said that gay people are sterile.   Here's the fun scenerio..."if everyone on Earth was gay, we'd go extinct."   Now....why would anyone think that?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


What does an embankment built to keep back flooding from the sea have to do with the topic of this thread?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Impressive, Comrade.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Oh yes, many HAVE said that gay people are sterile.   Here's the fun scenerio..."if everyone on Earth was gay, we'd go extinct."   Now....why would anyone think that?




Homosexuals aren't interested in having relations with dames.   Just because it is "possible" for them to do it, they would be unlikely to do it enough to replace the population.    IVF and other artificial methods again would not be able to keep the demand up either.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes, many HAVE said that gay people are sterile.   Here's the fun scenerio..."if everyone on Earth was gay, we'd go extinct."   Now....why would anyone think that?
> ...


You obviously aren't interested in having relations with WOMEN either since you keep referring to them in such a derogatory way. Dames? Or, you just consider us as an inferior species who are only here to do your bidding and keep you happy. You have yet to refer to a woman in a respectful manner and have the audacity to criticize a gay man? I have many gay friends and they have always treated me with the utmost respect and never once have I ever heard them refer to a woman as a "dame!"  You've called women other derogatory names on this thread and it seems that you really hate women because no gentleman who respects women would ever stoop so low as you have.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes, many HAVE said that gay people are sterile.   Here's the fun scenerio..."if everyone on Earth was gay, we'd go extinct."   Now....why would anyone think that?
> ...


My my...you  certainly think you are all up on gay knowledge, don't you?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


INCEL...you are talking to an INCEL


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You might be right, I never thought of that.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


You are so full of shit it makes me sick

*LGBT Adoption Facts*

*For many, LGBT adoption is still a new concept, and society’s image of a “perfect” family includes a mother and a father of opposite sexes. However, this is a just a stereotype. Today, more and more gay and lesbian couples are becoming parents, whether through artificial insemination, a surrogate or LGBT adoption. LifeLong Adoptions caters to heterosexual couples, single parents and gay & lesbian families.* *LGBT Adoption Facts | Gay Adoption | Same Sex Adoption*


The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare. So, before you buy into the myths and rhetoric that gay adoption poses an unsafe environment for children or that a gay household is a "recruitment center" for young adults, the facts those against same-sex adoption aren't telling you:

•      There are already thousands of children living in gay couple households. The 2000 U. S. Census reports 33% of female same-sex couple households and 22% of male same-sex couple households already have at least one child under the age of 18 living at home.


10 Ways You Can Join the Fight for Gay Rights


_In 2008 there were 129,000 children waiting to be adopted, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported. In 2007, the Urban Institute reported that two million gay or lesbian individuals said they had considered adoption. A hotly debated issue in the United States is whether or not those two million interested individuals should be able to adopt the children in need. There is currently no federal law that explicitly bans or allows gays and lesbians to adopt; the decision is left up to each state. _



Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_6746455_gay-lesbian-adoption.html#ixzz2vb55w73S


Here is more for you to chew on:


A final word to all of the low life bigots who shamelessly use propaganda about children in their failed war on equality. I’m sure that  these figures are  much higher now

There were an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 gay and lesbian biological parents in 1976. In 1990, an estimated 6 to 14 million children have gay or lesbian parents.

Latest statistics from the U.S. Census 2000, the National Survey of Family Growth (2002), and the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (2004) include:

•        An estimated two million LGLB people are interested in adopting.

•        An estimated 65,500 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.

•        More than 16,000 adopted children are living with lesbian and gay parents in California, the highest number among the states.

•        Gay and lesbian parents are raising four percent of all adopted children in the United States.

•        Adopted children with same-sex parents are younger and more likely to be foreign born.

How Many U.S. Children Have Gay Parents?

In addition, adoption is legal in all 50 states. Generally, acceptance of gay and lesbian adoption has been way out in front of same sex marriage. In some states, it has been occurring for decades.

Given these numbers, please answer the following questions:

•        If children who are in the care of gay people are at risk of abuse or  having developmental/ adjustment issues why have the states been allowing this for so long?

•        If mistreatment of children by gays was prevalent, why are we not hearing horror stories and seeing headlines about this on a regular basis ?

•        Why have we not been seeing large numbers of adults who had been  children of gays coming forward to speak out against gay parenting?

Claims that gay parenting is harmful to children are bogus and stupid.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 16, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You go girl!! What a sick and stupid piece of shit!


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The authoritarian right will never stop in their efforts to discriminate against gay and transgender Americans and deny them their rights and protected liberties – even though it violates the Constitution to seek to do so.


Nobody is less qualified to speak about the U.S. Constitution than you. So please...just stop. You're making a fool out of yourself.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.


Oh bullshit. Stop with your idiotic nonsense already. This is the queer version of yelling "racist". Every time you people can't fight science or facts, you scream "bigot" or "homophobe". Just stop already.


> In 2012, in his New Family Structures Study, Dr. Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, addressed each of the three main problems with the earlier studies.[4] His research found that, similar to children from non-intact families, those children who at some point during their childhood lived with one parent and that parent’s same-sex partner fared, on average, significantly worse than children of married biological parents on a multitude of measures, including their educational progress as children and eventual employment and dependence on public assistance in adulthood.


There is nothing healthy about a child going home to two mom's or two dad's. *Nothing*. At best, they grow up questioning why they have a fucked up situation that differs from every other child they know. At worst, it plays hell on their development and mental health. The science is settled, you radical lying hippie _asshole_.

The Research on Same-Sex Parenting: “No Differences” No More


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.


Oh bullshit. Stop with your idiotic nonsense already. This is the queer version of yelling "racist". Every time you people can't fight science or facts, you scream "bigot" or "homophobe". Just stop already.


> Controlling for child sex, age, and race and parents’ education and income, Dr. Sullins finds that children of parents in same-sex relationships fare significantly worse than those of opposite-sex parents on nine of 12 measures of emotional or developmental problems and their use of mental health treatment. In general, children of parents in same-sex relationships are about two to three times more likely to experience such problems.


There is nothing healthy about a child going home to two mom's or two dad's. *Nothing*. At best, they grow up questioning why they have a fucked up situation that differs from every other child they know. At worst, it plays hell on their development and mental health. The science is settled, you radical lying hippie _asshole_.

The Research on Same-Sex Parenting: “No Differences” No More


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.


Oh bullshit. Stop with your idiotic nonsense already. This is the queer version of yelling "racist". Every time you people can't fight science or facts, you scream "bigot" or "homophobe". Just stop already.

There is nothing healthy about a child going home to two mom's or two dad's. *Nothing*. At best, they grow up questioning why they have a fucked up situation that differs from every other child they know. At worst, it plays hell on their development and mental health. The science is settled, you radical lying hippie _asshole_.

Impact of Same-Sex Parenting on Children: Evaluating the Research


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The authoritarian right will never stop in their efforts to discriminate against gay and transgender Americans and deny them their rights and protected liberties – even though it violates the Constitution to seek to do so.
> ...


   I love Irony on the weekend.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.


The science is settled on this. Stop being a science denier like you tools are with the "Global Warming" scam.

How Children Raised By Same-Sex Married Couples Fare


----------



## bodecea (Feb 16, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.
> ...


Stuttering?  Not that there's anything wrong with that.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> I love Irony on the weekend.


Sweetie, I've forgotten more about the U.S. Constitution than you and every single one of your wing-nut pals here on USMB combined will ever know. I've studied it top to bottom, front to back, left to right, inside and out. I've read supporting materials about (such as original writings from the founders about it, such as the Federalist Papers), I've watched documentaries about it, and I've attended speaking engagements about it by experts.

The ridiculous part is that I know that you know that I know it inside and out. That's why you never challenge me on it and instead just make desperate snarky comments like a junior high school girl frustrated that she's not getting her way.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2019)

bodecea said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


No sweetie. Providing _volumes_ of *data* proving you people are liars.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 17, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> .... you just consider us as an inferior species who are only here to do your bidding and keep you happy.... I have many gay friends and they have always treated me with the utmost respect and never once have I ever heard them refer to a woman as a "dame!"  You've called women other derogatory names on this thread and it seems that you really hate women because no gentleman who respects women would ever stoop so low as you have.



You are aware that an extremely common term gay men refer to women ....is “Breeders”. 

Who else will churn out those pretty little boys/twinks?


----------



## Lysistrata (Feb 17, 2019)

Why do these people have to go after people who are LGBTQs? What drives this thing? I am a woman who is attracted to men. But I do not have to devote my time to making life hard for people who have a same-sex attraction. What is the reason for attacking folks who have a same-sex orientation? They are just living their lives, same as the rest of us.

What is the motivation here? What is it that you are doing and why?


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 17, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Why do these people have to go after people who are LGBTQs? What drives this thing? I am a woman who is attracted to men. But I do not have to devote my time to making life hard for people who have a same-sex attraction. What is the reason for attacking folks who have a same-sex orientation? They are just living their lives, same as the rest of us.
> 
> What is the motivation here? What is it that you are doing and why?



“Attacking” ??!  A state wanting to protect children isn’t “attacking” the perpetrators. It is defending against the LGBT affront.

Because this isn’t JUST about freedoms of adult lifestyles. It’s about states’ interests in regulating marriage for the benefit of all parties to the contract.

If a state encourages homes without a mother or homes without a father, the state is being forced to incentivize statistically deprived children. Reams  upon reams of studies show boys fare best with a father in their home & girls same with a mother.

Plus, a child notices as he grows up that the rejection of his gender in his two lesbian parents = a fundamental rejection of his maleness; no matter how many times the lesbians struggle against their manifest example to reassure him to the opposite. (Opposite true for girls contractually deprived for life from a mother).


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Why do these people have to go after people who are LGBTQs? What drives this thing? I am a woman who is attracted to men. But I do not have to devote my time to making life hard for people who have a same-sex attraction. What is the reason for attacking folks who have a same-sex orientation? They are just living their lives, same as the rest of us.
> ...



A testimonial to prove you wrong......


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.
> ...


Holly shit! Seriously? Regnerus? He is a fraud who was humiliated in court over his bullshit

Here is a clear example of the lengths to which opponents of same sex marriage, and child rearing by gays will go in order to manipulate data and distort evidence to support their narrow minded and bigoted agenda. *If there was a body of credible evidence to show that having gay parents was in any way detrimental to children, this would not be necessary! *

Opponents of Same-Sex Marriage Take Bad-for-Children Argument to Court  2.22.14  Selected excerpts follow….the full article can be found at Opponents of Same-Sex Marriage Take Bad-for-Children Argument to Court



> Scholars testifying in defense of Michigan’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage aim to sow doubt about the wisdom of change. They brandish a few sharply disputed recent studies — the fruits of a concerted and expensive effort by conservatives to sponsor research by sympathetic scholars — to suggest that children of same-sex couples do not fare as well as those raised by married heterosexuals.
> 
> *That view will be challenged in court by longtime scholars in the field, backed by major professional organizations, who call those studies fatally flawed.* These scholars will describe a near consensus that, other factors like income and stability being equal, children of same-sex couples do just as well as those of heterosexual couples.





> In meetings hosted by the Heritage Foundation in Washington in late 2010, opponents of same-sex marriage discussed the urgent need to generate new studies on family structures and children, according to recent pretrial depositions of two witnesses in the Michigan trial and other participants. One result was the marshaling of $785,000 for a large-scale study by Mark  HYPERLINK "https://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/sociology/faculty/mdr93"Regnerus, a meeting participant and a sociologist at the University of Texas who will testify in Michigan.
> 
> ………four social science researchers, all of whom attended at least one of the Heritage Foundation meetings and went on to publish new reports, are scheduled to testify in favor of Michigan’s ban.





> *The most prominent is Dr. Regnerus. His study, published in 2012, was* *condemned by leading social scientists as misleading and irrelevant, *but some conservatives call it the best of its kind and continue to cite it in speeches and court cases.
> 
> Dr. Regnerus found that the subjects in that category fared worse based on a host of behavioral and psychological measures than those who grew up in intact traditional families. The study, Dr. Regnerus wrote, “clearly reveals” that children are most apt to succeed when they grow up “with their married mother and father.”





> But *professional rejections of Dr. Regnerus’s conclusions were swift and severe*. In a friend of the court brief  To Better Social Policies, Listen to Beneficiaries the Supreme Court last year in two same-sex marriage cases, a report by the 14,000-member American Sociological Association noted that *more than half the subjects whom Dr. Regnerus had described as children of “lesbian mothers” and “gay fathers” were the offspring of failed opposite-sex marriages in which a parent later engaged in same-sex behavior, and that many others never lived with same-sex parents.*
> 
> “*If any conclusion can be reached from Regnerus’s study,” the association said, “it is that family stability is predictive of child well-being.”*





> *Wendy D. Manning, *a professor of sociology at Bowling Green State University in Ohio and the main author of the association report, said of the wider literature: *“Every study has shortcomings, but when you pull them all together, the picture is very clear. There is no evidence that children fare worse in same-sex families.”*
> 
> 
> 
> Opponents of Same-Sex Marriage Take Bad-for-Children Argument to Court


----------



## mdk (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> “Attacking” ??! A state wanting to protect children isn’t “attacking” the perpetrators. It is defending against the LGBT affront.
> 
> Because this isn’t JUST about freedoms of adult lifestyles. It’s about states’ interests in regulating marriage for the benefit of all parties to the contract.



You keep repeating this lie as we both know that children are not parties to the marriage contract of their parents in any state in this nation. Not Tennessee. Not Ohio. Not one. You've invented this legal standard and demand people follow it, but luckily for all of us, no one is bound by legal gibberish you've pulled out of your ass.



Silhouette said:


> If a state encourages homes without a mother or homes without a father, the state is being forced to incentivize statistically deprived children. Reams upon reams of studies show boys fare best with a father in their home & girls same with a mother.



Ending gay marriage in no way stops gay households from raising children. These homes suddenly don't have a mother or father added as result of your prohibiting gays from marrying. Your 'solution' doesn't address your problem in any way.



Silhouette said:


> Plus, a child notices as he grows up that the rejection of his gender in his two lesbian parents = a fundamental rejection of his maleness; no matter how many times the lesbians struggle against their manifest example to reassure him to the opposite. (Opposite true for girls contractually deprived for life from a mother).



Is this the case in your household that is devoid of a father? Or does this only apply to gay homes? Something tells me you only believe the latter. You demand gay people meet a standard that you yourself cannot meet. Get a life and worry about the happenings under your own roof.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 17, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


A singular or minority sampling of subjective statements supporting gay marriage does not refute reams of objective peer reviewed studies to the contrary. This is especially true when a bunch of adult children raised in gay homes having a negative experience were disallowed to submit amicus briefs to Obergefell.


----------



## dannyboys (Feb 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I have never witnessed anyone more consumed by being gay since I watched Little Britain.
I sincerely feel sorry for you.
It's like you feel you are "the only gay in the village".
Get some help.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> A singular or minority sampling of subjective statements supporting gay marriage does not refute reams of objective peer reviewed studies to the contrary. This is especially true when a bunch of adult children raised in gay homes having a negative experience were disallowed to submit amicus briefs to Obergefell.



Yes, Junk Science by religious nuts has no place in our legal system.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



How much longer are you going to continue to embarrass yourself by repeating these lies? Your false information has already been debunked. 
Oh, and do yourself a favor, come out of the closet.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 17, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> How much longer are you going to continue to embarrass yourself by repeating these lies? Your false information has already been debunked.
> Oh, and do yourself a favor, come out of the closet.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

dannyboys said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


I didn't think that it was possible for someone to be so fucking stupid as to think that it is those who defend gays who are the closeted gays.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


This jackass loves to exploit children to attack gays because she hates gays more than she cares about the kids. And to rail against gay parenting as an argument against same sex marriage is doubly stupid. Gay people will have kids in their care regardless of whether or not they are married-just like straight folks. But depriving them of the ability to marry will harm the children- depriving them of the legal and financial advantages of having married parents who are both there legal guardians. I have said this many times to this bigoted moron but she spewing here filth anyway


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 17, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


Please point me to a majority of objective peer reviewed studies that have allegedly refuted the boy’s fare better with father in their home & girls fare better with a mother in the home.


----------



## mdk (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



Which adult children were disallowed to sumbit amicus briefs concerning Obergefell? Do you have any names of these people? Or like most things with you are they a figment of your imagination?

Hells bells, your own signature had a link containing many of briefs from those opposing gay marriage for many, many months. Now you’re pretending that people were suddenly not allowed to sumbit briefs.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


A team at Columbia Law School has collected on one website the abstracts of all* peer-reviewed studies that have addressed this question since 1980 so that anyone can examine the research directly, and not rely on talking heads or potential groupthink.* Even when we might not agree with a study’s conclusions—with how a researcher interpreted the data—we still included it if it went through peer review and was relevant to the topic at hand. Peer review, of course, isn’t perfect, but it’s one of the best ways the world has to ensure that research conclusions are at least the product of good-faith efforts to get at the truth.



> The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. _What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution_.
> 
> Even the notion that some try to put forth that there are no good studies is wrong...the studies, while not perfect do give us a very good idea on the conclusions and that is that gay homes are not better nor worse.


Here is a link to all the studies

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

 I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized

LGBT parenting - Wikipedia



> Consensus
> 
> The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]




You're welcome!


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 17, 2019)

I’ve heard the standing consensus is that there hasn’t been enough time to tell. However, I do think it’s interesting that adult kids from gay homes were banned from submitting amicus briefs to the USSC during Obergefell. Easy to skew results in one’s cause when first hand test subjects are bound & gagged.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> I’ve heard the standing consensus is that there hasn’t been enough time to tell. However, I do think it’s interesting that adult kids from gay homes were banned from submitting amicus briefs to the USSC during Obergefell. Easy to skew results in one’s cause when first hand test subjects are bound & gagged.


Would you care to document or are we just supposed to take your  word LOL


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


You're a bigot and a liar.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > .... you just consider us as an inferior species who are only here to do your bidding and keep you happy.... I have many gay friends and they have always treated me with the utmost respect and never once have I ever heard them refer to a woman as a "dame!"  You've called women other derogatory names on this thread and it seems that you really hate women because no gentleman who respects women would ever stoop so low as you have.
> ...


Lies about same-sex couples adopting and raising children are nothing more than red herring fallacies contrived and propagated by the hateful, bigoted right – demagoguery intended to ‘justify’ conservatives’ bigotry and hate directed at gay Americans.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> I’ve heard the standing consensus is that there hasn’t been enough time to tell. However, I do think it’s interesting that adult kids from gay homes were banned from submitting amicus briefs to the USSC during Obergefell. Easy to skew results in one’s cause when first hand test subjects are bound & gagged.


Not enough time???!! Gay people have been raising kids for decades before they could marry. So that is bullshit. And as I keep saying, to try to show that gay parents are detrimental to kids as a reason to deny them the right to marry is as stupid as stupid gets


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Easy to skew results in one’s cause when first hand test subjects are bound & gagged.



I don't know, maybe they are into that kind of thing.  

I don't judge


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 17, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Re:  "Do you think those children shouldn't be allowed to have a home where they are wanted and cherished and cared for?"   Everybody needs to be loved - it's how you define LOVE that makes the difference - the facts are irrefutable sweety --- Gay Men molest children at a ridiculously higher percentage than any other demographic - they are responsibble for about 1/3 of all child molestation aganst male children yet comprise on 3 to 5 % of the population .   And by the way - you have no idea what goes on behind closed doors between those 2 perverts and the child / children in question - do you ?   So kindly STFU and stop enabling child abuse


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




So you know how to copy and paste from pro gay big brother rags  - good for you you've moved beyond the coloring book and crayons - but ALT-Facts do not and can not alter or change reality  *Gay Men are still responsible for roughly 1/3 of all child abuse cases against male children  - that equates to roughly 3% of the population responsible for 33% of child abuse*


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 17, 2019)

QUOTE="bodecea, post: 21833669, member: 20112"]





Polishprince said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes, many HAVE said that gay people are sterile.   Here's the fun scenerio..."if everyone on Earth was gay, we'd go extinct."   Now....why would anyone think that?
> ...


My my...you  certainly think you are all up on gay knowledge, don't you? *Edited-meister* 

 [


----------



## bodecea (Feb 17, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


And a deflection from their own disastorous ways of "raising" children.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 17, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> QUOTE="bodecea, post: 21833669, member: 20112"]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, considering that I am gay...I would think I have some.....and you, Comrade?


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 17, 2019)

bodecea said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > QUOTE="bodecea, post: 21833669, member: 20112"]
> ...



have some what ?  ....  STDs ???


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 17, 2019)

bodecea said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > QUOTE="bodecea, post: 21833669, member: 20112"]
> ...


The only thing green about the Bean is the diseased, gangrene brain cells that are driving his idiocy


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


An 'idiocy' .... that after ... what 3 / 4 years since that other forunm that you still haven't gotten over or been able to refute .... not one iota  ....  *TRUTH HURTS DOESN"T IT CUM GUZZLER ??!! *


----------



## martybegan (Feb 18, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Homosexuality violates people's religion. That's the problem. I can't force a Jihadi Butcher to sell me bacon or butcher a hog either.
> ...



The Army was only sent in when local law enforcement gave up on enforcing a valid law dictating equal access to public education. So your comparison doesn't work here. 

And again your assumption of domestic violence. Do you lie without even trying?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Unless you have irrefutable proof to back this accusation up, you're just pulling this info out of your homophobic ass.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




Horseshit!



> Members of disliked minority groups are often stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority's most vulnerable members. For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping White women. ]
> 
> In recent years, antigay activists have routinely asserted that gay people are child molesters. This argument was often made in debates about the Boy Scouts of America's policy to exclude gay scouts and scoutmasters. More recently, in the wake of Rep. Mark Foley's resignation from the US House of Representatives in 2006, antigay activists and their supporters seized on the scandal to revive this canard. http://psc.dss.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html



Selected Excerpts:



> The number of Americans who believe the myth that gay people are child molesters has declined substantially. In a 1970 national survey, more than 70% of respondents agreed with the assertions that "Homosexuals are dangerous as teachers or youth leaders because they try to get sexually involved with children" or that "Homosexuals try to play sexually with children if they cannot get an adult partner."*1*
> 
> By contrast, in a 1999 national poll, the belief that most gay men are likely to molest or abuse children was endorsed by only 19% of heterosexual men and 10% of heterosexual women. Even fewer – 9% of men and 6% of women – regarded most lesbians as child molesters.



Apparently you're a  part of the moronic minority( Yes a play on words lifted from the moral majority)



> One problem is that none of the studies in this area have obtained data from a probability sample, that is, a sample that can be assumed to be representative of the population of all child molesters. Rather, most research has been conducted only with convicted perpetrators or with pedophiles who sought professional help. Consequently, they may not accurately describe child molesters who have never been caught or have not sought treatment.




A second problem is that the terminology used in this area is often confusing and can even be misleading. We can begin to address that problem by defining some basic terms.



> _Pedophilia_ and _child molestation_ are used in different ways, even by professionals. Pedophilia usually refers to an adult psychological disorder characterized by a preference for prepubescent children as sexual partners; this preference may or may not be acted upon. The term _hebephilia_ is sometimes used to describe adult sexual attractions to adolescents or children who have reached puberty.
> 
> Child molestation and child sexual abuse refer to actions, and don't imply a particular psychological makeup or motive on the part of the perpetrator. Not all incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by pedophiles or hebephiles; in some cases, the perpetrator has other motives for his or her actions and does not manifest an ongoing pattern of sexual attraction to children.
> 
> Thus, not all child sexual abuse is perpetrated by pedophiles (or hebephiles) and not all pedophiles and hebephiles actually commit abuse. Consequently, it is important to use terminology carefully.




Hopefully, you are beginning to see that the issue is a bit more complicated than your  small mind is able or willing to contemplate




> Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men*2* is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.



Now we are getting to the crux of the issue. Still with me, or are you watching porn and jerking off, rather than trying to learn something?



> As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).
> 
> To avoid this confusion, it is preferable to refer to men's sexual abuse of boys with the more accurate label of _male-male_ molestation. Similarly, it is preferable to refer to men's abuse of girls as _male-female_ molestation. These labels are more accurate because they describe the sex of the individuals involved but don't implicitly convey unwarranted assumptions about the perpetrator's sexual orientation.





> *Typologies of Offenders *The distinction between a victim's gender and a perpetrator's sexual orientation is important because many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children – boys, girls, or children of both sexes.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


He heard this shit somewhere- doesn't really remember the source- and mindlessly regurgitates it when prompted.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




The thing with homosexuality is that they need to bring in new people to adopt the orientation.  Do homosexuals sometimes try to recruit underaged boys to become "queer"?   That's an unquestioned fact.   Gays have established groups in High Schools in the modern age to gin up interest, and supported those efforts with prominent homosexual characters and shows on TV, even getting politicians to go all in for homosexuality.

This is where the problem lies.  

I could really give a shit what kind of sexuality gay beaus are involved in, but they should really only be on boarding people who have reached their majorities


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


Keep on going! Lets see what other bigoted bovine excrement you can pull out of your ass, Slick


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


I can guarantee that his source is hate filled RW homophobic one. These people look for sources that align with their own warped views.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



All I can say is that ADULTS should be allowed to engage in whatever they like, however CHILDREN should not be exposed to it.

In the Russian Federation, the Duma passed a law to outlaw gay propaganda to youth.  I think this is a good thing, homosexuals should be directing their recruitment efforts to adults. Let a man live life first, give him a chance to see both lifestyles so he can make a decision with open eyes as to what orientation to pursue.

Nothing "homophobic" at all about it.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You still don't get it do you? You can't be "recruited" into being gay if you're not. People are born that way and not converted to it. 
Oh, and as far as handing out propaganda, guess you also hate the religious freaks who hand out their propaganda and actively recruit youth and adults alike to join their churches. I have yet to see any gays handing out anything at all, but sure as hell have seen numerous religious freaks out there daily. And that doesn't include the rabid anti abortionists who hand out their lying propaganda daily.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


Gay people come from straight parents...like Phyllis Schlafly,  like Dick Cheney, like Alan Keyes.......


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> All I can say is that ADULTS should be allowed to engage in whatever they like, however CHILDREN should not be exposed to it.


I completely agree!!


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Re:"Gay people come from straight parents"
Yes -  this is true and so do mongoloids, serial killers and people like you - so what's your point ?


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > All I can say is that ADULTS should be allowed to engage in whatever they like, however CHILDREN should not be exposed to it.
> ...



That being the case - then why did you enable Gay adoption ?  A logical falasy - but then again you , yourself are an illogical PHallic


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Re: "People are born that way and not converted to it. "   - That *MAY be true* but it is not proven - it is only theory


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> In the Russian Federation, the Duma passed a law to outlaw gay propaganda to youth. I think this is a good thing, homosexuals should be directing their recruitment efforts to adults. Let a man live life first, give him a chance to see both lifestyles so he can make a decision with open eyes as to what orientation to pursue.


The idea that gays have to "recruit " anyone is based on the stupid idea that people can become gay when encouraged to. That is just plain stupid. There is credible evidence that there is a biological basis for homosexuality. I would share it with you but I doubt that you have the intellectual capacity or emotional maturity to benefit by it.  You would rather just remain in your comfort zone of bigotry and ignorance.


----------



## mdk (Feb 18, 2019)

I was a pussy crushing machine until I was recruited into the gay lifestyle as teen by accidentally stopping on _Logo_.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




A friend of mine who was serving time in a Maryland penitentiary was just minding his own business when a couple of Homosexual inmates did try to recruit him into the orientation.  Sure, he fought for his manhood, and didn't give in and remained straight, but they did pressure him.   Are you saying the efforts of these gay guys would always be in vain?  Why would they try it then?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Because children needed a safe and loving home after being abused and neglected -sometimes sexually -by their straight parents. And unlike you, most people know that gay people are not predators or in any a threat to children. Any more stupid questions?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Are you sure that it wasn't you who got fudge packed in the big house?


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...




I've never been in the Big House.  But if I was, I wouldn't hang out with the homos.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


*For many, LGBT adoption is still a new concept, and society’s image of a “perfect” family includes a mother and a father of opposite sexes. However, this is a just a stereotype. Today, more and more gay and lesbian couples are becoming parents, whether through artificial insemination, a surrogate or LGBT adoption. LifeLong Adoptions caters to heterosexual couples, single parents and gay & lesbian families.* *LGBT Adoption Facts | Gay Adoption | Same Sex Adoption*

 The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare. So, before you buy into the myths and rhetoric that gay adoption poses an unsafe environment for children or that a gay household is a "recruitment center" for young adults, the facts those against same-sex adoption aren't telling you:

•      There are already thousands of children living in gay couple households. The 2000 U. S. Census reports 33% of female same-sex couple households and 22% of male same-sex couple households already have at least one child under the age of 18 living at home.


10 Ways You Can Join the Fight for Gay Rights


_In 2008 there were 129,000 children waiting to be adopted, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported. In 2007, the Urban Institute reported that two million gay or lesbian individuals said they had considered adoption. A hotly debated issue in the United States is whether or not those two million interested individuals should be able to adopt the children in need. There is currently no federal law that explicitly bans or allows gays and lesbians to adopt; the decision is left up to each state. _



Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_6746455_gay-lesbian-adoption.html#ixzz2vb55w73S


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


A final word to all of the low life bigots who shamelessly use propaganda about children in their failed war on equality. I’m sure that  these figures are  much higher now

There were an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 gay and lesbian biological parents in 1976. In 1990, an estimated 6 to 14 million children have gay or lesbian parents.

Latest statistics from the U.S. Census 2000, the National Survey of Family Growth (2002), and the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (2004) include:

•        An estimated two million LGLB people are interested in adopting.

•        An estimated 65,500 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.

•        More than 16,000 adopted children are living with lesbian and gay parents in California, the highest number among the states.

•        Gay and lesbian parents are raising four percent of all adopted children in the United States.

•        Adopted children with same-sex parents are younger and more likely to be foreign born.

How Many U.S. Children Have Gay Parents?

In addition, adoption is legal in all 50 states. Generally, acceptance of gay and lesbian adoption has been way out in front of same sex marriage. In some states, it has been occurring for decades.

Given these numbers, please answer the following questions:

•        If children who are in the care of gay people are at risk of abuse or  having developmental/ adjustment issues why have the states been allowing this for so long?

•        If mistreatment of children by gays was prevalent, why are we not hearing horror stories and seeing headlines about this on a regular basis ?

•        Why have we not been seeing large numbers of adults who had been  children of gays coming forward to speak out against gay parenting?

Claims that gay parenting is harmful to children are bogus and stupid.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You would not have a choice,Slick


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


He has no idea how it really works in prison. Those men weren't "gay" they were doing what is infamous in prison and those men get their sex from wherever they can. And you're right, there would be no choice because rape happens all the time in prison.
I have a friend who did 20 years in Angola, one of the worst prisons in this country and some of the stories he tells would make your blood go cold. He was in there for murder and is a really big guy, so he was never messed with much, but he's seen plenty and all of it was awful.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> *For many, LGBT adoption is still a new concept, and society’s image of a “perfect” family includes a mother and a father of opposite sexes. However, this is a just a stereotype. *
> 
> The push against gay, lesbian, and same-sex couple adoption is more about gay discrimination than child welfare.



No. It’s a documented & exhaustive peer- reviewed emperical fact that children fare poorly in a home where their gender of parent is missing. 

Especially if that child faces a contract knowing his/her fate is sealed. 

So it is about child well being after all.


----------



## caddo kid (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> ...



It sure seems to have an effect on those from the right, conservatives, Republicans, etc.

These assholes ALWAYS want to put their goddamn noses into everyone elses fvcking business, like some old fvcking maid.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > *For many, LGBT adoption is still a new concept, and society’s image of a “perfect” family includes a mother and a father of opposite sexes. However, this is a just a stereotype. *
> ...



What if a woman is widowed and has a son? Is she supposed to run right out and grab the first man she sees so that her son will have a man in the house? My aunt was widowed when her son was only 10 weeks old. She never remarried and raised him all on her own. She was tall and looked like a model and very feminine, but made sure he was in every sport and activity he wanted. And she attended every game. For awhile, he was into that fake wrestling and she would take him to all of the matches that came to the coliseum and go backstage with him to meet the wrestlers. He grew up into a fine man and isn't the least bit feminine, so your "peer-review" is a load of shit.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



You people have no right to redefine what my marriage means, nor can you cheapen the institution of marriage and the God who defined it as such.  Marriage is a holy union between *one* man and *one* woman as God defined it. That's the way it has always been and shall always be. Otherwise you are denying the existence of God, which is probably not the smartest thing to do.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Let us look at some of the verses from the Old Testament that allow polygamy:

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

In Deuteronomy 21:15 "If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons...."

There are a lot more verses from the Old Testament that allow polygamy, but I think that the above are sufficient enough to prove my point.


----------



## caddo kid (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




"You people?"

Look, I'm not, nor was ever on the SCOTUS.

You got a problem with gay marriage? Take it up with them.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> RoshawnMarkwees said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



The court erred in its decision regarding equal protection as gays had the same rights to marriage as anyone.  They had the right to marry someone of the opposite sex.  Gays wanted the right to marry someone of the same sex, which heterosexuals couples did not have at the time.

Personally, I don't give a Shiite, other than the decision was in error, based on a right that did not exist.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



Old Testament Mosaic Law. Jesus said that if you ever look at another woman cross-eyed, you've already committed adultery.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Which God?    The Judeo-Christian God?   The God of the Muslims?   The God of the Hindus?


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



There is only one God: The God of Abraham, Moses, and Issac. The God whose Son was crucified on the cross so that we all my be forgiven.

Everything else is false doctrine.


----------



## iamwhatiseem (Feb 18, 2019)

Looks to me like it is "the sky is falling! the sky is falling" fear mongering from the LGBQT crowd.
It already failed to pass once, and is predicted to roundly fail again and it could cost TN $9 bil. in loss tax revenues.
 So it is a nothing burger proposed by a guy pandering for votes... the same thing Sen's and Congress critters do everyday.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



Thanks, first he said it was God's definition, one man and one woman, but when I posted what I did, then he changed it to Jesus. He must look like a pretzel with all of that twisting. And, you're right about the different God's there are. Heck, there are tribes who have never even heard of God and live by the rules of their tribes.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



That is your belief.   And largely irrelevant to the discussion here.   

This discussion is regarding the gov’t recognition of the institution of marriage.   And the gov’t is not Christian.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Our laws are based upon Christianity however. "Thou shalt not steal" "Thou shalt not bear false witness", etc.  Sunday, as you know, is the Christian day to meet and worship Almighty God, and Christians are interested in keeping the date holy.  As a result, here in Pennsylvania, the state's fathers have banned the sale of alcohol in barrooms until 11 a.m. on Sunday to give the people time to get to church.

You might not like it, but it doesn't change the factoids.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Our government is based on Christian ideals and Tennessee wants to ban same-sex marriage based on their religious belief.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



How many of those "gods" condone homosexuality or same-sex marriage?

Not a single solitary one of them.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



It's really arrogant of you to presume to know what your God thinks because the bible was written by men who lived in the bronze age and knew very little of the rest of the world. And what about this....Jesus never married or had a family and traveled around with 12 men and even kissed some of them. What do you make of that?
Also, it's people like you who give religion a bad name. I know a lady who is a devout Jew and practices her religion daily, but never once has she ever tried to shove it down anyone's throats like people such as yourself does. As a result, I have learned a great deal about her religion and have a great respect for her. 
Oh, ans speaking of Jews, tramp's daughter, son-in-law and their kids are all Jews. So according to you, they all will be going to hell, right?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



And, this country follows laws and the Constitution and not anyone's particular religion or belief. You have a problem with that, take it up with your Congressman.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Oh really?   

Just the first one I looked up:  Stances of Faiths on LGBTQ Issues: Buddhism | Human Rights Campaign


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



NYPD?

It was in Chicago, dumbass!


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



First of all, the 10 Commandments were not the first set of laws to make stealing & lying illegal.   Virtually every culture has laws against theft.   And except for specific circumstances, lying is not illegal in the US.   

The Blue Laws you refer to are slowly being removed.   And just as an FYI, Sunday is not the Sabbath.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



Thomas Jefferson stated, unequivocally, that the US was not a Christian nation.  And we are not.    Whatever ideals you hold are fine.  But when it comes to laws, religious views cannot be the sole basis for them.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Hindus have no issue with same sex marriages.  

But, once again, we are talking about religious views but secular gov’t recognition of marriage.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


You're right. The Sabbath is from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. Or, some Jews say until dark on Saturday. And, here in NC they can now sell alcohol on Sunday starting at I think 10 in the morning. It was noon before.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > *For many, LGBT adoption is still a new concept, and society’s image of a “perfect” family includes a mother and a father of opposite sexes. However, this is a just a stereotype. *
> ...


Produce it or shut up.And don't bother to post that debunked Princes Trust crap


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Yup, that where their idiotic arguments fail miserably. The fact that they don't rail against single parents exposes their bigotry.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Especially those poor children who are forced to live with two "parents" who statistically have higher rates of suicide, drug abuse, disease, depression, and family violence.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



Link to a credible source or as usual these are things you're pulling out of your homophobic ass. Ask any cop about domestic violence and see how many times they have been called out on a same sex couple. It's always a hetero couple where the man thinks the woman is nothing more than a punching bag. And the rest of your list is pure bullshit too. The only suicide that is committed by a gay person is by those so persecuted and driven to it by people such as yourself. 
I am glad I don't live in your hate filled, judgmental bubble.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Any group who has been historically marginalized, beaten down, and discriminated against will have higher rates of mental health and physical problems. Those problems are not caused by their being gay in and of itself. They are caused by people like you. You have blood on your hands


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



So do something for the children of drug addicts, abusers and those suffering from disease or depression.    If it is their parent, they will be with them whether they can marry or not.  

And before you bring up same sex couples adopting, the vetting process should weed them out.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



You just revealed the motivation behind your entire "movement." You don't want "equal rights", do you? You want a special government-protected status and a shiny little sticker on your forehead that reads "*Victim*."

"Ohhh woe is mee!! Dem bad ol' straight people done done me wrong!!!"

Sorry, hillbilly. We'un done got us enough "victims" in this world. Youse needs to git in line behind dem wemmins and black folks, Dey's was here first.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



JGalt, I have to ask you, why do you care one way or the other?

The same sex couples that marry have likely been living together for years.  Same sex marriage does not make more gays.   And it has no effect at all on you.   It just gives these existing couples access to the hundreds of benefits married couples get.   The ONLY thing that changes is between the gov’t and the couple.  

Why do you care?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Interesting....I just shared your post with our daughter....who is now chuckling.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



Horseshit.   He simply pointed out that people who have been mistreated, marginalized and screwed over tend to suffer from the things you mentioned.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You don't really expect a rational or honest  answer do you?


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Personally, I don't care. If there are any gay conservatives out there, well "Welcome to the party, boys and girls."

Same with black folks, Hispanics, or anyone else.


----------



## noonereal (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'T
> *Tennessee Seeks tonBar Same Sex Marriage*
> .




I guess they want to keep it in the family down there.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Just because homosexuals may have been persecuted in a long gone generation doesn't mean anything about today.

In today's world, homosexuals are lionized and honored with special rights;  that's current reality.   All this gay shit like "non binary" and "gay adoption"  is something new.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...






That is the stupidest fucking thing that have said so far -and you have said some STUPID THINGS


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Re:  "Why have we not been seeing large numbers of adults who had been children of gays coming forward to speak out against gay parenting?"    

*Yo Dumbass* - Gay parenting in any large volume has not been around long enough for these kids to have grown up - AND when they do reach adulthood - if they reach adulthood - the likelihood of them turning against the only family they have known is miniscule.  In fact Research suggests that roughly 1/3 of all individuals who were themselves abused as children will in turn subject children to the same treatment when they reach adult status. [ Breaking the cycle of abuse : how to move beyond your past to create an abuse-free future. Engel, Beverly.





 Pg. 214 ]  So in effect what you are creating is a cycle of abuse while fostering a new generation of degenerates - a perverts paradise.


Re: "If mistreatment of children by gays was prevalent, why are we not hearing horror stories and seeing headlines about this on a regular basis ?"  Media Suppression

Re: "If children who are in the care of gay people are at risk of abuse or  having developmental/ adjustment issues why have the states been allowing this for so long?"  ROFL  - you're truly a special kinda stupid aren't you ??


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> The same sex couples that marry have likely been living together for years.  Same sex marriage does not make more gays.   And it has no effect at all on you.   It just gives these existing couples access to the hundreds of benefits married couples get.   The ONLY thing that changes is between the gov’t and the couple.
> 
> Why do you care?




Gay Marriage was established as an uber-campy way to poke fun at and outrage Normative folks , straight arrows and squares.

It has nothing to do with how long the homosexuals involved have known each other, just whether they are on the same page as far as outraging people


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...




Like Jussie Smollet .....   Nice post but your talent is wasted on these dullards .  Progressive has a wooden dick and winterborn has splinters in his mouth


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > The same sex couples that marry have likely been living together for years.  Same sex marriage does not make more gays.   And it has no effect at all on you.   It just gives these existing couples access to the hundreds of benefits married couples get.   The ONLY thing that changes is between the gov’t and the couple.
> ...


My my...you are just full of information about how gay people think and why do they do what they do......


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


As usual, you're showing your shameful ignorance and lack of connectedness to reality. While LGBT people have indeed made considerable strides, there is still widespread discrimination. Many states do not afford them protection from discrimination in housing, public accommodation or employment. Someone could get fired for posting a picture of his same sex spouse  on Facebook. There is a high rate of violence against LBGT people . Common. ! Please show us a sign that you are not this stupid!!


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Guess that's what I get for being so idealistic, believing mankind is inherently good, and that people can change themselves for the better

To hell with it. I give up on those leftist zipperheads.


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...




Gays have no "right" to be married.  They were given access to a civil union.  Accomplishes the same thing without poking a finger in the eye of those who hold marriage as sacred.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



Long gone?   Lol.   Not so long gone at all.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > The same sex couples that marry have likely been living together for years.  Same sex marriage does not make more gays.   And it has no effect at all on you.   It just gives these existing couples access to the hundreds of benefits married couples get.   The ONLY thing that changes is between the gov’t and the couple.
> ...



So you think the entire same sex marriage idea and movement was just to fuck with conservatives?     LMAO!!

That is hilarious!


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Nice.   It’s slways good when you have nothing valid to add and you just attempt to insult people.   Pity you aren’t better at it.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



I have seen no research that shows homosexuals can change to heterosexual orientation.  At least not honestly.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



I 'm the dumb ass??? 


> *How Many Children Have Gay Parents in the US?*
> How Many U.S. Children Have Gay Parents?
> *In 1990, an estimated 6 to 14 million children have gay or lesbian parents. Latest statistics from the U.S. Census 2000, *the National Survey of Family Growth (2002), and the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (2004) include: ... Adopted *children with same*-*sex* parents are younger and more likely to be foreign born.



Where are all the horror stories and dysfunctional adults that they produced.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



They obviously have no control over their behavior. I can choose to go out and screw as many women as I want to or even have sex with a herd of sheep.

But I don't. Those things are not within the realm of what's considered "normal behavior."


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




1.  The topic was *adoption*  - there has always been faggots who sired kids with normal women and dikes who did the same with normal men  ... you do understand the difference between popping a kid out the vaginal rabbit hole and plucking some poor innocent little toddler from an orphanage do you not ?    The data you provided is useless - although it does state "include: ... Adopted *children with same*-*sex* parents'"  THOSE ONLY COVER A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE AND THE LINK [LACK] FAILS TO STATE PERCENTAGES of queer vs normal parents.  *Capice Bozo ?*


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> I 'm the dumb ass???



Yes - I thought that pretty much went without saying - stupid is as stupid does progressive - how is your brother Daryl and your other brother daryl  - still using the old KY Jelly are you ?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...



Here's to a thumb in your eye big guy:

*Civil Unions are a Sham and a Failure  - by Progressive Patriot 5. 7. 16*

Long after Obergefell, I’m still hearing that gay people should have been satisfied with civil unions or domestic partnerships instead of pushing the issue of marriage. This is the familiar separate but equal argument reminiscent of the Jim Crow era. To begin with, the simple fact is that even if they are equal on paper, in reality they are not equal if for no other reason, because they are called by different names. “Marriage” is universally understood to mean a certain thing…   a bond and a commitment between two people.  “Civil Unions” carry no such instantly understood meaning. Now, I know that there are those who will say that marriage is understood to mean a man and a woman, but those people are living in a bygone era. Similarly, there are those who contend that marriage is a religious institution, but they too are living in a world that no longer exists, if it ever did. While there were times and places in history where it was-and for some still is -for the most part it is anything but religious. Therefore, neither heterosexuals nor the religious own “marriage”

I firmly believe that those who claim that they believe in equal rights for gays and lesbians but are against marriage in favor of civil unions are using that story line so as not to appear to be anti -equality while not really believing in equality at all. This may be conscious process that is deliberately deceptive, or a rationalization to make themselves feel good about how magnanimous they imagine themselves to be, but the motive, and the outcome is the same.



Words are powerful. Consider the word “Citizen” In this country anyone who is born a citizen -as well as those who are naturalized – are simply” citizens” They all have the same rights and responsibilities. But let’s say that we decided that naturalized citizen could not and should not be called “citizens” but rather they must be distinguished from those who were born into citizenship by calling them something like Permanent Legal Domestic Residents. Still the same rights and responsibilities but are they equal in reality? How many times will they have to explain what that means? For instance, will hospital staff understand when there is an issue with visitation or making a medical decision regarding a spouse?   

Consider this:

*Marriage is more perfect union: In gay marriage debate, separate but equal won't cut it*

Civil unions are in no way a legitimate substitute for gay marriage.

They fail on principle, because - as America should have learned from racial segregation - separate is never equal.

 And they fail in practice, because couples who enter into this second-class marriage alternative in New Jersey and elsewhere are constantly denied the rights and benefits that married couples take for granted.

 Which brings up a third way in which they fail - verbally. Imagine getting down on one knee and saying, "Will you civilly unite with me?"

 All kidding aside, semantics matters when it comes to labeling our most important and intimate relationships. Denying gay and lesbian couples the right - and the joy and the responsibility and the ordinariness - to use the M-word is a profound slap in the face.

"When you say, 'I'm married,' everyone knows who you are in relation to the primary person you're building your life with," says Freedom to Marry director Evan Wolfson. " 'Civil union' doesn't offer that clarity, that immediately understood respect." Marriage is more perfect union: In gay marriage debate, separate but equal won't cut it


Monday, April 20, 2009, 5:00 PM

 We had experience with civil unions here in New Jersey. It did not go well:

Since New Jersey’s civil union law took effect in February 2007, many employers across New Jersey have refused to recognize civil unions as equal to marriage, and therefore do not grant equal health benefits to partners of employees. Employers and hospitals say that if the legislature intended for the civil union law to be the same as marriage, the legislature would have used the same name.

Because these employers and hospitals don’t recognize civil unions as they would marriage, many same-sex couples go without adequate health insurance – a horror in this economy. And because of the real-world disparity between civil unions and marriage, some hospitals do not allow civil union partners to make medical decisions for one another, or even to visit one another in the emergency room. http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/civilunions/


Here is more:

*Report: Civil union law fails to achieve goal of equality*

This article first appeared in The Sunday Star-Ledger on Feb. 17, 2008.

When civil unions became available one year ago, Gina Pastino of Upper Montclair was "thrilled" to form one with her partner of a dozen years, Naomi Cohen.



But the couple are frustrated after a year of trying to explain -- at the bank, the passport office and repeatedly in hospitals -- that their civil union entitles them to be treated like spouses.

"People don't understand what civil unions are," said Cohen.

Judy Ford of Port Norris formed a civil union last April to add her partner to her health insurance plan. But the medical center that employs Ford used a loophole in federal law to deny coverage to her partner, Yvonne Mazzola.

Now, because of her civil union, she would be liable for her partner's uninsured medical bills. They might dissolve their civil union.

 "It only puts us in a precarious legal situation," said Ford. "Now we have a civil union with no benefit and only detriment."  Report: Civil union law fails to achieve goal of equality


And New Jersey is not the only state to experience a failure to achieve equality through civil unions:

Equality Illinois Says State Civil Union Law a Failure Chicago Family Law Attorneys - Divorce Lawyer Illinois

 And let’s not forget that the federal government only recognizes “marriage “ for the myriad of benefits and privileges that are attached to that status. Change federal laws and regulations? Good luck with that. We can’t even get a none discrimination law in employmen passed. Back  in New Jersey, a state judge ordered the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples following the Windsor decision by SCOTUS for just that reason. Previously, the state supreme court had ruled that same sex couples must be treated the same as opposite sex couples but that it did not have to be called marriage. Once the section of DOMA that dealt with federal benefits for married same sex couple was overturned, there was no longer even a pretense of equality in same sex unions could be called marriage.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


The topic is , or has become parenting by gays and lesbians. Read the fucking post, Slick


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...




So you don't believe in freedom of religion. You believe anyone who doesn't believe the same as you believe are all involved with false doctrine.

You expect to have the freedom to follow any religion you want. Yet you don't believe anyone else should have the same freedom.

You expect to be able to love and marry anyone you want yet you don't believe everyone else should have that same freedom.

So while no homosexual is forcing their faith on you, none of them are forcing you to be in a relationship with another person if your sex, you expect to be able to tell homosexual people they don't have the freedom and respect that those homosexuals are giving you.

This is the United States of America. Where everyone has freedom of religion. Not just you and people who agree with your views. Everyone has the same civil rights. Not just you and those who agree with your views.

My faith has absolutely no problem with homosexuals or heterosexuals. My faith believes that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home and relationship is their business and no one else.

I wonder what you would do if someone told you your god is a false doctrine and our government shouldn't allow you to marry the person you love?

Finally I find it very sick that you spend your time worrying about what total strangers are doing. I guess you don't have a life that keeps you much too busy to stick your nose into complete strangers lives.


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



Anyone can control whether they have sex or not.  

What they cannot control is who they find attractive or who they love.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Hey Dumbass - I ran your post on several plagiarism checkers ... one stated it was totally plagiarized but when I check I found it was referencing your post from the political hotwire.  When you eliminate that post it turns out you actually did write 15% of the post all by yourself - did you do it without help from your brother Daryl and your other brother Daryl ????  Poorly written - partially plagiarized, but only a small percentage - that was the good parts.  Same thing I said when I read it on the political hotwire ....  some sections you stole from the NY Daily News and there's even a piece you stole from the ACLU  ... like I said you're a special kinda stupid aren't you little fella ?


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


That's Opinion not fact  .... get the splinters outta your mouth it's giving you a lisp


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > I 'm the dumb ass???
> ...


You seem to be loosing it slick, as if you ever had it. You already abysmal level of discourse is in full retard mode. Now getting beck to the topic of parenting and to further refute your contention that same sex parenting is to new and the numbers are insufficient to know the outcomes, I give you this from the Netherlands where they are studying children of same sex parents born since 1995.

Study: Children Of Same-Sex Parents Do Better In School



> A new study indicates children raised by same-sex couples perform better in school than those of opposite-sex parents, reports _The Washington Post._
> 
> Using government data tracking all children born between 1995 to 2005 in the Netherlands, researchers found children with same-sex parents scored higher on tests in elementary and secondary school, and had a seven percent higher likelihood of graduating from high school than children reared by a mom and dad.





> Information including educational performance, family income and more was utilized in the massive study which followed over 1 million children, including 1,200 children raised by same-sex parents.


And by the way, common sense would tell you that if there problems with the children, they would come to light long before they became adults -and I have already presented the stats for this country. 

Now, lets try an experiment with you. Lets see if you can formulate a civil, relevant and intelligent response without name calling. My guess is that you cant'


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Wrong Again Dumbass - you replied to this post  


TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




 

That's the post you replied to slick -  I can't  really fault you for some of your infantile errors considering you're working with limited mental faculties - are you brain damaged or were you born that way ?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


You're a fucking shameless liar!


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




For once you're right I shant respond in a civil manner to scum such as you - now how about explaining the plagiarism factor mentioned above ?  It's possible there's an explanation why your post is only 15% original content - maybe the professional authors stole it from you ?!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



You're a fucking shameless liar! I provided links to all of my sources


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




Just Google 'Free online plagiarism checker' - there's a number of sites that will do it for you - skip the first 3 or 4 results as they aren't really free anyone can do it - even you


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



I have never read any statement by any homosexual that stated otherwise.   

If you are not a homosexual, you have no way of knowing.   If you are......


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




Is that a screen capture of your mind - empty ?


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Libtards all have the same talking points, they all sound the same with same stupid ass arguments


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


You're still lying, Bitch!


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




I guess then you haven't done much reading on the topic - outside of leftist publications -  try reading a less biased article which states ....

 " If someone is born homosexual, the claim that he/she has no control over their perversion, the false assumption that their homosexuality is a product of their birth over which they have no control then why use the terms "sexual preference" or "alternative lifestyle" both of which imply that they have chosen their lifestyle. .... The only scientific evidence cited when passing the resolution to declassify Homosexuality as a mental illness was based on studies by Alfred Kinsey, who admitted that he flubbed his results and Dr. Evelyn Hooker."   Homosexuality as a Mental Illness   Now we are in agreement that being queer is *probably a birth defect **and *not an *acquired trait *in the majority of instances - but its far from settled science


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




*PROVE IT Sweety*


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



Given the fact that homosexuality has been around as long as mankind, and was severely punished for centuries, I doubt most homosexuals would choose that orientation.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



There is no "gay gene" that's passed on from parents to their children. So that would mean that it's either either a defect or a behavior.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Explain why 40% of identical twins who have a gay sibling are also gay.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




If they CONSCIOUSLY chose that orientation then it would be the equivalent of  being born that way - as nobody would choose it unless they were already oriented towards it - non gays find queer sex repugnant and repulsive.   No it's not a conscious choice, traditionally psychaitry / psychology viewed as a trait acquired in the formulative pre-cognizant years - usually around the time that a toddler acquires coherent speech and at the very latest in the first five years of life.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




So you're saying that 60% ... a large majority of twins are not both Gay  .....


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



If it is a trait acquired in the formative pre-cognizant  years, then my statement that they cannot control who they find attractive and who they love is valid.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



You are quoting study done by NARTH, which is the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. Grain of salt required.

It's much more likely that it develops early on in childhood. Twins who have a gay sibling are generally raised in a pretty similar way, so that explains the higher than average correlation.

BTW: NARTH is an organization dedicated to giving "hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality", as advertised in their mission statement.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


I did Bubba. I documented my sources, now shut the fuck up if you're mental defects will not allow you to have a rational and informed discussion of the topic. You think that you can win by gaslighting me....not working bitch!


----------



## WinterBorn (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



Conversion therapy has been discredited and debunked.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


*Oh no it hasn't * ... unless you've got your nose exclusively buried in big brother propaganda - it has a comparable success rate with drug rehab and uses alot of the same principles ... with substance abusers the relapse rate is actually slightly higher than it is with ex-gay conversion therapy ... so you think society should stop treating drug addiction ???


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

WinterBorn said:


> Conversion therapy has been discredited and debunked.




Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that we just haven't found a psychiatric cure for homosexuality?   That's the same with many disorders.

But we don't say that other experimental cures for cancer or whatever have been "discredited"- we just acknowledge that more research is necessary.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Why would you need to control it?

Do you control heterosexuality?


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


If you say so little fella - dude , if you can't run with the big dogs - stay on the porch. You're endeavors at feigning intellectual maturity are very amusing ... but poorly executed.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


Pray away the gay

Conservative solution


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

JGalt said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


You don't know that much do you 

Study Finds Epigenetics, Not Genetics, Underlies Homosexuality

Aside from genetics, there are other factors that can effect sexual orientation

UC Berkeley Psychologist Finds Evidence That Male Hormones In The Womb Affect Sexual Orientation

In any case, this contradicts the "defect of behavior" horseshit


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



OH GOODY ...My old buddy Norton, I get to bitch smack you again !?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Conversion therapy has been discredited and debunked.
> ...


It would be accurate to say that we have not found a psychiatric cure for whatever the fuck is wrong with you.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...




We already beat the shit out of that article last time you posted it  UC BERKELY  gimme a fucking break ....


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




Heterosexuality, or normalcy, isn't a disorder at all.

In the field of surgery, for example, there is a lot surgery and research being done to separate Siamese twins.   But no research or surgeries at all to sew ordinary twins together.  That's because the later is normal and the previous is something people want resolved.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...




You are right, there is no cure for normal.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Once again you prove that you are unable to have a civil, adult discussion, with anyone. You behave like someone who has some serious problems on many levels.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




I like Norton he's a good guy - a tad bewildered from all those sewer fuimes he's been inhaling but basically a good guy .  You ---- I don't like you.  You're an immature scumbag - a lowlife ignorant piece of shit and a sorry excuse for a human being  and I take great pleasures in bitch smacking you from time to time


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...







*I'm just fucking crushed!!  You don't like me because I shove to much reality and truth in your face and you can't do anything with it except lash out like a 10 year old special ed. student or a spoiled 5 year old






*


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


You didn't beat the shit out of anything! Where did you go to school? Trump U? Did you go to school?


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




I think what you're failing to consider is history.   Our President has suggested that the American people become more biblically literate.

If you study the bible, you can see how poorly Gay Marriage and Sodomy worked out for the city of Sodom as well as Gomorrah.  Sodom adopted its name, because of the high amount of sodomy being performed within its city limits. The city did not survive.


----------



## Dana7360 (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...





TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




The person you're replying to is a Russian bot.

It doesn't deserve your time or effort. All it will do is all it can to tick you off at conservatives to create more divide.

Look at the date that person came here. It's been here for two and a half months. It's got more than 5 thousand posts in that short time.

Where as I've been here since 2014 and have less posts that that person in nearly 5 years. I only have 46 hundred posts.

Notice how the posts from that person are so far right extreme from normal Americans and it doesn't seem to have any understanding or knowledge of our constitution.

The maga hat guy is a russian bot too.

The Russian bots are back in force doing what they do best, divide our people and everything they can too help trump get reelected.

The only response to that poster is "How's the weather in moscow comrade?"


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


What you're failing to consider is that I don't give a flying fuck about what YOUR president is suggesting, or what the bible says. Please compare and contrast the modern  Netherlands-  the first country to legalize same sex marriage-with the ancient Sodom and Gomora. Better yet , just shut up!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Holly crap!! Really? Thanks!!!  How did you find out?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Like he doth protest too much?


----------



## Rustic (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

Rustic said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


Ah, I see another selfie video.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Dana7360 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dana7360 said:
> ...


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


If you'd actually read the bible, you know that the "sins" of Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing to do with gays or gay marriage....it had to do with inhospitality.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)




----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Sweety - I'm not even a Christian and I know thats a pile of horse shit ....  I have studied the bible extensively - which is why I am not a Christian - but you are simply posting false horse feathers

In Leviticus 18.22 it says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with another man as with a woman. In Lev. 20.13 the death penalty is prescribed in Israel for such an act, along with adultery, incest, and bestiality. Now sometimes homosexual advocates make light of these prohibitions by comparing them to prohibitions in the Old Testament against having contact with unclean animals like pigs. Just as Christians today don’t obey all of the Old Testament ceremonial laws, so, they say, we don’t have to obey the prohibitions of homosexual actions. But the problem with this argument is that the New Testament reaffirms the validity of the Old Testament prohibitions of homosexual behavior, as we’ll see below. This shows they were not just part of the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament, which were done away with, but were part of God’s everlasting moral law. Homosexual behavior is in God’s sight a serious sin. The third place where homosexual acts are mentioned in the Old Testament is the horrifying story in *Genesis 19 of the attempted gang rape of Lot’s visitors by the men of Sodom, from which our word sodomy derives. God destroyed the city of Sodom because of their wickedness.*


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


It's amazing how interested you are in gay sex. I think it's time for you to come out of the closet because true straight men could not care less about it and you sir, are obsessed with it.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Good for them....they look to be a lovely couple.


----------



## Polishprince (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



I would like to say two things to that.

First off, nothing more inhospitable that f'ing someone in the a.   If you'll remember that's what the homosexuals of Sodom wanted to do to the angels who were the Lot Family's house guests.

But also consider the name of the town itself.  They named it after an act of homosexual intercourse, just like Bumfuck,Egypt.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


Couple of what ?


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

Dana7360 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Lordy lordy lordy, I wondered how long it would be before some zipperhead brought up the "Russian" accusation. Took you long enough, but your didn't fail to deliver.

You can almost set your clock by the predictability of some leftard invoking the Russian version of Godwin's Law. Be sure to check your closet for Russians tonight, before you turn in.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



You do know that every time a liberal uses that inane piece of logic, a kitten dies, don't you?

So by the same reasoning, I must be a closet gun-hater because I own so many of the damned things, right?

Or I must really love liver and onions, because the thought of it makes me want to puke, right?

Or how about this: I'm really a closet Democrat because I vote Republican every election.

Now do you see why we conservatives think you people have some loose screws upstairs?


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...



Which is why it’s important to understand that the New Testament came along as Jesus’ more reasonable modification of old Jewish laws. Even still, Jesus reminds his followers in Roman’s 1 & Jude 1 that the particular prohibition (gay culture & behaviors) are in even his eyes, just as calling for God’s wrath.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

Polishprince said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


"Sodom adopted its name, because of the high amount of sodomy".....


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...


Yeah Yeah Yeah....we know.  The OT doesn't count....except when it does.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


And there you are showing your lack of English understanding, Comrade.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



...or Sodomites adopted their name because that's what they did in Sodom. Either way.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 18, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



It's not the "OT"  that doesn't count my dear - it's you that don't count .... now run away like a good little cockroach


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Here's to a thumb in your eye big guy



No thumb, no eye.  tl;dr. Civil unions were the ticket, all that was needed, but gays just couldn't be satisfied with being equal.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 18, 2019)

martybegan said:


> The Army was only sent in when local law enforcement gave up on enforcing a valid law dictating equal access to public education. So your comparison doesn't work here.
> 
> And again your assumption of domestic violence. Do you lie without even trying?



That's the point...  the Army was sent in because the racists intimidated local law enforcement into inaction.  of course, Truman had to desegregate the Army first.  

No assumption made.  I'm pretty good at reading people.  Every video I've seen with these two speaking in front of Christian Groups, he's the one doing all the screaming about how they've been wronged, and she's cowering like she terrified of saying the wrong thing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 18, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> No thumb, no eye. tl;dr. Civil unions were the ticket, all that was needed, but gays just couldn't be satisfied with being equal.



Sounds like "Separate but Equal" to me... we all know what that looked like.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 18, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Here's to a thumb in your eye big guy
> ...


For one simple reason: they wanted at orphan kids in adoption.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Here's to a thumb in your eye big guy
> ...


You don't read very well, do you?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


That's not even coherent!


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


Sure it is. Being married is the best shoehorn one could have walking in to apply to adopt an orphan.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 18, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Sure it is. Being married is the best shoehorn one could have walking in to apply to adopt an orphan.



Awesome. We have lots of orphans waiting to be adopted who have medical issues or are too old and straight white people don't want them.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 18, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


So what? Children deserve to have two married parents who are both their legal guardians when possible . Would you rather that the kids remain orphans. I think that you are bigoted and ignorant enough to think that they would be better off!!!


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> So what? Children deserve to have two married parents who are both their legal guardians when possible . Would you rather that the kids remain orphans. I think that you are bigoted and ignorant enough to think that they would be better off!!!



Sil is just angry that gay people can be happy and he isn't after years of self-denial.

The best way to understand Sil.

Picture a vegetarian who can't stop talking about steak.

Steak grilled to perfection, sauted with mushrooms and onions, perfectly locked in it's own juices, medium rare.





and never, ever being allowed to eat it because you think meat is murder, but man, you'll describe it in detail.

Now imagine Sil coming on here every day talking about gay male sex in graphic detail you would find in bad slash fiction.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 19, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > The Army was only sent in when local law enforcement gave up on enforcing a valid law dictating equal access to public education. So your comparison doesn't work here.
> ...



Actually the racists were local law enforcement, just like in these cases the bigots are the local "anti-discrimination" boards. 

You base it on zero fact. You are just as bad as that fake vietnam vet indian poseur.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




The problem is not his reading skills ... it's your writing skills  ... did you even go to school  stupid ?    Yes I know ----- you came out that way too.


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



With time as valuable as mine, you have to be SELECTIVE in filtering out the garbage.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 19, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


There is a lot more at stake than your  "valuable Time' Like civil rights and human dignity.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



It's the truth. I know of NO straight man who obsesses over gay sex like a closet gay. Keep spinning though as it only makes you look even more pathetic.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Here's to a thumb in your eye big guy
> ...



Civil unions are NOT the same as being married. This was pointed out several pages ago.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...




Bullshit. If I was gay, you'd have no other recourse than to sympathize with me, support my "cause", and go out an protest for my "rights", being the brain-dead liberal that you are.

Otherwise, your peers would condemn you for being "homophobic."

Looks like you're backed into a corner, hypocrite.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


No, we would not being supporting your bigotry  if you were gay and engaging in gay bashing as a smokescreen to prove that you are straight- which may well be what you're doing. But I would have great sympathy for the pain that you are apparently in. I think that it is who are backed into a corner.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...



I don't have to "prove" anything pole-smoker. I know misery loves company and you sure hate having to suffer through your gayness by yourself, but I'm a good ol' 110% straight, white American who isn't suffering from the sexual dysfunction you're afflicted with.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...



Ever notice that actual straight men don't have to claim over and over that they are. Nor, are they as obsessed with gay sex and JGalt is. 
I have many gay and lesbian friends and none of them have ever mentioned anything about sex at all. They're just ordinary people who want to go on with their lives just like everyone else does. There are two married male couples and one married female couple and a some who are single. One couple lives in the SFO area but the rest live around here. We get together for lunch/dinner occasionally and not once does sex ever enter into the conversation. My one lesbian friend and I meet more frequently and have gone to the movies a few times. She's a very talented musician and master woodworker. She made a mandolin out of a wooden cigar box and it's beautiful. When we part to go home, I hug her right on the street and don't give a rat's ass what anyone thinks about it. I feel blessed to have all of them as my friends. They're talented, creative, educated, and just good people. All of them are so much better than any of the homophobes here on this board.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



So if I really am gay like you think I am, you'd have no objection to seeing you naked? Maybe giving you a nice back rub or something?

Everyone knows that women feel less "threatened" by gay people, than they do straight men, so why not take me up on my offer? 

I promise, I won't try to stick it in you because after all, I'm gay. We could even be BFF.  

Maybe afterward, we can go shopping for clothes at the mall and have a mocha at Starbucks, while I tell you how fabulous you look in that new dress, and that I wish I had the figure to wear something like that.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


I'm not suffering at all, dude. But you  sure are insufferable.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> So if I really am gay like you think I am, you'd have no objection to seeing you naked? Maybe giving you a nice back rub or something?


No objection at all . Lots of people see me naked. I'm a nudist and I'm not homophobic so you can rub my back if you like .


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > So if I really am gay like you think I am, you'd have no objection to seeing you naked? Maybe giving you a nice back rub or something?
> ...



Sorry, mang You're not a Kittymom. My doors only swing one way.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Maybe afterward, we can go shopping for clothes at the mall and have a mocha at Starbucks, while I tell you how fabulous you look in that new dress, and that I wish I had the figure to wear something like that.


No thanks. Not with that face. I would not want to be seen with you


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



No thanks, I have a man in my life who is my partner. I wouldn't touch you with a ten foot pole. But, I do have a couple of single gay guy friends who might if you're interested. One is absolutely brilliant! He's a Russian scholar and probably has a genius IQ. He lives in a mansion in the eastern NC area and is a master gardener and and he and his roommates eat all of the veggies and fruit he grows in the summer and puts up for the rest of the year. I am constantly envious of his garden because he researches different kinds of ways to grow things and always improves his garden each year. If I am in awe of any of my friends, it's him. He is brilliant and is knowledgeable on just about any subject out there. He does extensive research and presents facts to assholes like you and make them look like the pathetic losers they are.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > So if I really am gay like you think I am, you'd have no objection to seeing you naked? Maybe giving you a nice back rub or something?
> ...


Send me some pics! My days of walking around naked are over, but I still have my long legs and don't look too bad in my underwear.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


I don't want you. I have someone to swing with and he's enough for me.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...



Ooooohhhh! A Russian scholar. Girlfriend, you need to hook me up with him right this very minute. I love shopping for clothes, does he love shopping for clothes too? Maybe all three of us can go shopping for clothes and have some mocha lattes at Starbucks afterward.

I saw this dress the other day that was absolutely fabulous. I just wish I still had my girlish figure so I could fit into it. But you know what those chocolate bon bons can do to a youthful girlish figure.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



Where are you? I still have my girlish figure...5'2'...110 pounds. But, you're definitely someone I would never want to meet in person. And to be honest, neither would he. He's very selective and just the way you think would turn him off. He is a progressive liberal and wouldn't want to meet a tight assed tramp cultist. Too bad for you too because he's really good looking.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...



Do you even realize that I'm mocking you? 

Hey, but anyone that likes cats is ok with me. We have six of them, all inside cats. Every one of them has their own personality and are like family members. See? We Republicans aren't the monsters you make us out to be, now are we?

BTW: The backrub offer is still good. Promise I won't try to stick it in you.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 19, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


\\


JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...



I'm not dumb. I was only telling you about someone I thought you might be interested in and finally come out of the closet. 
I'm off now to watch A Star Is Born. I got it in the mail today. I saw it in the theater and loved it. Lady GaGa deserves the Oscar.


----------



## JGalt (Feb 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...




Oooohhh girlfriend! I love Streisand!! And Midler too, she is undoubtedly one of my faves! She is just soooo fabulous!!


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 20, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Sure it is. Being married is the best shoehorn one could have walking in to apply to adopt an orphan.
> ...


What’s odd is that those types of kids are so difficult to raise with no point where adult independence is reached that anyone seeking them out to adopt is either 1.  a complete glutton for punishment  2.  An angel or 3. Someone who might have ulterior plans for a child least likely/least able to resist, understand or communicate that they are being sexually abused.


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 20, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...




Once again, gays think they have more rights to more dignity than the rest of us.


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 20, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Who said they should be?  Marriage is a holy coupling between man and woman.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 20, 2019)

martybegan said:


> Actually the racists were local law enforcement, just like in these cases the bigots are the local "anti-discrimination" boards.



No, the racists were all the people who thought Jim Crow was just fine, because it was them uppity yankees coming down and demanding equal rights and stuff.  Their negros were perfectly happy with the status quo, just ask them.  



martybegan said:


> You base it on zero fact. You are just as bad as that fake vietnam vet indian poseur.



You mean the veteran who was mocked by an entitled little white punk who had to hire a bunch of public relation firms to tell him how to not look like an entitled little punk?  

Mr. Wifebeater has had a lot of the same PR firms, and he still comes off as a bullying bigot whose wife is terrified of him. Any self-respecting woman would have dumped him after he tanked the business she spent years building. 



Kittymom1026 said:


> It's the truth. I know of NO straight man who obsesses over gay sex like a closet gay. Keep spinning though as it only makes you look even more pathetic.



It is kind of sad.  again, I go back to my steak analogy....


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 20, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> What’s odd is that those types of kids are so difficult to raise with no point where adult independence is reached that anyone seeking them out to adopt is either 1. a complete glutton for punishment 2. An angel or 3. Someone who might have ulterior plans for a child least likely/least able to resist, understand or communicate that they are being sexually abused.



Yeah, clearly these gays know that these kids won't already be getting a ration of shit at school for having gay parents... they'll totally mess that up further by putting the moves on the kid. 



toobfreak said:


> Once again, gays think they have more rights to more dignity than the rest of us.



When they ask for the same thing you are entitled to, they want more/ How does this work, exactly?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 20, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> Who said they should be? Marriage is a holy coupling between man and woman.



Just ask Donald Trump, he's done it three times. 






He must be extra holy!  

Here's the thing.... Melania's green card wedding was just as holy was two gay folks walking down the aisle after a 10 years relationship.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 20, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Actually the racists were local law enforcement, just like in these cases the bigots are the local "anti-discrimination" boards.
> ...



That doesn't respond to my statement. try again, hack.

Wow, you are still going with the proven lie? You are a worthless pile of scum (apologies to scum)


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 20, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


Send you pics? Watch for a PM


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 20, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


No they do not. You bigots just like to regurgitate that shit because you think that you can score points with it and that it sounds smart. You can't and it doesn't


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Feb 20, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> Who said they should be? Marriage is a holy coupling between man and woman.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 20, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > Who said they should be? Marriage is a holy coupling between man and woman.
> ...


In his case, a man and a woman and numerous porn stars on the side.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

JGalt said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Polishprince said:
> ...


You mean Lot pushing his young virgin daughters on the people of Sodom so they'd leave him alone?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Ah...this is the CRC (conservative republican christianity) we keep hearing about.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Here's to a thumb in your eye big guy
> ...


WE tried the "civil union" route....it was sanctimonious anti-gay marriage people who shot that down in any state it was introduced in.  Made us realize that marriage was the only way to go.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


Some more of that CRC (conservative republican christianity), I see.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

JGalt said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JGalt said:
> ...


Methinks you protest too much.....


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

JGalt said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Definitely trying very very hard to convince......someone....that you are straight.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 20, 2019)

toobfreak said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


So, only religious people can get married?   

Ironically, my wife and I had a church wedding almost 20 years before we could legally marry.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 20, 2019)

bodecea said:


> JGalt said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I've been saying that all along.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 20, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > What’s odd is that those types of kids are so difficult to raise with no point where adult independence is reached that anyone seeking them out to adopt is either 1. a complete glutton for punishment 2. An angel or 3. Someone who might have ulterior plans for a child least likely/least able to resist, understand or communicate that they are being sexually abused.
> ...


That was a very obvious straw man. Please at least attempt to explain why gays are eagerly taking on these truckloads of stress to raise. Pick 1, 2 or 3 & convince me of your explanation. Thanks.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Feb 20, 2019)

Yanno..................there are a few churches out there that are gay friendly, and more are popping up every day.  If a church doesn't want to perform a gay wedding, hey, that is their choice, but if they can find a church that is willing to marry them, then what is the problem?  

Gays deserve to be just as miserable as straights and get married.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 20, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> Yanno..................there are a few churches out there that are gay friendly, and more are popping up every day.  If a church doesn't want to perform a gay wedding, hey, that is their choice, but if they can find a church that is willing to marry them, then what is the problem?
> 
> Gays deserve to be just as miserable as straights and get married.


Maybe someday an Islamic Mosque will ”adjust” the immutable words of their Prophet & Allah to accommodate this abomination. Time & the Devil’s slippery tongue finds its ways even into hairline cracks.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 21, 2019)

martybegan said:


> That doesn't respond to my statement. try again, hack.
> 
> Wow, you are still going with the proven lie? You are a worthless pile of scum (apologies to scum)



Nobody has proven a lie to me... an entitled punk from an $8000 a year high school approached a bunch of minorities with his Nazi MAGA cap, and then got in the face of the oldest, most frail guy there. (Because those other darkies would have kicked his entitled ass.) 



Kittymom1026 said:


> In his case, a man and a woman and numerous porn stars on the side.



The porn stars were just livening things up.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 21, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Maybe someday an Islamic Mosque will ”adjust” the immutable words of their Prophet & Allah to accommodate this abomination. Time & the Devil’s slippery tongue finds its ways even into hairline cracks.



Sil will convert to Islam as soon as all the Christian churches decide that homophobia just makes them look bad.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 21, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Joe?  Gonna answer?


----------



## martybegan (Feb 21, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > That doesn't respond to my statement. try again, hack.
> ...



You have plenty of evidence that the kid did nothing wrong, and yet you continue lying. 

But keep making shit up, it just shows everyone on this board how much of a fucking liar you are.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 21, 2019)

I sure wish that Joe or any other gay marriage advocate would show up here & tell us why gays are so eager to marry to qualify to adopt kids; only to happily line up for the hardest most stressful children to raise?

I offered three possibilities of motivation we could discuss. But there may be more & we could explore those as they are offered. I said the gays are doing so because in raising significantly mentally disabled kids who will never be independent reciprocating care helpers of their parents when aging means their care...means the prospective guardians are 1. Gluttons for punishment. 2. Angels. 3. Eager to have access to kids who can’t understand, can’t recognize & would be the least able to communicate even if they did, that they were being sexually abused. 

Many many gays have cited in the top two reasons civil unions weren’t enough is because marriage bumps prospective adult partners/applicants into the top tier of being able to adopt children.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 21, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Sil will convert to Islam as soon as all the Christian churches decide that homophobia just makes them look bad.


And when will lgbt formally confront Islam on their WAY more brutal intolerance of the sinners who identify themselves as homosexuals?  When it comes time for two gay dudes to apply to adopt disabled orphans from a Muslim charity orphanage?


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 21, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Sil will convert to Islam as soon as all the Christian churches decide that homophobia just makes them look bad.
> ...


Like will they force the issue with this group? Muslim Foster Care Association – Helping those in need!


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 21, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Joe? Gonna answer?



Nope. Already did, many times.  

I know you live in mortal fear of your wank fantasies coming true. but the reality, a lot of gay folks are great parents.... and now they have equal access to adoption.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 21, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> And when will lgbt formally confront Islam on their WAY more brutal intolerance of the sinners who identify themselves as homosexuals? When it comes time for two gay dudes to apply to adopt disabled orphans from a Muslim charity orphanage?



Here's the problem with that.  This is the kind of cultural imperialism they use to get stupid people to fight wars. (And I say that as someone who spent a large part of his life as a professional soldier) We have to save the oil....er the women.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 22, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Joe? Gonna answer?
> ...


When was Dumont v Lyons settled?  Last I heard it’s still in open court.


----------



## boilermaker55 (Feb 22, 2019)

You definition is totally flawed. One man and one woman. What a joke!
So many people have been married multiple times and then when married were having affairs.
Well, is that one man and one woman? NO! LOL stop trying to fool yourself and tell others how to lead their lives.
There is an adulterous lying pile of non-monogamous asshole in the whitehouse.
He even paid people to pay them to shut them up.
What is the difference, Being married 5 times to marrying 5 different people.
Stop lying about the "law". 
Or are you one of the "evangelicals?" 
LOL



P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > I still do not understand why same sex marriage is an issue.  It is consenting adults entering into the state of matrimony.  It has no effect on anyone else except those who marry someone of the same gender.
> ...


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 22, 2019)

Two men marrying produce a lifelong contract banishing any children involved from having a mother under their roof. 

Tennessee may have vested fiscal & socio-political objections to removing the importance & impact of the word/concept of “mother” from the English language. That’s what the courts will weigh; among other compelling interests of individual states on their powers to limit marriage.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 22, 2019)

boilermaker55 said:


> You definition is totally flawed. One man and one woman. What a joke! So many people have been married multiple times and then when married were having affairs. Well, is that one man and one woman?


Um..._yes_ stupid, it is. They are still *married* to ONE person. 

You argue like a 5-year old.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 22, 2019)

boilermaker55 said:


> What is the difference, Being married 5 times to marrying 5 different people


Psst... boilermaker55 .... Trump _is_ your President.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Feb 22, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Two men marrying produce a lifelong contract banishing any children involved from having a mother under their roof.
> 
> Tennessee may have vested fiscal & socio-political objections to removing the importance & impact of the word/concept of “mother” from the English language. That’s what the courts will weigh; among other compelling interests of individual states on their powers to limit marriage.


You obviously didn't read my comment several pages back about the two men who adopted at birth both a drug addicted infant and a fetal alcohol syndrome infant. They spent hundreds of dollars on their medical bills and walked the floors with them almost 24/7 to try to comfort them. They are a white couple and the boys are black. They had a black woman friend who introduced the boys to their culture when they were still toddlers.
Fast forward to today, the boys are in their teens and doing fine and they have adopted more kids that no one else would ever want. That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again. 
And, if you had read another of my comments several pages back, I said that here in NC there was a foster couple...man and woman....who tied a raw chicken around a small foster girl's neck, tied her to the porch and she died of both hypothermia and starvation. Key words - MAN AND WOMAN!


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 22, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Two men marrying produce a lifelong contract banishing any children involved from having a mother under their roof.
> ...


The quote you replied to doesn’t match your response. The quote talks about Tennessee’s investment in limiting marriage & preserving the importance & meaning of the word “mother” in the English language. That not being merely the only reason to assert state right to define.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 23, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> The quote you replied to doesn’t match your response. The quote talks about Tennessee’s investment in limiting marriage & preserving the importance & meaning of the word “mother” in the English language. That not being merely the only reason to assert state right to define.



Yes, yes, some day Sil hopes that a court somewhere will validate his homophobia so he feels those years of suppressing his feelings wouldn't have been in vain.  

But the reality- the big corporations that run the GOP and America have decided that homophobia is no longer useful in getting the stupids to vote against their own economic interests.  






Whoops. 67% and rising... You lose.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 23, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > The quote you replied to doesn’t match your response. The quote talks about Tennessee’s investment in limiting marriage & preserving the importance & meaning of the word “mother” in the English language. That not being merely the only reason to assert state right to define.
> ...


I doubt 67% of Americans support exiling the meaning & importance of the word “mother” to the dusty archives of a post beta-male era museum.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 24, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> I doubt 67% of Americans support exiling the meaning & importance of the word “mother” to the dusty archives of a post beta-male era museum.



Well, since no one has proposed that, not a problem, then.


----------



## Erinwltr (Feb 24, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Two men marrying produce a lifelong contract banishing any children involved from having a mother under their roof.
> ...



Are you alright today, my friend?


----------



## Geaux4it (Feb 24, 2019)

Man, I am overjoyed with our decision to retire in Tennessee

-Geaux


----------



## Erinwltr (Feb 24, 2019)

Cheers.


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 24, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt 67% of Americans support exiling the meaning & importance of the word “mother” to the dusty archives of a post beta-male era museum.
> ...


And yet that’s how it renders out at the end of the day.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 25, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> And yet that’s how it renders out at the end of the day.



No, not really. I mean, I know you are going to try to find all these hysterical reasons why gay marriage is a bad thing, but no one is going to send you to Tolerance Camp for saying, "Mother".


----------



## Silhouette (Feb 25, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > And yet that’s how it renders out at the end of the day.
> ...


Sure. Just as long as the word “ mother” is only used in the context of “breeder”. 

If it is used in it the context of “unique female-only vital role to children throughout their development into adulthood..” you will go readjustment camp...


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 25, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Sure. Just as long as the word “ mother” is only used in the context of “breeder”.
> 
> If it is used in it the context of “unique female-only vital role to children throughout their development into adulthood..” you will go readjustment camp...



Let me know when that happens outside of the gay porn you watch.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 2, 2019)

Those jackasses in backward ass Tennessee are at it again! 

URGENT: Oppose discriminatory adoption policy in Tennessee - Freedom From Religion Foundation



> The Tennessee Legislature is considering a bill that would allow taxpayer-funded child-placing agencies to discriminate based on religion — *and we need your help to stop it.*
> 
> TN HB 1152, currently in front of the Tennessee House Children & Families Subcommittee, would prohibit the state from taking any action against a child-placing agency that declines to facilitate adoptions conflicting with the agency’s “sincerely held religious beliefs.” If passed, the law would allow these agencies the right to refuse services to, among many other groups, LGBTQ families and children.
> 
> This bill is part of Project Blitz, a Christian fundamentalist nationwide push that seeks to inject state legislatures with a whole host of religious template bills, imposing the theocratic vision of a powerful few on We The People. It is an unvarnished attack on American secularism and civil liberties — those things we most cherish about our democracy, and now must tirelessly defend.


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 2, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Those jackasses in backward ass Tennessee are at it again!
> 
> URGENT: Oppose discriminatory adoption policy in Tennessee - Freedom From Religion Foundation
> 
> ...


From the POV of kids wanting both mother & father ?  Or from the POV of experimental sex fetish lifestyles seeking to use a contract to deprive orphans of either mother or father for life?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.


And here’s the thing that people like you will never understand - your comments are largely irrelevant when taking into consideration that raising children in a homosexual home causes them distress. They _know_ something is wrong when they see every family in the world with a mom AND a dad.


> Gender was supposed to be boundless; yet, I did not see my father and his partners valuing, loving and affirming women. My father’s preference for one gender (male) created an inner sense of inequality for me.


Children are irreparably harmed by growzing up with same-sex parents.

My Father Was Gay. Why I Oppose Same-Sex Marriage.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.
> ...



I could find a lot of people who had straight parents who had unhappy childhoods... What's your point. 

If being raised in a gay household causes "Distress", it's only because of the hatred of homophobes...  So that's a good reason to ban homophobia.


----------



## Rustic (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.


And here’s the thing that people like you will never understand - your comments are largely irrelevant when taking into consideration that raising children in a homosexual home causes them distress. They _know_ something is wrong when they see every family in the world with a mom AND a dad.


> same-sex marriage is more about promoting adults’ “desires” than about safeguarding children’s rights to know and be raised by their biological parents.


It’s tragic that people like you put the desires of the “parents” over the needs, development, and mental health of the children.

My Father Was Gay. Why I Oppose Same-Sex Marriage.


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...




This is a good thing….

Marriage is between a man and a woman…

Homosexuals should have unions with all the same benefits as marriage…


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.


And here’s the thing that people like you will never understand - your comments are largely irrelevant when taking into consideration that raising children in a homosexual home causes them distress. They _know_ something is wrong when they see every family in the world with a mom AND a dad.

How Children Raised By Same-Sex Married Couples Fare


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> And here’s the thing that people like you will never understand - your comments are largely irrelevant when taking into consideration that raising children in a homosexual home causes them distress. They _know_ something is wrong when they see every family in the world with a mom AND a dad.



Well, except that's really not what they see.  50% of straight marriages end in divorce.  So they are more likely to see Mom and Mom's new boyfriend they refuse to call Dad, and Dad who only shows up on weekends and tries to buy affection.  

Now THAT'S distress.  Divorce does far more harm to kids than gay marriage does, but no one sane is saying we should compel people to stay married "For the children'.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...



The age old question that homophobes can never answer.....How does a married gay couple directly affect your life and marriage? I suspect it doesn't one bit except for the fact that it seems to live in your minds almost constantly. And what is this fascination your guys have with gay sex? I never give anyone elses sex life a second thought, but homophobes seem to obsess about it constantly. 

You think marriage should be between an man and a woman, but thankfully now our laws don't agree with you.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.


And here’s the thing that people like you will never understand - your comments are largely irrelevant when taking into consideration that raising children in a homosexual home causes them distress. They _know_ something is wrong when they see every family in the world with a mom AND a dad.


> Worse yet, people claiming marriage must be redefined as a matter of justice are *telling children that the hurt they feel isn’t a legitimate response *to objective reality* but the result of their own misguided feelings. *This is nothing less than victim shaming.


What people like you are doing to these children is shameful. Not only robbing them of the normal, natural structure that exists for a reason, but then trying to convince them that they are “bigoted” for knowing that something is wrong.

New York Times Ignores Kids of Gay Parents Who Want Mom, Dad


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> This is a good thing….
> 
> Marriage is between a man and a woman…
> 
> Homosexuals should have unions with all the same benefits as marriage…



That makes about as much sense as this. 





What's that black guy complaining about... his water fountain dispenses water, just like the nicer one the white folks have.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> And here’s the thing that people like you will never understand - your comments are largely irrelevant when taking into consideration that raising children in a homosexual home causes them distress. They _know_ something is wrong when they see every family in the world with a mom AND a dad.



Do you have this on a keystroke, Poodle? You kind of remind me of Little Marco repeating that same line about Obama in a debate. 

I find it amusing that the same people who want to take health care and food stamps from poor kids are suddenly concerned with DISTRESS some child might feel because they have two dads. 



P@triot said:


> What people like you are doing to these children is shameful. Not only robbing them of the normal, natural structure that exists for a reason, but then trying to convince them that they are “bigoted” for knowing that something is wrong.



So when are you going to advocate a ban on divorce, which robs more kids of a two-parent household than gay marriage does?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> The age old question that homophobes can never answer.....How does a married gay couple directly affect your life and marriage?


It doesn’t. At all. And if they can find a church to marry them, have at it. Go for it. I could give a shit. But when government climbs into bed with them and recognizes their marriage, that is catastrophic. It redefines marriage which opens Pandora’s Box.

Like all progressives, you can’t think beyond the end of your nose. You actually believe that all actions occur in a vacuum.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> It doesn’t. At all. And if they can find a church to marry them, have at it. Go for it. I could give a shit. But when government climbs into bed with them and recognizes their marriage, that is catastrophic. It redefines marriage which opens Pandora’s Box.
> 
> Like all progressives, you can’t think beyond the end of your nose. You actually believe that all actions occur in a vacuum.



Ah, we get to Poodles big complaint... the government actually protecting people's rights when they aren't white male and straight. 

Marriage has been redefined throughout history.  Marriage used to be a transfer of property- the property being the woman, who often entered an arranged marriage, where whatever she had became her husbands, and it was okay for him to rape or beat her.  

Because Marriage... which is totally sacred and stuff.  

Fortunately, we "redefined" the institution to give women rights, including the right to leave the marriage if it just plain didn't work.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > The age old question that homophobes can never answer.....How does a married gay couple directly affect your life and marriage?
> ...



So in other words, you don't want equal rights for all, just the ones you think should have them, right? And  climbs in bed with them? Who besides someone obsessed with gay sex would even say anything like that?
It's you who can't see beyond the end of your homophobic nose.


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...





You Tards are all so very warped…..

First off how am I a homophobe?

How would a civil union with all the benefits affect your bigoted ass?

Words have meanings..

I have nothing against homosexuals, I think they are born that way….

While I have to admit the thought of two men together does repulse me,

for some strange reason I don’t have the same reaction with lesbians

as long as they don’t look like bull dikes…… 

Laws can be changed…..


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > This is a good thing….
> ...




You Tards are too Stupid to know the difference between apples and oranges.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> You Tards are all so very warped…..
> 
> First off how am I a homophobe?



Well, let me count the ways...



Deno said:


> How would a civil union with all the benefits affect your bigoted ass?





Deno said:


> While I have to admit the thought of two men together does repulse me,





Deno said:


> for some strange reason I don’t have the same reaction with lesbians
> 
> as long as they don’t look like bull dikes……



I think you just answered your own question...  

One more time, asking why gays aren't happy with civil unions is like asking why black folks weren't happy riding on the back of the bus.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> You Tards are too Stupid to know the difference between apples and oranges.



Looks like apples to apples to me. 

"Separate but equal", where have we heard that one before.


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > You Tards are all so very warped…..
> ...




You are ignorant.....

Just because I am repulsed by your gay lifestyle doesn't mean I hate you....

I understand you are a freak of nature......


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > You Tards are too Stupid to know the difference between apples and oranges.
> ...




You Tards always twist the facts...……….


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > You Tards are too Stupid to know the difference between apples and oranges.
> ...




You said...

"Separate but equal", where have we heard that one before.

We heard that from old school Democrats....


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> You are ignorant.....
> 
> Just because I am repulsed by your gay lifestyle doesn't mean I hate you....
> 
> I understand you are a freak of nature......



Dude, I'm straight... you do seem to have some hangups, though. 



Deno said:


> You said...
> 
> "Separate but equal", where have we heard that one before.
> 
> We heard that from old school Democrats....



With republicans cheering them on...


----------



## OldLady (Mar 9, 2019)

God is gonna flatten the people of Tennessee for judging his children for nothing but loving each other.

*Tornado Warnings, Severe Thunderstorm Watch issued in Middle Tennessee*


----------



## toobfreak (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> *Tennessee Seeks tonBar Same Sex Marriage*




Shouldn't need to bar what is so unnatural as to not even exist!  "Same Sex" Marriage makes about as much sense as an electrical outlet where both the hot and neutral pins are both at ground potential------- ------- it doesn't work.

Just one more example of an irrational, out of contact with reality society.

_MARRIAGE_ first and foremost was created intending for the union of a man and woman before their creator in the sanctity of making the sex act (and the potential to create new life) both moral and special for the preservation of an ethical society where life is revered.

Only animals rutting like pigs in the mud "do it" any way they can just to get off their jollies and if they plop one out in the process----  so be it.

Removed from the process, society devolves into depravity.  No two ways about it.


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > You are ignorant.....
> ...




Glad you admit you Tards led the charge on RACISM...

It's hard to believe you are straight, your fingers type otherwise....


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.
> ...


This a pathetically piss poor argument against same sex marriage. Here we have a kid who has some gripes about his upbringing. One of those gripes is that he was "exposed to sexuality" whatever that means. Not a good thing if true, but I'm here to tell you, as a former CPS investigator , that inappropriate sexual expression-and worse- happens in all sorts of families.  

Then  he complains that he felt unable to express himself.  Again that is a lot of families. But then he goes on to express some very positive thoughts about his father.

I will also point out that there is no mention of whether or not the father was married, but I suspect that he was not because it is mentioned that he had multiple partners. Maybe, just maybe, if he had been married he would not have had multiple partners and died of AIDS. And , maybe if he were married, the boy might have still had a living legal parent after the death of his birth father. So, you see, you are really making an argument FOR same sex marriage.

Lastly, using children in this manner-to argue against same sex marriage - is especially stupid because it is not even the right argument. Gay people are going to come to have children in their care by a variety of means, just like everyone else. Regardless of the outcomes for the children,( and all the so called  evidence that they suffer is debunked bullshit) you can't argue that they would not benefit  from having two parents who are both their legal guardians. The children would enjoy the security and stability of having married parents.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > The age old question that homophobes can never answer.....How does a married gay couple directly affect your life and marriage?
> ...


Do tell, what ills have befallen society as the result of same sex marriage. what evil has emerged from that Pandora's Box


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > That's the thing many like you will never understand. You think that a gay couple only wants damaged children so that they can do whatever perverted thing the want with them, when in fact, they put their heart and soul and money into trying to make these kids whole again.
> ...


The Daily Signal

Daily Signal - Media Bias/Fact Check






> These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.
> 
> 
> *Overall, we rate the Daily Signal, Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that always favor the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to not aligning with the consensus of science regarding climate change.*


In addition, the findings in this article rely on the so call research of the American College of Pediatrics which has zero credibility



> The American College of Pediatricians (ACP) is a wingnut collection of pediatricians who espouse a socially conservative and " family values " agenda in opposition to the pediatric mainstream that, in their view, has a liberal bias. The SPLC has described it as a hate group.
> 
> *American College of Pediatricians - RationalWiki*
> rationalwiki.org/wiki/American_College_of_Pediatricians


----------



## boedicca (Mar 9, 2019)

I'm still trying to figure out what tonBar means.

What language does tonBar come from?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

boedicca said:


> I'm still trying to figure out what tonBar means.
> 
> What language does tonBar come from?


You should have been able to figure out that it's a typo. It should read "to Bar"


----------



## boedicca (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > I'm still trying to figure out what tonBar means.
> ...




*sigh*  Humor is so wasted on Some People.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> How would a civil union with all the benefits affect your bigoted ass?



As an ally and supporter of gay and Lesbian people, I feel their pain when they are told that they should have been satisfied with civil unions as a compromise and that they are being “divisive” for having pushed for and won the right to marry. I wrote this a while ago


*Civil Unions are a Sham and a Failure - by Progressive Patriot 5. 7. 16*

Long after Obergefell, I’m still hearing that gay people should have been satisfied with civil unions or domestic partnerships instead of pushing the issue of marriage.* This is the familiar separate but equal argument reminiscent of the Jim Crow era. *To begin with, the simple fact is that even if they are equal on paper, in reality they are not equal if for no other reason, because they are called by different names. “*Marriage” is universally understood to mean a certain thing*…   a bond and a commitment between two people.  “Civil Unions” carry no such instantly understood meaning. Now, I know that there are those who will say that marriage is understood to mean a man and a woman, but those people are living in a bygone era. Similarly, there are those who contend that marriage is a religious institution, but they too are living in a world that no longer exists, if it ever did. While there were times and places in history where it was-and for some still is -for the most part it is anything but religious. Therefore,* neither heterosexuals nor the religious own “marriage” *

*I firmly believe that those who claim that they believe in equal rights for gays and lesbians but are against marriage in favor of civil unions are using that story line so as not to appear to be anti -equality while not really believing in equality at all. *This may be conscious process that is deliberately deceptive, or a rationalization to make themselves feel good about how magnanimous they imagine themselves to be, but the motive, and the outcome is the same.

* Words are powerful. Consider the word “Citizen” *In this country anyone who is born a citizen -as well as those who are naturalized – are simply” citizens” They all have the same rights and responsibilities. But let’s say that we decided that naturalized citizen could not and should not be called “citizens” but rather they must be distinguished from those who were born into citizenship by calling them something like Permanent Legal Domestic Residents. Still the same rights and responsibilities but are they equal in reality? How many times will they have to explain what that means? For instance, will hospital staff understand when there is an issue with visitation or making a medical decision regarding a spouse?  

Consider this:



> *Marriage is more perfect union: In gay marriage debate, separate but equal won't cut it*
> 
> Civil unions are in no way a legitimate substitute for gay marriage.
> 
> ...



We had experience with civil unions here in New Jersey. It did not go well:



> Since New Jersey’s civil union law took effect in February 2007, many employers across New Jersey have refused to recognize civil unions as equal to marriage, and therefore do not grant equal health benefits to partners of employees. Employers and hospitals say that if the legislature intended for the civil union law to be the same as marriage, the legislature would have used the same name.
> 
> Because these employers and hospitals don’t recognize civil unions as they would marriage, many same-sex couples go without adequate health insurance – a horror in this economy. And because of the real-world disparity between civil unions and marriage, some hospitals do not allow civil union partners to make medical decisions for one another, or even to visit one another in the emergency room. http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/civilunions/



Any more questions? You do no have the right to toot yo0ur own horn about having nothing against homosexuals while wanting to deprive them of marriage


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 9, 2019)

Deno said:


> Glad you admit you Tards led the charge on RACISM...
> 
> It's hard to believe you are straight, your fingers type otherwise....



Funny thing. They've done studies, and found that violent homophobes are usually latent homosexuals themselves... 

They found the most homophobic guys they could, attached meters tot heir peckers and showed them gay porn, and guess what, they got serious erections...


----------



## ABikerSailor (Mar 9, 2019)

You know, from around 1997 to 1999, I rented a room from a lesbian couple.  And, one of the women had a 15 year old daughter.  Cindy and Connie had been together for around 7 years when I met them, and their daughter Tawnya was a pretty normal teenage girl.  She liked boys, did most of the same things that your typical teen girl does, and had a crush on some of the teen pop stars at the time. 

And, I lived there for over 2 years with those women.  If there had been anything even a little bit off about Tawnya (the daughter), I would have noticed it, because I was there every day.

Based on my experience, it doesn't matter the sexual orientation of the parents, but rather whether or not the adults want and love the child.  Cindy and Connie loved Tawnya, and made sure she had a happy, healthy childhood.


----------



## Deno (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > Glad you admit you Tards led the charge on RACISM...
> ...




Thanks for your introspection…..

Did you have meters tot heir pecker? Read his post for this to make sense.

That thing about your Woodie was just a little bit too much information…


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> It's you who can't see beyond the end of your homophobic nose.


So a left-wing loon devoid of facts responds to data, links, and facts with “but... but...but...you’re a <insert adjective here> PHOBE”. Gee, haven’t seen that pitiful tactic before.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> And  climbs in bed with them? Who besides someone obsessed with gay sex would even say anything like that?


Uh...the left has been saying that for _years_, sweetie.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> So in other words, you don't want equal rights for all, just the ones you think should have them, right?


So in other words, you think children should suffer so people like you can get off on sexual deviance. Nice. Classy. Typical selfish leftist.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> This a pathetically piss poor argument against same sex marriage.


But not as “piss-poor” as your reading comprehension _and_ sexism. The article was written by a *woman*. And *she* made that abundantly clear in the article.


----------



## miketx (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


The only threads you are in are faggot threads.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> The Daily Signal
> 
> Daily Signal - Media Bias/Fact Check
> 
> ...


How cute...you turned to two radical wing-nut sources in a sad attempt to discredit the medical community and the world’s most respected think tank.


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Funny thing. They've done _studies_, and found that violent homophobes are usually latent homosexuals themselves....


What does that have to do with a state wanting the power of regulating marriage on behalf of its children affected by the definition?


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 9, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Funny thing. They've done _studies_, and found that violent homophobes are usually latent homosexuals themselves....


What does that have to do with a state wanting the power of regulating marriage on behalf of its children affected by the definition?

Windsor 2013.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

miketx said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...



You think so because the only treads that your on are “faggot” threats 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## miketx (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I know so because you are a faggot. A disgusting perverse creature that has no moral character.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > This a pathetically piss poor argument against same sex marriage.
> ...


So what that it was written by a woman ? That does not change anything and makes no sense! You seem desperate now.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 9, 2019)

boedicca said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



That was humor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rustic (Mar 9, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Mar 9, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



No, that version you are reading is from the gay Bible.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Mar 9, 2019)

GreenBean said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



Nah, she doesn't like cockroaches or cocks either for that matter!


----------



## bodecea (Mar 9, 2019)

miketx said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


More CRC talk.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Mar 9, 2019)

bodecea said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...



If you married in a church, it was invalid from the very beginning.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Mar 9, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> You know, from around 1997 to 1999, I rented a room from a lesbian couple.  And, one of the women had a 15 year old daughter.  Cindy and Connie had been together for around 7 years when I met them, and their daughter Tawnya was a pretty normal teenage girl.  She liked boys, did most of the same things that your typical teen girl does, and had a crush on some of the teen pop stars at the time.
> 
> And, I lived there for over 2 years with those women.  If there had been anything even a little bit off about Tawnya (the daughter), I would have noticed it, because I was there every day.
> 
> Based on my experience, it doesn't matter the sexual orientation of the parents, but rather whether or not the adults want and love the child.  Cindy and Connie loved Tawnya, and made sure she had a happy, healthy childhood.



The reason you didn't notice anything either is your own gayness perhaps?


----------



## bodecea (Mar 9, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


Nope.  Not true.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory (Mar 9, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Yep.  Any church that would marry gays is not a church, but a cult.


----------



## Polishprince (Mar 9, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> ...




The Rev. Jerry Falwell is one of the greatest theologians of our time, and when homosexuality first became an issue, Falwell pointed out that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden, not Adam and Steve.  No cultist has ever successfully refuted that, using scripture.


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 9, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Nope.  Not true.
> ...


The same. “Church” would marry satanists as well. When entering a church, mosque or synagogue I am careful to recognize if they have cult type decorations near the altar or out front

I see rainbow flags, drapes or insignia worn on lapels, altars, from choir lofts etc,. I turn on my heel & leave ; after saying a prayer for the damned running that place. Nothing can be worse than using a house of God as a front to coddle or cater to pure blasphemy.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 10, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> What does that have to do with a state wanting the power of regulating marriage on behalf of its children affected by the definition?



Again, when you ban divorce for people with children, then you can come back to me about how gay marriage effects kids.  

Divorce is a lot more traumatic.  I've known more kids fucked up by divorce than having gay parents.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 10, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> The same. “Church” would marry satanists as well. When entering a church, mosque or synagogue I am careful to recognize if they have cult type decorations near the altar or out front
> 
> I see rainbow flags, drapes or insignia worn on lapels, altars, from choir lofts etc,. I turn on my heel & leave ; after saying a prayer for the damned running that place. Nothing can be worse than using a house of God as a front to coddle or cater to pure blasphemy.



here's the reality... in 50 years, all the churches will be accepting gays, just like all the churches deny any role in segregation and racism today.


----------



## sparky (Mar 10, 2019)

they'll have no choice, if they want a following.  

but then the entire ideal of '_church_' isn't something one finds in scripture either, unless of course one is _bending_ scripture to conform to one's _narrative_

this then is the _crux_ of the issue, why allow the '_church_' to politically sanction what is a government bureaucratically administered and licensed _contract_ bettween two individuals?

excuse me, we're not only a _secular _society, we've allgedly _seperation_ OF church /state 

the _reality_ is ,the majority of marrige licensure is achieved by JP , the '_church_' simply facilitating as the circus act clown show

Society needs to rid itself of the term '_marriage'_, for  '_civil union_' , thus removing the religmo's from the equation

~S~


----------



## P@triot (Mar 10, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


It proves you either didn’t read the article or didn’t understand it. In _either_ case, your credibility is shot on this discussion.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 10, 2019)

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Nah, she doesn't like cockroaches or cocks either for that matter!


Come on ART, you’re better than that. Don’t stoop to such a ridiculously low level.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 10, 2019)

sparky said:


> this then is the _crux_ of the issue, why allow the '_church_' to politically sanction what is a government bureaucratically administered and licensed _contract_ bettween two individuals?


Congrats! You are now in the lead for the *dumbest* post of 2019.

While government has absolutely 0 constitutional authority regarding marriage (and thus has absolutely no business being involved), marriage was designed to be performed in the church.

You’re literally so stupid, you created the polar opposite of reality in your own mind.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 10, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Interesting how you cut out most of my post which is very cogent and on point,  and then have the colossal nerve to claim that I have no credibility. I am co.nfident that any thinking person who is reading this knows exactly who has the credibility and who does not


----------



## sparky (Mar 10, 2019)

P@triot said:


> sparky said:
> 
> 
> > this then is the _crux_ of the issue, why allow the '_church_' to politically sanction what is a government bureaucratically administered and licensed _contract_ bettween two individuals?
> ...



Amazing that you missed the part about Tenn. legislators creating '*constitutional authority*' concerning who marries who........


----------



## sparky (Mar 10, 2019)

Yup......state goverment of Tenn......hittin' gays square over their little _twinkie _heads w/their *CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY*  , while allowing 1st cousin marraige w/o sterility requirements.....






~S~


----------



## boedicca (Mar 10, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Not at all hard to believe that you don't grok it.  But thanks for playing!


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 10, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > What does that have to do with a state wanting the power of regulating marriage on behalf of its children affected by the definition?
> ...



Yep. The left loved it that divorce is now easy. It fucked up marriage. And then, after they sufficiently fucked it up, they can now claim that since it is so fucked up, that allowing any other arrangement won't hurt it.

Insidious.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 10, 2019)

sparky said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > sparky said:
> ...



Why is this a problem? The left has been disregarding laws they don't like for years. Marijuana is still a controlled substance, according to the feds, and liberals in some states pass laws to over ride the feds.

Why can't a state do the same with gay marriage? 

Mark


----------



## ColonelAngus (Mar 10, 2019)

States should be able to do what they want for these types of issues.

Legal weed or not
Legal whores or not
Legal abortion or not
Legal gay marriage or not

If the state you are living in doesn’t suit you, go to one that does.


----------



## sparky (Mar 10, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> sparky said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Associating what pharmacueticals can be _sold_ to who can have sexual _relations _is about as absurd as a chicken with a _kickstand_ Mark




~S~


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 10, 2019)

sparky said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > sparky said:
> ...



Thats deflection. I knew the minute that the feds didn't come down hard on the states that crossed them that this problem would grow. Sanctuary cities and marijuana  have now given other states the idea that they don't have to listen to the Feds either. Can't say as I blame them.

And its only gonna get worse.

Mark


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 10, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


The left loves divorce? Is trump on the left? He has been divorced twice. And speaking of fucked up marriages, he's cheated on every wife he's had, so who fucked up his marriages?


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 10, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> Yep. The left loved it that divorce is now easy. It fucked up marriage. And then, after they sufficiently fucked it up, they can now claim that since it is so fucked up, that allowing any other arrangement won't hurt it.
> 
> Insidious.
> 
> Mark



Or we just realized that marriage shouldn't be a permanent mistake. 

Let's be honest. A lot of marriages ARE mistakes.  Mistakes should be corrected.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 10, 2019)

Nobody cares about this story


----------



## ABikerSailor (Mar 10, 2019)

ColonelAngus said:


> States should be able to do what they want for these types of issues.
> 
> Legal weed or not
> Legal whores or not
> ...



You know, on this, we actually agree.  One thing high on my to do list if I ever win the lottery is to buy a humble little house, somewhere in CO, within 3 miles of at least 2 420 shops.


----------



## ColonelAngus (Mar 10, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> ColonelAngus said:
> 
> 
> > States should be able to do what they want for these types of issues.
> ...



I just moved back to Florida after 3 years in Colorado.  The legal weed is very nice and the dispensaries are very well run.  Colorado was very cool....just too cold for me.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Mar 10, 2019)

ColonelAngus said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > ColonelAngus said:
> ...



I routinely visit relatives in CO.  And yeah, the dispensaries are extremely well run.  For anyone who is scared that kids will get their hands on marijuana because of the dispensaries, has obviously never been in one.  

The thing I like the most about them is how knowledgeable the bud tenders are, and the variety of smoke you can find in just one store.  It's kinda nice to know exactly what kind you are getting, as well as being able to know what the effects are in advance.  Beats the hell out of smoking Mexican brick.


----------



## ColonelAngus (Mar 10, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> ColonelAngus said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...



100%!  They verify your ID and you are registered and on camera.  No way someone underage with a fake ID gets in.

Also, the staff is always cool and willing to discuss, as you said,

The standardization has to limit the overdoses.

I love a strain called Skunkberry,  it’s a hybrid Sat/In....60/40 Sat.  Phenomenal weed.  I got a friggin ounce for $120 on a 4/20 sale.  The wife and I used that same oz for like 3 months.

Also love the chocolates. They are super regulated.  10 mg doses, 10 doses per bar.   10 mg is the most you want as a first timer....maybe even half to see how it affects you.

Hitting 1 chocolate on the way to Red Rocks and 1 more just when you park is perfect for the show!


----------



## ABikerSailor (Mar 10, 2019)

ColonelAngus said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> > ColonelAngus said:
> ...



I like the standardization of the edibles as well.

I remember the first time my roomie and I tried edibles.  We had gotten some chocolate bon bons (100 mcg per bon bon), and decided to see what would happen.  Well, my roomie and I both knew that we had zero experience with edibles, so on the first time, I babysat for her.  She at the whole thing in about 4 or 5 bites, said it was really good, and about an hour later, she said she was starting to feel it.

She was stoned for the next 36 hours.

We figured out after that to get candies and bars that were easier to break apart and dose with than bon bons.  But, I gotta admit, eating the whole thing was a pretty fun day for myself as well. 

And, ya gotta admit, warm showers while stoned on a really good Sativa is a wonderful thing.


----------



## ColonelAngus (Mar 10, 2019)

ABikerSailor said:


> ColonelAngus said:
> 
> 
> > ABikerSailor said:
> ...



Showers are nice.....I prefer sex. Lol

10 MG is like having 3 beers and it only last like 4 hours.  It’s a perfect sample size.


----------



## Rustic (Mar 10, 2019)

The federal government involved in marriage in any sense makes no sense… There again federal government/career politicians/deep state are all about control.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 10, 2019)

Rustic said:


> The federal government involved in marriage in any sense makes no sense… There again federal government/career politicians/deep state are all about control.


So you believe that the Feds involvement in Loving v. Virginia was also wrong?


----------



## Rustic (Mar 10, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Rustic said:
> 
> 
> > The federal government involved in marriage in any sense makes no sense… There again federal government/career politicians/deep state are all about control.
> ...


I believe any federal government involvement in personal lives as wrong...


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 10, 2019)

Rustic said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Rustic said:
> ...



So Va. and other states should have been allowed to continue to ban interracial marriage?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 11, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > Yep. The left loved it that divorce is now easy. It fucked up marriage. And then, after they sufficiently fucked it up, they can now claim that since it is so fucked up, that allowing any other arrangement won't hurt it.
> ...



Too easy to do. Make it harder. With almost every divorce, problems and costs are pushed onto society. Their "mistake" should cause them problems, not us.

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Sure , force people to stay together. That will be real good for mental and physical health. Lets drive the to murder or suicide . Now that will push costs onto society .

People, especially young people make mistakes. Should they be made to pay for them for their whole life or be given a chance to start again.?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Trump loved it that divorce was easy. How exactly did divorce fuck up marriage? I'll tell you what fucked up marriage. It was the expectation  that young people would  get married at an early age and have 2.5 kids, with a stay at home mom who would give up her career if she had one.  In addition, the fact that gay people had little choice but to pretend  to be straight and marry someone of the opposite sex no doubt contributed to the divorce rate. .

Now that we have evolved from those issues, the divorce rat is declining. US Divorce Statistics and Divorce Rates (2000 - 2017) - Divorce Magazine  So you really don't know what the fuck your talking abut.

And no, no one thinks that " any marital arrangement " is OK.


----------



## Rustic (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


#SocialismIsSuicide’sFriend


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

Rustic said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


----------



## Rustic (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Rustic said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



It was much harder to divorce in the 1950's. Did they commit murder and suicide? Being old, I know quite a few divorced couples. Most simply "fell out of love", and society is left to pick up the pieces. Divorce should be accessible, it should simply be much harder to do.

Make something easy, and more people will partake.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Why not? Discouraging any other arrangement makes you a bigot. At least that was the common refrain concerning gay marriage.

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


So what if more people get divorced because they can? How is that your business? What does it cost you?


----------



## ABikerSailor (Mar 11, 2019)

Yanno, I got married back in the mid 80's, and all I had to do was pay 25 bucks for the license and find a preacher.  I managed to get the ship's chaplain to do the ceremony for me.  Getting married cost me less than a night out with the boys, and the whole process only took a couple of days. 

Then, in the early 90's, I got divorced.  That little venture took me 3 months to complete, and when all was said and done, it had cost me around 1,500 dollars.

I think that things should be reversed.  If you really want to get married, it should be a huge registration fee, as well as should take around 3 months for the process to be completed. 

Divorce?  25 bucks and 2 days max.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


That's the same old well worn red herring, slippery slope,  and false equivalency equine excrement logical fallacies  that I have heard too many times before. . What are you saying- that marrying your underage sister is the same as two unrelated consenting adults getting married who happen to be  of the same sex. ?Are you saying that opposing the former example makes you a bigot? That is really  just fucking stupid. No one who supports same sex marriage every said that. If someone wants to marry their sister, or two tree people at the same time, or a corps - based on the Obergefell decision,  they can pursue in court. It would be fun to see what happens.

It is also a Tu Quoque ,or an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy to imply that  someone is a hypocrite for supporting same sex marriage while opposing sibling marriage-or whatever, or just not supporting it



> _tu quoque_ (To kwok we )(Latin for "you, too" or "you, also") or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that *attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position;* it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. *This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency and not the position presented whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit the position. *Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument. To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their argument."


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Are you serious? Most cannot afford to live in single parent households, and then the government subsidizes them. Single parent homes make up quite a few of those families on welfare.

I believe that people divorce today because its easier to do. They can rely on the taxpayers to survive.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



There is no fallacy. You are also restricting society according to what you believe it should be. While you might not like the idea of an underage sister marrying her brother, it doesn't make you any less restrictive. 

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Please provide the statistics on the number of people who are on some form of assistance because of divorce. But in any case they still have a right to divorce.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 11, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



I don't care if its one couple who divorces and gets welfare. If they want to divorce, they should pay their own way. Society is not responsible for their mistakes.

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 11, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


You just don't get it. It's not a matter of what I like or don't like. You might have noticed that I have not taken a position on other variations of "marriage. It's a matter of whether or not your argument is valid and the fact is that it is not because it employs logical fallacies which you apparently do not understand


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 12, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> Too easy to do. Make it harder. With almost every divorce, problems and costs are pushed onto society. Their "mistake" should cause them problems, not us.
> 
> Mark



Right.  And if we have more domestic violence and murders because people who can't stand each other are stuck in bad marriages, well, heck, that's just what Jesus wanted...   Praise Jesus. 

Fucking Moron. 



80zephyr said:


> It was much harder to divorce in the 1950's. Did they commit murder and suicide? Being old, I know quite a few divorced couples. Most simply "fell out of love", and society is left to pick up the pieces. Divorce should be accessible, it should simply be much harder to do.
> 
> Make something easy, and more people will partake.



I know a few divorced couples, too.  Getting divorced was the best outcome for them.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 12, 2019)

LOL.....how many people in America know about this? About 10,000.......maybe?

nobody cares.

What we see in this thread is this whole new progressive mo.......perpetual outrage. Its the new religion. Thankfully, not embraced by most people.


----------



## Erinwltr (Mar 12, 2019)

skookerasbil said:


> LOL.....how many people in America know about this? About 10,000.......maybe?
> 
> nobody cares.
> 
> What we see in this thread is this whole new progressive mo.......perpetual outrage. Its the new religion. Thankfully, not embraced by most people.


Lots of folks care, but obviously not you.  And for someone that doesn't care you just had to post an asinine comment in what is otherwise a pretty good thread.  And you would have found that out for yourself had you taken the time to read just a small part of it.  Honestly, it is your loss.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 12, 2019)

Erinwltr said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > LOL.....how many people in America know about this? About 10,000.......maybe?
> ...



Nah.....its fringe banter only. Outside internet community forums, most dont care. Huge majorities still support same sex marriage.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 12, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



What makes an argument valid? Your beliefs? Why are your beliefs the litmus test for validity?

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 12, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > Too easy to do. Make it harder. With almost every divorce, problems and costs are pushed onto society. Their "mistake" should cause them problems, not us.
> ...



Divorce  was harder to obtain in the 1950's. Since you have asserted there would be more violence and murders, we could use the 1950's as our guide to what would happen today.

And with that, you don't have a logical leg to stand on.

BTW, why bring Jesus into this? Religion is not part of the debate. The cost to society is the debate. And the children.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 12, 2019)

skookerasbil said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...



Why do you think that is?

Mark


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 12, 2019)

TN is becoming very powerful
And where the conservatives are fleeing to from liberal areas 

Germany's wise are fleeing to the Chattanooga and Cleveland TN area

TNs 2 Rino republicans had to leave the senate after seeing how the wise now will control TN voting.


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 12, 2019)

The abortion issue and the gay marriage issue have brought this monster imbalance of young to old

The crooks tried to run in the low IQs and Muslims to replace the young

TN will become very powerful quickly


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 12, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


It has nothing to do with my beliefs . It has to do with the issue of whether or not an argument is based on facts and logic. Yours is not as I have demonstrated.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 12, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Erinwltr said:
> ...



Anywhere outside of California, New York and a couple of other places.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 13, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> Divorce was harder to obtain in the 1950's. Since you have asserted there would be more violence and murders, we could use the 1950's as our guide to what would happen today.



In the 1950's, we didn't have more guns than people. That's why we have more violence and murders today.  

We could also talk about how in the 1950's, the work force was 40% unionized,and working men brought home good pay..  

It seems that you want to turn back the clock selectively.


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 13, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > Divorce was harder to obtain in the 1950's. Since you have asserted there would be more violence and murders, we could use the 1950's as our guide to what would happen today.
> ...




We didn't have a gender difference in voting then.  The women went along with the males

Now the gender difference will bring a nation of men against women


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 13, 2019)

GreenAndBlue said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


No. It will bring the nation of women -along with the smarter men -against T-Rump


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 13, 2019)

More about Tennessee in the news...…..and it sucks

Trump Greenlights Discrimination in Foster Care as Additional States Try to Pass Harmful Laws



> Today, the Tennessee Legislature is holding a committee hearing on a bill that allows government-funded child welfare contract agencies to discriminate against foster and adoptive parents. And this Thursday, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar (pictured) will be on the hot seat a Senate Finance Committee hearing answering questions about why HHS is now waiving federal law to permit South Caroina agencies to do the same.



And before anyone starts blathering about the gay people can just go to another agency, consider this. There are always more children in need of adoption than there are people who are willing and able to adopt them. In addition matching children to prospective adoptive parents is a complicated process. In short, these children should have maximum opportunity to be adopted and excluding gay people cut down their odds of being placed in a loving home


----------



## P@triot (Mar 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Interesting how you cut out most of my post which is very cogent and on point,  and then have the colossal nerve to claim that I have no credibility. I am co.nfident that any thinking person who is reading this knows exactly who has the credibility and who does not


Your entire posts are not only still there in their entirety, but I make sure to quote you so that they can click on the arrow by your name and be taken directly to the FULL post. I cut most of it to keep the posts readable for others (nobody wants to sit through a fuck'n novel of responses in a single post genius) and to focus on addressing the point out of your long-winded nonsense that I want to focus on in my response. Geezus. The fact that you need that explained to you makes me think your IQ is that of the average 4th grader in America.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 13, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Facts and logic show that a man cannot biologically marry a woman. That is not a belief, but a fact. Your logic is that simply if a man can marry a woman, a man should be able to marry a man. 

That is not logical, or rational.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 13, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > Divorce was harder to obtain in the 1950's. Since you have asserted there would be more violence and murders, we could use the 1950's as our guide to what would happen today.
> ...



None of that has anything to do at all with marriage. Used to be, a divorce meant failure, and people rightly felt bad about it. Today, they throw divorce parties.

Mark


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 14, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> None of that has anything to do at all with marriage. Used to be, a divorce meant failure, and people rightly felt bad about it. Today, they throw divorce parties.
> 
> Mark



It had everything to do with it.  Women stayed in bad marriages because they had no job prospects.  They were actually expected to put up with marital abuse...  





Hahahahahahaha... it's funny because she's getting a beating for fucking up the coffee.. 





No, seriously, bitch, you had one job!  

Yeah, Women don't miss 1950's style marriage, for some reason.


----------



## Meathead (Mar 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > None of that has anything to do at all with marriage. Used to be, a divorce meant failure, and people rightly felt bad about it. Today, they throw divorce parties.
> ...


Much better now. Women get boinked by  every DeShawn, DeAndre and Darnell that comes along, spawn and get free stuff from the state. That's progress!


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 14, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Much better now. Women get boinked by every DeShawn, DeAndre and Darnell that comes along, spawn and get free stuff from the state. That's progress!



That's nice, buddy.   I understand you ran into a black guy once and totally pissed yourself out of fear.


----------



## August West (Mar 14, 2019)

Meathead said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


I hate to burst your little snot bubble but it`s the party of Trump that`s getting all of the "free stuff from the state". How much are you getting?
The GOP Base Benefits Most From Government-Assistance Programs: - The Atlantic


----------



## Meathead (Mar 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Much better now. Women get boinked by every DeShawn, DeAndre and Darnell that comes along, spawn and get free stuff from the state. That's progress!
> ...


You inject race into everything. What's your prooblem?


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 14, 2019)

Meathead said:


> You inject race into everything. What's your prooblem?



So when you whined about "DeShawn, DeAndre and Darnell " you weren't being racial?  Really?  

Why is it when someone calls you racists out you get all defensive? Is it because you know on some level you are in the wrong?  I guess that's a good first step.


----------



## Meathead (Mar 14, 2019)

August West said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


"The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal policy-analysis group, found ..."

I hate to bust your bubble.


----------



## Meathead (Mar 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > You inject race into everything. What's your prooblem?
> ...


Well, we know it's rarely Tom, Dick or Harry. Just being realistic, not racist.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 14, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Well, we know it's rarely Tom, Dick or Harry. Just being realistic, not racist.



Actually, 16% of white babies are born outside of wedlock, so, no... sometimes it is Tom, Dick or Harry knocking those ladies up.


----------



## Meathead (Mar 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Well, we know it's rarely Tom, Dick or Harry. Just being realistic, not racist.
> ...


Wha\t about DeAndre, DeShawn and Darnell's spawn?

OK, 77%. Absolutely fucking disgraceful!

77% black births to single moms, 49% for Hispanic immigrants


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 14, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Wha\t about DeAndre, DeShawn and Darnell's spawn?
> 
> OK, 77%. Absolutely fucking disgraceful!



Or just not a big deal.  The thing is, you work on the assumption that because they don't get a big fancy wedding, they aren't a family... 

You get worked up about it... most people don't really care.


----------



## August West (Mar 14, 2019)

Meathead said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...


Okay, I`ll look at your link regarding who is getting the most free stuff. Until you have something the numbers from the so called liberal policy-analysis group stand. I`m looking for numbers, not an opinion piece from a white supremacist group.
The GOP Base Benefits Most From Government-Assistance Programs: - The Atlantic


----------



## lantern2814 (Mar 14, 2019)

August West said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > August West said:
> ...



California and New York combine for about 50% of tne welfare payments in the country. Throw in Illinois and the tell us who's getting freebies? Lefties love using percentages while not telling you that 45% of Mississippi's population is  LOT less than 25-30% of California's. Funny how real numbers work.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 14, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...


And all of this has what, exactly , to do with same sex marriage?


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 14, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenAndBlue said:
> 
> 
> > Now the gender difference will bring a nation of men against women
> ...



I don’t know too many women anxious to assist the meaning & impact of the word mother into obscurity by giving a thumbs up to motherless marriages.

Especially not in Tennessee.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 14, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > GreenAndBlue said:
> ...


You and Green and Blue make a great pair.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > None of that has anything to do at all with marriage. Used to be, a divorce meant failure, and people rightly felt bad about it. Today, they throw divorce parties.
> ...



Women don't divorce today because of abuse. They divorce out of boredom. Let them be bored on their own dime.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 14, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Wha\t about DeAndre, DeShawn and Darnell's spawn?
> ...



No one cares if they don't have a wedding. We do care tat the reason they don't marry is to game the system.

Mark


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 14, 2019)

The wise are stampeding to tenn

The wise Germans fleeing Germany are setting up in TN

And the stampede of conservatives out of New York and calif has many going to tn

TN is becoming very powerful
Quickly


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 14, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...




Correct


Boredom
And brainwashed by the deep state 

Selling to women is where the real profit comes because they are so easy to fool

That is now about to change as the men rises


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 14, 2019)

How many sock puppets ^^ does JoeB have?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 14, 2019)

GreenAndBlue said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



I would call you retarded but that would be an insult to the intellectually impaired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 14, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> GreenAndBlue said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...




Why do sales people say sell to the woman and not the man??


Why?

More easier to fool because of lower logic and more emotions 

The founders protected women by not letting them vote

Today women voted in Obama who brought their worst nightmare the Muslims


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 14, 2019)

TN is being flooded with the wise conservatives fleeing loser liberal areas

Germany and New York


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 15, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> I don’t know too many women anxious to assist the meaning & impact of the word mother into obscurity by giving a thumbs up to motherless marriages.
> 
> Especially not in Tennessee.



Except no one is really proposing that...  

So one more time... gays can get married, how has that made your life worse?


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 15, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> No one cares if they don't have a wedding. We do care tat the reason they don't marry is to game the system.
> 
> Mark



What system is that?  Frankly, marriage is a big liability... that person can get half your shit if there's a divorce.  What kind of idiot would sign up for that?  (One who is really in love, I guess.)  

There are straights who game they system, too.  There are the guys who marry chicks to they can get green cards... so let's ban straight marriage!  



80zephyr said:


> Women don't divorce today because of abuse. They divorce out of boredom. Let them be bored on their own dime.



Frankly, if a guy can't keep her interested, that's his problem!


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 15, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > I don’t know too many women anxious to assist the meaning & impact of the word mother into obscurity by giving a thumbs up to motherless marriages.
> ...



No one is proposing that?? Of course they are. If gay men marry, they are certainly precluding a mother.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 15, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > No one cares if they don't have a wedding. We do care tat the reason they don't marry is to game the system.
> ...



Read what we were talking about, then respond. Hint: It wasn't about gay marriage.

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 15, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


If gay men marry? Gay men *do marry. *And they have children in their care. And those kids do just fine.


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 15, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> I don’t know too many women anxious to assist the meaning & impact of the word mother into obscurity by giving a thumbs up to motherless marriages.
> 
> Especially not in Tennessee.





> Except no one is really proposing that...
> 
> So one more time... gays can get married, how has that made your life worse?


No one was really proposing that; yet that is exactly what is happening. Unintended consequences exist.

So as to your next question, since my quality of life is vastly overshadowed by the entire State of Tenessee’s quality of life (& therefore that State’s standing as to this question of law), we address It & not me.

As to that, then, gays getting married in Tennessee means that some people in Tennessee will have contracts that EFFECTIVELY banish children implicitly involved in said contracts, from a mother (or father) & the importance of those irreplaceable roles...for life.

Why does that matter to the entire State of Tennessee?  Look for the rationale in any pleadings pending. But my money is on that the State wants to avoid the known & uber-documented & peer-reviewed pitfalls of giving a blessing, no less, to kids being raised in motherless & fatherless homes..ensuing rises in indigence, crime rates, prison terms, drug addiction & all the rest.

Plus; Obergefell was arrived at illegally, in direct defiance of Windsor 2013 & outside the powers of the Judicial Branch of government.  So doing it effectively stripped states of their due powers (without authority to do so) it had just said was the sole realm of a states to determine (Windsor 2013).


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 15, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > I don’t know too many women anxious to assist the meaning & impact of the word mother into obscurity by giving a thumbs up to motherless marriages.
> ...


Please explain-  given the fact that many of the children in the care of gay people are their biological children, and that marriage is a requirement to adopt - how are all of those children going have a mom and a dad if gays are not allowed to marry,


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




Wrong

Children must have a real feminine and masculine balance to be healthy kids


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 15, 2019)

Women with better memory intellect and men with better logic intellect

Their natural differences works together to bring the best for kids 

The woman's memory is to remember what the mans logic figures out


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 15, 2019)

Liberalism has brought great harm to kids in many ways 

Now the universal law of life like always will correct this


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Their unfortunate situations are not Tennessee’s obligation to subsidize “just because they exist”. If they were, then Tennessee would have to subsidize any scenario children find themselves locked into.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 15, 2019)

GreenAndBlue said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Appeal to ignorance logical fallacy. Saying something is true does make it true. Must humans over 5 years of age know that


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 15, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Is that supposed to be an answer to my question? It doesn't even make sense. You wouldn't want anyone to start thinking that your concern for children is bullshit-would you?


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Low logic is the cause of thinking you are wise when you are not

And great harm comes

It's like a blind person who cannot see who is not blind and letting the wrong ones lead them

A blind person with logic would set up tests to prove the other is not blind

Your low logic brings you great harm in many ways 

Liberalism brings the death sentence with the big imbalance of young to old !!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 15, 2019)

GreenAndBlue said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


You're a bad joke without a punchline . Get lost!


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 15, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



And? Are they precluding a mother, yes or no?

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 16, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Yes. So what?


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 16, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> No one is proposing that?? Of course they are. If gay men marry, they are certainly precluding a mother.



Not really.  Maybe they don't want to have kids. Lot's of straight folks get married with no intent of having kids.  



Silhouette said:


> So as to your next question, since my quality of life is vastly overshadowed by the entire State of Tenessee’s quality of life (& therefore that State’s standing as to this question of law), we address It & not me.
> 
> As to that, then, gays getting married in Tennessee means that some people in Tennessee will have contracts that EFFECTIVELY banish children implicitly involved in said contracts, from a mother (or father) & the importance of those irreplaceable roles...for life.



So does divorce, and we don't hear you advocating for repealing divorce laws or mandating marriage for out of wedlock births.  

Again, none of which has any effect on your life.   



Silhouette said:


> Plus; Obergefell was arrived at illegally, in direct defiance of Windsor 2013 & outside the powers of the Judicial Branch of government. So doing it effectively stripped states of their due powers (without authority to do so) it had just said was the sole realm of a states to determine (Windsor 2013).



I think you keep misinterpreting Windsor, which was only about Federal Marriage, not state marriage.  Obergefell settled the issue of State marriage.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 16, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > No one is proposing that?? Of course they are. If gay men marry, they are certainly precluding a mother.
> ...



Silhouette has been blathering that same old tired  shit about Obergefell is in conflict with Windsor for years now. She is clearly uneducable .


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Silhouette has been blathering that same old tired shit about Obergefell is in conflict with Windsor for years now. She is clearly uneducable .



I think Sil is a dude.  But the funny thing is, as much as he/she goes on about gender/sexuality issues, it won't even reveal it's own gender. 

One time he talked about how some gay dude put the moves on him, and he beat him up.  Not that I believe it for  second, but i think it shows his mentality.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 16, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You said: *Except no one is really proposing that...*

If you are backing gay marriage, that is exactly what you are proposing.

Mark


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 17, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Exactly. It’s like he is baking chocolate chip cookies & saying “I’m just making cookies; I don’t know how those chocolate chips got in there?”


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> You said: *Except no one is really proposing that...*
> 
> If you are backing gay marriage, that is exactly what you are proposing.
> 
> Mark



Nope.  We have gay marriage, people still refer to their female parent as their "mother'.   Like, "My mother is such a pain in the ass!"  and "My Mom is always ragging on me to move out of the basement"  -- Oh, wait, that last one was your typical USMB Right Wing Troll.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Exactly. It’s like he is baking chocolate chip cookies & saying “I’m just making cookies; I don’t know how those chocolate chips got in there?”



Well, a cookie would kind of suck without chocolate chips.  

Again, still not seeing what that has to do with other people's families that aren't yours.  

I mean, I guess there will be some kid who might refer to his mother as "Parent One" sardonically, before his mom backhands him.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 17, 2019)

GreenAndBlue said:


> Women with better memory intellect and men with better logic intellect
> 
> Their natural differences works together to bring the best for kids
> 
> The woman's memory is to remember what the mans logic figures out



Do you actually think that men are more logical than women? That's a joke. And what "balance" is there of "masculine" and "feminine" if one of the partners cheats, commits violence against the other partner, brags of being superior to their partner, refuses to support their partner's hopes and dreams for themselves and their children? 

Explain heterosexual domestic violence, and family annihilaters like chris
Watts.

Some LGBTQ parents are raising their own biological children. Some are volunteering to adopt children, which is an incredible act of love on their part.. It's not a mistake or the result of a tear in a condom. They are voluntarily opening their homes to orphaned children when they might be off cruising the world on their combined incomes.

There is no need to attack the LGBTQ community. The heterosexual community, which produces children, has a lot to clean up.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 17, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > You said: *Except no one is really proposing that...*
> ...



What if there is no female parent?

Mark


----------



## GreenAndBlue (Mar 17, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> GreenAndBlue said:
> 
> 
> > Women with better memory intellect and men with better logic intellect
> ...




Yes this all can be explained and much easier as time goes on

We have learned that the earth is not flat

We were PRE~WIRED at creation for this result at that time


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 17, 2019)

*crickets* ^^. 

JoeB’s chocolate chip he pretends cannot be foreseen


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 17, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.


Stop humping the cat.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Then there just isn't. Plain and simple


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> So Va. and other states should have been allowed to continue to ban interracial marriage?


Yes, dumb ass. And if any interracial couples didn’t like it, they were *free* to move to another state. I realize you fascists can’t stand it, but *We* *the* *People* have the *right* to govern ourselves in our own states. And We the People are also free to move to another state that better aligns with our views if we don’t like it.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > So Va. and other states should have been allowed to continue to ban interracial marriage?
> ...


Some states are pro-slavery still. So much for *We the Peoples*. Should read for DOPer types. *'We the Whitey Peoples'*


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > So Va. and other states should have been allowed to continue to ban interracial marriage?
> ...


Who are you to think that you are "the People"? No one is. If two people  wish to be married in your state, who live in your state, they are members of "We, the People." of your state.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > So Va. and other states should have been allowed to continue to ban interracial marriage?
> ...


Thank you admitting that you would be quite wiling to allow the states to discriminate against inter racial couples as well as gays > Free  to move to another state? That is fucking stupid .! Would you want to have to move your ass  to another state in order to be able to do something that other can do without moving?  You call me a fascist? The states that banner interracial and gay marriage were the fascists. We the people ratified a constitution that provides for due process and equal protection under that law.


----------



## lantern2814 (Mar 17, 2019)

States that banned gay "marriage" did so the majority of the time after it was put on the ballot and the PEOPLE rejected it. Even California's crazies didn't want this. If you were unable to convince the people to approve it, maybe the people don't want this. Yes you would be the fascist. Running to the courts to overturn the will of the people. As well as DOMA. Signed by Bill Clinton.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> States that banned gay "marriage" did so the majority of the time after it was put on the ballot and the PEOPLE rejected it. Even California's crazies didn't want this. If you were unable to convince the people to approve it, maybe the people don't want this. Yes you would be the fascist. Running to the courts to overturn the will of the people. As well as DOMA. Signed by Bill Clinton.


Who exactly are you addressing? It would be helpful if you learned how to you the quote function. 

You seem to be another cry baby who has no clue as to how a Constitutional Republic works or what equal protection under the law means. Yes DOMA was signed by Clinton, to head off a marriage amendment being pushed by bigots.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > So Va. and other states should have been allowed to continue to ban interracial marriage?
> ...


Furthermore, the fact that you have to call me a dumb ass shows that you either don't believe your own equine excrement- or- at best don't have much confidence in it. Before you call someone a dumb ass - you should learn something about the subject matter- least you wind up looking like the dumb ass. Ooooops. Too late.


----------



## lantern2814 (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > States that banned gay "marriage" did so the majority of the time after it was put on the ballot and the PEOPLE rejected it. Even California's crazies didn't want this. If you were unable to convince the people to approve it, maybe the people don't want this. Yes you would be the fascist. Running to the courts to overturn the will of the people. As well as DOMA. Signed by Bill Clinton.
> ...



And you would be an absolute moron to not know that you were the one being slapped down. Nice dodging of the FACT that people didn't want this sham in their states. It's YOU who doesn't seem to understand that running to the courts to overturn the will of the people makes YOU the dictator wanna be. YOU don't understand that when the people vote down something it means they DON'T want it. But being the anti straight bigot you are, you applaud circumventing the will of the people. Maybe you better learn how things work.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


I was slapped down?> 

Fuck what the people want. The people , including you, have no fucking business dictating what other people can or cannot do, unless it is something that harms you or others . Same sex marriage has absolutely nothing to do with your life. Anti straight? You fucking moron. I am straight. Again, fuck the will of the people . Learn what a constitutional republic  means. And while  your at it, look at the current public opinion of the issue


----------



## lantern2814 (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Fuck the will of the people? You truly are an Anti-American REGRESSIVE PERVERT who doesn't understand he just destroyed his own argument.  Equal rights and protection  for all but fuck what the people who disagree with you think. YOU have NO right telling me what to think either. Learn that running to the courts to overturn the WILL OF THE PEOPLE makes you a whiny little wanna be dictator. Just go to Cuba or Venezuela where you can tell people what to do and think. That doesn't fly in the U.S.A. Commence whining that we're all bigots and then go look in the mirror.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


Holy fucking  shit! You actually don't get it!! . You don't understand that the "will of the people "does not trump constitutional law! Too often the "will of the people have been at odds with equal rights . Too many of the "people" -and you are a good example - are bigoted morons who think that they have a right to tell others how to live and what to do based on your questionable moral values. Who the fuck are you to decide what is moral ?

You are the wanna be dictator ! I don't want  tell people what to do and what to think. Your sorry bigoted ass does. I don't give a rats hind parts what kind of stupid shit you think, or if you think at all - and apparently that is not much. What I care about is how you treat  other people and the extent to which you respect who they are as human beings , and clearly you fall short in that department. I'll ask again, why do you care if same sex couples can marry and how does it effect you?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


PS You have no fucking idea what the will of the people is currently and, I'll guess, don't want to know.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> What if there is no female parent?
> 
> Mark



What if? Kids cope. Kids cope with divorce, with that guy mom hooks up with, etc.   

They're usually fine. 



Silhouette said:


> *crickets* ^^.
> 
> JoeB’s chocolate chip he pretends cannot be foreseen



Meh, most people don't go into your hysterics.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Yes, dumb ass. And if any interracial couples didn’t like it, they were *free* to move to another state. I realize you fascists can’t stand it, but *We* *the* *People* have the *right* to govern ourselves in our own states. And We the People are also free to move to another state that better aligns with our views if we don’t like it.



Wow... dude, that's kind of fucked up...  SO you don't like when the FEDERAL government makes arbitrary decisions but you are cool when states do it, because people can just uproot their lives and move to another one.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> States that banned gay "marriage" did so the majority of the time after it was put on the ballot and the PEOPLE rejected it. Even California's crazies didn't want this. If you were unable to convince the people to approve it, maybe the people don't want this. Yes you would be the fascist. Running to the courts to overturn the will of the people. As well as DOMA. Signed by Bill Clinton.



Jim Crow would have been approved by voters in the 1950's and 1960's and maybe the 1970's in some states.  

The Courts are doing exactly what they are designed to do, reign in the excesses of the legislative branch.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> Fuck the will of the people? You truly are an Anti-American REGRESSIVE PERVERT who doesn't understand he just destroyed his own argument. Equal rights and protection for all but fuck what the people who disagree with you think. YOU have NO right telling me what to think either. Learn that running to the courts to overturn the WILL OF THE PEOPLE makes you a whiny little wanna be dictator. Just go to Cuba or Venezuela where you can tell people what to do and think. That doesn't fly in the U.S.A. Commence whining that we're all bigots and then go look in the mirror.



Would you want everything you do that you might enjoy left up to a popular vote?  

I wouldnt' think so. 

The problem with you homophobes is all your arguments boil down to "I think it's icky!"


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 17, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > States that banned gay "marriage" did so the majority of the time after it was put on the ballot and the PEOPLE rejected it. Even California's crazies didn't want this. If you were unable to convince the people to approve it, maybe the people don't want this. Yes you would be the fascist. Running to the courts to overturn the will of the people. As well as DOMA. Signed by Bill Clinton.
> ...



No the courts weren't designed to do that. When women fought for the right to vote, no court "suddenly" found that right in the Constitution. The court rightly knew that they could not enact law, and that it had to go thru the system. The reason the SCOTUS today is such a big deal is that because they took law making out of congress and have made themselves the ultimate arbiter of what the Constitution says.

A very dangerous game to play.

Mark


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

Meathead said:


> OK, 77%. Absolutely fucking disgraceful!
> 
> 77% black births to single moms, 49% for Hispanic immigrants


Shhh...statistical *facts* are “racist” to leftists.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Gay men do marry*. *And they have children in their care. And *those* *kids* *do* *just* *fine*.


I’ve already proven that is a blatant *lie*.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> Some states are pro-slavery still.


A.) The _only_ group that is “pro-slavery” are leftists

B.) Slavery is explicitly outlawed in the U.S. Constitution

Epic Fail. Try again.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 17, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> No the courts weren't designed to do that. When women fought for the right to vote, no court "suddenly" found that right in the Constitution. The court rightly knew that they could not enact law, and that it had to go thru the system. The reason the SCOTUS today is such a big deal is that because they took law making out of congress and have made themselves the ultimate arbiter of what the Constitution says.
> 
> A very dangerous game to play.



Naw, not really.   The are already the ultimate arbiter of what the constitution says... that boat sailed 200 years ago with Marbury v. Madison.  

So the only real question here is whether or not sexual orientation is a choice or innate facet of a person, like his race or gender.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> If two people  wish to be married in your state, who live in your state, they are members of "We, the People." of your state.


Yes they are. And they get a vote like everyone else. And if they lose, they should accept that *We* *the* *People* have spoken. Just like I would respect that *We* *the* *People* have spoken if they won. That’s how it works (at least for anyone that isn’t a fascist like you leftists).


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Free  to move to another state? That is fucking stupid!


No, that’s only “stupid” to fascists. To normal people, that’s called *liberty*. Everyone is free to live in communities that align with their values.

Fascists like you want to demand that all states suffer under _your_ view of what is acceptable. Just like Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin, etc.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 17, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > No the courts weren't designed to do that. When women fought for the right to vote, no court "suddenly" found that right in the Constitution. The court rightly knew that they could not enact law, and that it had to go thru the system. The reason the SCOTUS today is such a big deal is that because they took law making out of congress and have made themselves the ultimate arbiter of what the Constitution says.
> ...



No, they never "made up" rights before. And it will come back and bite them in the ass.

Mark


----------



## Leo123 (Mar 17, 2019)

Let 'em get married......They are examples of how NOT to mature into a normal human being.   They are good people, just not very normal.  Abnormality is a part of life we must teach our children about it, and be tolerant of the mentally sick instead of trying to make it normal.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Would you want to have to move your ass  to another state in order to be able to do something that other can do without moving?


Stop with the false narrative. Everyone is bound to the exact same rules. In states where gay marriage was not legalized, all men were prevented from marrying other men and all women were prevented from marrying other women.

Likewise, all men were permitted to marry _any_ woman they wanted and all women were permitted to marry _any_ man they wanted.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Fuck what the people want.


Spoken like a true fascist.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Stop saying stupid shit and I won’t have to call you a dumb ass.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

lantern2814 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Fuck what the people want.
> ...


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You don't understand that the "will of the people "does not trump constitutional law!


And you don’t understand the U.S. Constitution. The constitution _clearly_ makes marriage the responsibility of the states. Game. Set. Match.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> PS You have no fucking idea what the will of the people is currently and, I'll guess, don't want to know.


Sure we do. Even radically left-wing California voted down Proposition 8. Very few people want gay marriage. Just you Gaystapo nuts.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 17, 2019)

When I take my girl in the ASS.  To unload some sperm to feel good. As not jacking MY load on her backside.
So she does not get pregnant.
Is a female asshole any different to a male asshole too fuck? As I have done no male assholes to know the feeling to get off btw.
But seems it should be the same by materials given to fuck to get off.
Seems the church loves fine YOUNG virgin assholes to rape to get access to heaven.

See the BS area that does not exist.... btw. looks like an anal hole to me.






But I pump only willing legal holes in any hole in the end game here.
Spunking my living sperms and killing many
sperm lives in the end, that could conceive more life from my need to fuck.

FYI: Where I will pay for abortions to meet my needs always,
and not to abuse a female of her needs sexually to pay a price for us both to get off.

btw: LICK a Pussy or a Dick seems fare to get us OFF.
But all anal holes, do look the same.

.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> When I take my girl in the ASS.  To unload some sperm to feel good. As not jacking MY load on her backside.
> So she does not get pregnant.
> Is a female asshole any different to a male asshole too fuck? As I have done no male assholes to know the feeling to get off btw.
> But seems it should be the same by materials given to fuck to get off.
> ...


That literally might be the worst post in USMB history. The grammar was atrocious. The content was repulsive. And the thoughts were completely and totally incoherent.

I doubt there is a single person here who can honestly say they understood what he was trying to communicate there.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> Spunking my living sperms and killing many sperm lives in the end, that could conceive more life from my *need* to fuck.


Aside from being the single most incoherent sentence ever produced, there is one thing I can tell you for certain. You do *not* have a “need” to “f*ck”. You have a need for oxygen. You have a need for water. You have a need for food. You do not have a “need” to get off. You want to get off. You don’t have a need to get off.

Stop being a dram queen, stop posting repulsive content, and for the love of all things holy, stop rambling incoherently. If you are intoxicated, walk away. Go sleep it off and come back another day.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 17, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > When I take my girl in the ASS.  To unload some sperm to feel good. As not jacking MY load on her backside.
> ...


weak.


----------



## Dale Smith (Mar 17, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> When I take my girl in the ASS.  To unload some sperm to feel good. As not jacking MY load on her backside.
> So she does not get pregnant.
> Is a female asshole any different to a male asshole too fuck? As I have done no male assholes to know the feeling to get off btw.
> But seems it should be the same by materials given to fuck to get off.
> ...



"But all anal holes, do look the same"


Voice of experience, Baz the spaz????
 BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I can only imagine in my worst nightmares as to what kind of human being would allow themselves to be mounted by a pig like you..........(shudder)


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 18, 2019)

P@triot said:


> No, that’s only “stupid” to fascists. To normal people, that’s called *liberty*. Everyone is free to live in communities that align with their values.
> 
> Fascists like you want to demand that all states suffer under _your_ view of what is acceptable. Just like Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin, etc.



You see, Poodle, this is where you are confused.  

Clearly, if the Gay Marriage Question were put to a National Vote, it would pass, easily.  The majority has turned the corner on the issue.  






So what you want is some little enclave where you can be free to impose your bigotry on others.  

Now, my definition of liberty would be "If you don't like gay marriage, don't have one."


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 18, 2019)

P@triot said:


> And you don’t understand the U.S. Constitution. The constitution _clearly_ makes marriage the responsibility of the states. Game. Set. Match.



Actually, Marriage isn't anywhere on the list of "Best thoughts of Slave Rapists who shit in chamber pots".  



P@triot said:


> Sure we do. Even radically left-wing California voted down Proposition 8. Very few people want gay marriage. Just you Gaystapo nuts.



67% of the country now favors gay marriage. Prop Hate only won because the Mormons lied to people about what it entailed. This is why it was struck down by the courts.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 18, 2019)

tommyboy80 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


That really is quite an impressive argument on the topic,


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 18, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


Say what?? "What do you think society does? We enforce moral values everyday. Its why people don't openly fuck in public. Or screw kids. 
And unless you are OK with an "everything goes" society, you are also deciding what is moral and what isn't."

So in your moronic world, sex in public and child abuse is equivalent to two consenting adults who happen to be of the same gender getting married? What the fuck is wrong with you.? Could you really be that stupid?


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 18, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > When I take my girl in the ASS.  To unload some sperm to feel good. As not jacking MY load on her backside.
> ...


You loved it and fully understood it.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 18, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > Spunking my living sperms and killing many sperm lives in the end, that could conceive more life from my *need* to fuck.
> ...



Like there is no anal sex in traditional marriages. This is about anal sex with you clowns.
I love some men, my dad, and brothers. Some do fuck family, I don't. So its not about love. People have a right to plow any hole they like.  Males or females having anal sex is just a form of sex act.
The only restrictions are they are of legal age and the owner of the holes approval entry.
 Unless you belong and support any religious cult. Where it demands raping of the underage, and older
 by the lord for entry into heaven. Using the lords' funded by the flocks.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


That's the best retort that you have Lantern? A funny face? That is pretty pathetic


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



If its not equivalent, you are now passing a moral judgment on society. Because people are the only ones who decide what is moral and what is not. 

Murder could be moral, and in some countries it is. See, you are a bigot, just like I am, I just have a tiny higher moral standard than you do.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 18, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Baz Ares said:
> ...



Again, you set the parameters and get upset when someone doesn't agree with you. As a society, we set the legal age. It could be twelve or it could be 21. Either way, society is indeed proclaiming that this is our moral standard. 

Mark


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 18, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> 
> 
> I really have to wonder what the fuck is wrong with these people! My only question is, are they so stupid and blindly driven by their bigotry that they don't know that any federal judge will immediately slap on injunction on this- because they would have to given the Obergefell precedent- OR  is a a strategy to get the case back to SCOTUS?
> ...


States rights. The citizens of a state should not be forced to accept two guys licking each other’s assholes.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 18, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Its set @ 12 years old now in Mormon Utah Cult sex slave prison camps.
Where am I upset? I list what is current laws. Marriage is not a
constitutional right'. Just a contract to do somthang between two peoples.
I care less if its 2 males, 2 females. As 1 male and 1 female works so well. LOL!


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 18, 2019)

Edit


Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


Must be licking pussy only, for you. With your nose in an asshole.
 As you get a blow job with a finger in your ass.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 18, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> Edit
> 
> 
> Bush92 said:
> ...


Have you noticed that all they ever zoom in on is the sex?And it's always what men do and not women. I personally never think about it, but they're obsessed by gay men sex. Wonder why that is....


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 18, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > Edit
> ...


You can go for this.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> Like there is no anal sex in traditional marriages.


You’re _obsessed_ with anal sex. You can’t stop mentioning it for some reason (you’re also a misogynist prick...but I digress). Nobody is arguing anything about anal sex - any more than they are arguing about oral sex.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You can go for this.
> 
> View attachment 250992


Aaaaaand I rest my case.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > That literally might be the worst post in USMB history. The grammar was atrocious. The content was repulsive. And the thoughts were completely and totally incoherent.
> ...


I promise you - there isn’t a single person in the world who could understand that incoherent babbling. It was illiterate to the extreme.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Allow me to illustrate, snowflake. Let’s review your opening sentence:


Baz Ares said:


> When I take my girl in the ASS.


When you (and I quote) “take your girl in the ass” _what_? You placed a period after “ass”. It’s an incomplete sentence. It’s also misogynistic as hell as only rapists *take*.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Allow me to illustrate, snowflake. Now let’s review your second sentence:


Baz Ares said:


> To unload some sperm to feel good.


Once again, an incomplete sentence. Nobody has the slightest clue what your dumb ass is trying to convey here. What about it? How this even remotely relevant to the discussion at hand? But sadly, it only gets worse from here.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Allow me to illustrate, snowflake. Now this third sentence is a _real_ gem:


Baz Ares said:


> As not jacking MY load on her backside.


Wow. Where to go with that mind-boggling, illiterate mess. “As not jacking”? As? As _what_? What the fuck is your dumb ass trying to say here? And what about it anyway? What does jacking and your horses backside have to do with _anything_ that’s being discussed?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Sentence six just completely falls off the sanity rails:


Baz Ares said:


> As I have done no male assholes to know the feeling to get off btw.


Sooooooo you’ve done “male assholes” but just not to know the feeling to get off? You’ve done “male assholes” for _other_ reasons? Because that’s literally what your dumb ass just said.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Sentence nine continues down the same path as six:


Baz Ares said:


> See the BS area that does not exist.... btw. looks like an anal hole to me.


See the BS area that does not exist? How the fuck can I “see” something that does “not exist”? And of course, whatever the fuck you’re referring to here (and nobody knows), you immediately go righ back to an anus. You’re _obsessed_ with it. It’s pretty sick dude.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Sentence 10 is quite interesting:


Baz Ares said:


> But I pump only willing legal holes in *any* *hole* in the end game here.


Soooooo you do in fact do men, like you previously denied but then subsequently admitted to? And you do animals as well?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> You loved it and fully understood it.


Unfortunately for the USMB community, your dumb ass wasn’t done yet:


Baz Ares said:


> FYI: Where I will pay for abortions to meet my needs always, and not to abuse a female of her needs sexually to pay a price for us both to get off.


What the fuckety-fuck?!? 

“Not to abuse a female of her needs sexually”? Did you mean “not to DENY a female of her needs sexually”? I can’t believe even begin to guess anything beyond that. I pray you are some foreign asshole because if you’re an American, the Dumbocrats have destroyed our education system far worse than I had realized.


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 19, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Motherless marriages are harmful to kids involved & are therefore immoral. States like Tenessee are merely seeking to regulate harm to kids within their borders.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Give me  a fucking break with that bigotry bullshit. You are terribly confused. It is one thing to make a judgement about morality on a personal level, and quite another to codify your sense of morality into law. To prohibit something by law, one must go beyond the nebulous issue of "morality" and demonstrate how it harms others or society as a whole. Murder and child abuse clearly are harmful. On the other hand, opponents of same sex marriage- who bleat about morality- have failed miserably to show how it is harmful in any way. Just please, just cut the crap already.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


How stupid is that....let me count the ways.

The issue here is same sex marriage. If people are into licking assholes  or anything else that you find distasteful, not being married is not going to stop them

In addition, plenty of opposite sex couples are into ass licking, take my word for it.

States Rights? Look up Lawrence v. Texas . That ship has sailed and it won't be back


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > Like there is no anal sex in traditional marriages.
> ...


If the church stops, I may see my way to say less.
Have some balls and learn from the video.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


DOPer Weak Spews as always.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > You loved it and fully understood it.
> ...


You go to church. Semen spreads the words (goo) of the lord' everywhere there.


----------



## mdk (Mar 19, 2019)

I just checked again: Homos can still marry in Tennessee. Better luck next week.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


The mother died in childbirth, should the kid be put to death for murder?


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 19, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


What if the mother dies? Should the father immediately run out and find another woman so that his kids have a mother? There are plenty of families out there who are being raised by single parents and most all of them turn out just fine.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


The ones who follow fake gods/lords' are not turning out well.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


That one there has a broken record for a brain It can't seem to understand that the child adopted by two gay men had NO PARENTS before hand


----------



## bodecea (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...


Another homo-voyeur here.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > Edit
> ...


It's homo-voyeurism.   Now as to why they ARE homo-voyeurs.....I'll leave that guess up to you.   But I think we all know the statistics on that.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 19, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Would you want to have to move your ass  to another state in order to be able to do something that other can do without moving?
> ...


_During the Cold War, an American went to a bar with a Russian.   The American bragged about the freedoms he enjoyed in the United States.  "In the US, we have freedom of speech.  I can call the President of the United States an SOB and I cannot get in trouble."   The Russian retorted.  "In the Soviet Union, we too have freedom of speech.  I too can call the President of the United States an SOB and I cannot get in trouble._ *See?   Same Freedom."*


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 19, 2019)

bodecea said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I always loved that joke!


----------



## Silhouette (Mar 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Time isn’t in this equation. No man (or two) should ever have a contract that banishes any kids he has from a mother for life.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


Happens all the time, its called a divorce. 

As mom is getting it from a new support supplier.


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 19, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


That doesn't even make any sense. If the mother DIES, then how is that the mans fault? Plus, there actually are women who leave and abandon the kids voluntarily.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...


Men cause all female deaths from childbirth.
AS they all sowed the internal release of pollywogs that caused the whole death process to start, in the end of her life..

btw: I do like the Spartans way of saving the state resources from supporting weak defective spawns. Some say they tossed them on a hillside all alone.


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 19, 2019)

Baz Ares said:


> Edit
> 
> 
> Bush92 said:
> ...


Is there anything better than going south on a woman?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> > Edit
> ...


69,  and especially if it hair pie with ketchup time.


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 19, 2019)

bodecea said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Nope. Pissed off a lesbian co-worker when I said, laughingly in a conversation that she invited herself into, that gay guys are bung hole surfers. She became indignant and said some people (her gay friends) do this. WTF?


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > Baz Ares said:
> ...


Your stupid. Couples are aware of menstruation...you would not be. Because heterosexual couples are decent and mature. 69? Good stuff...what’s your point?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


Why would I not be aware of menstruation? Are you making some moronic assumption about me?


----------



## Crixus (Mar 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > Baz Ares said:
> ...





Is that Kosher?


----------



## deanrd (Mar 19, 2019)

It’s all about rights. 

Republicans feel they have the right to hate gays and make gays lives miserable. 

Republicans feel they have the right to legislate women’s bodies. 

Republicans feel they have the right to shoot blacks out in the street and call it stand your ground. 

 Republicans feel they have the right to ban Muslims from coming into the country even if it’s against the constitution. 

 Republicans feel they have the right to slander Hispanics. 

 None of this is about the rights of minorities, it’s all about the rights of Republicans.


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You just made rather degrading comments about women. There is nothing in this world as beautiful as a woman. Across the board. I’m sorry you will not be able to appreciate this. The way the light plays upon her at dinner on a date, the smell of her hair, the way she kisses you in the morning. Those days when you see the way she plays with your children. Something gay couples cannot biologically produce because of the will of God.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


What the fuck are you blathering about? Degrading comments? You're not making a bit of sense!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


My point is that you're a stupid ass for making assumptions about my sexuality


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I don’t care who you get it it on with. That doesn’t entitle you to a a parade down the Main Street of your community. Keep it to yourself. I love women. I’m a heterosexual. What gives you the moral compunction that you have to take that from my society?


----------



## Bush92 (Mar 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You meet each other in back bars and truck stop restrooms, unless your taking adavantage of homeless kids. Sick fucks.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...



I keep seeing the best Gay Sex happens in the church, in the pews or rectories/parsonages by staff on the flock.
Do you support and the fund the church? All religions are about sex abuse. Or is it abuse?
If the leaders of the church approve and practice gay sex, why do the train the kiddies
in the sex acts? Seems the lord' is okay with it.


God spreads anal LOVE! We are made in the lords' image.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 19, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Bullshit. There are many things that we regulate that aren't harmful. Hell, in my area, homes are REQUIRED to have some masonry or stone on the front of the house.

Remember this, EVERY law or rule is a restriction on someones freedom. You seem to completely disagree with society only when it comes to sex, it appears.

Mark


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 19, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


"Something gay couples cannot biologically produce because of the will of God." WRONG!! Any gay woman can biological produce. All she needs is a sperm donor and a turkey baster. And gay men can biological produce with a woman who agrees to carry their child. They're not sterile, as much as you in your warped mind seem to think they are.

Jody Foster has two biological boys who are full brothers because she used the same sperm donor for both. She carried them inside her body and gave birth to them.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 20, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


More horseshit! I did not say that we don't prohibit anything that is not harmful. I said that there is a distinction to be made between that which is harmful and that which is based strictly on ones moral sensibilities. Yes, laws are restrictions on freedom Some make sense and are rational, others are not. Again, prohibiting same sex marriage has not been shown to be rational. I disagree only when it comes to sex? What the fuck are you talking about? This isn't even about sex. It's about marriage.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 20, 2019)

Bush92 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 20, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Do you ever wonder why they're all so obsessed with gay sex? I never think about the sex lives of anyone, gay or straight, but they sure do about gay men....a lot!


----------



## Likkmee (Mar 20, 2019)

TN ought to first get rid of inner family marriage.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 20, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Then laws against polygamy aren't rational either?

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 20, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Well, I would say that many-although not all have harbor fears and doubts about their own sexuality. Others just have  some weird ideas about sex and sexuality. I wonder more about what their lives are actually like.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 20, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Maybe not. I have not taken a stand on that issue  so putting that out there as a red herring and straw man fallacy will get you no where. If anyone thinks that there is no rational basis for any law that prohibits a practice, they are free to pursue through the courts or petition their law makers. You do realize that throughout all of this, neither you or anyone else has made a logical argument about why same sex marriage should not be legal. All that you seem to be able to do is fling dung at the wall and hope that something sticks. It ain't sticking.


----------



## Baz Ares (Mar 20, 2019)




----------



## Silhouette (Mar 20, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > Then laws against polygamy aren't rational either?
> ...


You’ve allowed as how it could be a rationale basis for denial; then subjectively waived your hand to swipe it away; as if that elephant in the living room doesn’t exist.

Problem is that it’s the USSC’s job to anticipate how precedent will affect future verdicts. This is/was made especially compelling in Obergefell because of the Brown v Utah case pending in lower courts & known in the press at the time.

The Court isn’t allowed the luxury of arbitrarily picking favorites when it comes to alternative lifestyles getting married.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 20, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


I have not subjectively done anything and as usual, you are blathering senselessly. Obergefell set no precedent that would support plural marriage . Read the fucking opinion and show us how you think that it does. I've allowed that " it could be a rationale basis for denial; " What the fuck does that mean?. You get more bizarre with each post.


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 20, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Logical, rational, sane thought is all that is needed to decide whether gays should marry or not. Marriage is about having a family, and two men or two women cannot do that biologically. Hell, polygamy makes more sense.

Mark


----------



## rightwinger (Mar 20, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...



The Roberts Court will be known for Obergfell
It’s finest decision


----------



## 80zephyr (Mar 20, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



Since it was in violation of our usual process, I doubt that. That decision is one of the reasons that most Americans feel that the courts have become politicized.
The court should have turned it back to the states, just like when women won the right to vote. Todays court would have just told us their "right was there all along".

No, it wasn't.

Mark


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 20, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Complete horseshit rejected by numerous federal courts, The ability to " reproduce" in the manner that you approve of is not, and never has been a condition of marriage .  Many straight couples do not reproduce in the usual way either. But same sex couple - like those straight couples do indeed have families, establish homes, are productive members of the community and most of all, are parents to the children who are in their care by whatever means. Your argument against same sex marriage- if in fact it can be called an argument at all , is truly pathetic.

There are couple who can reproduce " biologically' but are terrible parents while there are many others-gay and straight - who cannot but are great parents. Try to understand the difference between making a baby and nurturing a child,

So tell us now, Should hetero couples who cannot reproduce on their own as a couple without any "help" Be denied the right to marry? Answer honestly. If the answer is no, you are exposed to be full of shit


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 20, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 80zephyr said:
> ...


Two married people ARE a family. What about the man and women who don't want children but still want to get married? Should they be denied a marriage license? Heck, there is one member here who specifically said he didn't marry to have kids, but to have a wife who would "obey" him. Can't remember his screen name, but his avi says Grumpy Old Man. I'm sure you know who I'm referring to. So should he have been denied the right to get married?
Also, many people are sterile for one reason or another, but still fall in love and want to make a life with the person they love. The key word here is....LOVE.
I have some very good friends who are same sex married couples, and they are compassionate, intelligent, and loving people. I read daily how hetero couples abuse and torture both their biological, adopted, and foster children. Many innocent kids die in their custody.
I also know a gay couple who adopted two boys. One was born with fetal alcohol syndrome and the other was born addicted to drugs. they walked the floor with those babies while they screamed in pain. they got them the best medical care and then when they got older, got tutors for them so that they would be able to progress to the level of their class. Oh, and these guys were white, and both boys were black. They had a female black friend who had a daughter, and she came in regularly to teach the boys about their heritage and culture. They cried like babies at each adoption hearing when the judge approved the adoption. I'm still in touch with them and the boys are in their teens and still thriving.  
So tell me Einstein, how many straight white couples do you know who would spend the time and money do anything like that? NOT THAT MANY, if any at all!!


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 21, 2019)

80zephyr said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...


In violation of the "usual process" What the fuck does that mean?  Sounds like you also have a problem with the 19th amendment. The right might have been there but if the states are denying that right, the courts or Congress must step in.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 23, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> There are plenty of families out there who are being raised by single parents and *most all of them turn out just fine*.


Left-wing lies get more bizarre as the left-wing liars get more radical and more bizarre. Statistics show that the overwhelming majority of children from single parent homes are fucked up.

Children of single-parent homes underachieve academically

Children of single-parent homes suffer emotionally


----------



## P@triot (Mar 23, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> There are plenty of families out there who are being raised by single parents and *most all of them turn out just fine*.


Left-wing *lies* get more bizarre as the left-wing liars get more radical and more bizarre. Statistics show that the overwhelming majority of children from single parent homes are fucked up. Children who grow up in single-parent homes:

Are twice as likely to drop out of high school

Are 2.5 times as likely to become teen mothers

Are 1.4 times as likely to be idle (out of school and out of work)

Have lower grade point averages

Have lower college aspirations

Have poorer attendance records

As adults, have higher rates of divorce
Stop making shit up you _ignorant_ leftist.

The Consequences of Single Motherhood


----------



## hjmick (Mar 23, 2019)

Aba Incieni said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 'Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act' seeks to strip gay marriage rights
> ...




Wait... we can't do that anymore?


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 23, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > There are plenty of families out there who are being raised by single parents and *most all of them turn out just fine*.
> ...


If you have single mothers, who have care of the children, raise them, house them, pay for them, comfort them, where are these childrens' fathers? Where are they? Off in some bar instead of giving baths, cuddling, telling bedtime stories.

If the women are there, doing these things day in and day out, where are the men?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 23, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> If the women are there, doing these things day in and day out, where are the men?


The men are off being irresponsible assholes (in most cases - in some the men are the responsible loving parent).

But that being said, WTF does that have to do with the issue? We’re not discussing the failures of men in this thread. Stay on topic.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > If the women are there, doing these things day in and day out, where are the men?
> ...



YOU are the one who brought up "The Consequences of Single Motherhood" in YOUR posts #934 and #935.

You have absolutely business ordering me or anyone else around. You aren't the boss of anything.

Stop being an asshole. I know that it is hard for right-wing men to stop being assholes, but at least try.

All of those people weeping and knashing their teeth following Obergefell are just cretins, like the creeps in Tennessee who can't get on with their own lives.


----------



## impuretrash (Mar 24, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Kittymom1026 said:
> ...



You seem to have an axe to grind against males.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 24, 2019)

impuretrash said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Only the ones who insist on acting like shitheads who use their gender to justify an unearned sense of entitlement, and who don't meet their commitments. It's all in how a person behaves.

You apparently didn't notice that this guy was yapping about "single motherhood." It's a case of who is in there slugging it out every day and who is not.


----------



## SweetSue92 (Mar 24, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



More entries for Lysistrata's Diary on USMB:

"Dear Diary,

The 'Right Wing Men' here are mean to me just like they have always been! I imagine in my head that they order me around just like I imagine they do out there in flyover country where their wives always wear those long and flowy skirts and wash dishes out in the lawn with the hose and the tin tub! They're awful! Those Right Wing Men! I hate them so much!"


----------



## SweetSue92 (Mar 24, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> impuretrash said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...



"Dear Diary:

I know Single Mothers are all heroes because the Overlords said so! They are all heroes slugging it out on their own while their no good loser Right Wing deadbeats are off wielding their testosterone at the bar! I hate men! Especially Right Wing Men in flyover country!!"


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > If the women are there, doing these things day in and day out, where are the men?
> ...



Why aren't we? You guys want to "save" marriage from the nasty old gays calling their relationships a marriage, because a few of them might have a kid using a turkey baster or a surrogate.  

But since 50% of marriages end in divorce, maybe you should be working on that by making it harder for straight to get married or divorced.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kittymom1026 said:
> 
> 
> > There are plenty of families out there who are being raised by single parents and *most all of them turn out just fine*.
> ...


All the more reason why gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 24, 2019)

impuretrash said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


I don't think so. But you seem to have an ax to grind against humanity


----------



## P@triot (Mar 24, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> YOU are the one who brought up "The Consequences of Single Motherhood" in YOUR posts #934 and #935.


No, dumb shit. KittyMom brough it up when she said that all children in single parent homes turn out fine. If you can’t follow along, leave.


Lysistrata said:


> You have absolutely business ordering me or anyone else around. You aren't the boss of anything.


I’m not trying to be the “boss”, you dumb shit. I’m following the board rules. And you’ll find yourself suspend soon if you don’t. You can’t hijack a thread. You must stick to the thread topic, stupid. Clearly reading is not your strong point. Maybe ask a man to read them and then explain it to you?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 24, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> All the more reason why gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry


Why?

*A.* You don’t need to be married to have two people in a home

*B.* LGBT’s can’t reproduce anyway

*C.* LGBT’s shouldn’t be allowed to adopt since it’s harmful to children


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Why?
> 
> *A.* You don’t need to be married to have two people in a home
> 
> ...



Sure they can.  They can use surrogates (for the men) or donated sperm and a turkey baster (for the ladies.)


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 24, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Why?
> ...


I told him that several post age but for some reason he chooses to ignore it.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> You don’t need to be married to have two people in a home


Children benefit from having the security of two married parents who are each their legal guardians


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > All the more reason why gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry
> ...


You keep saying that but in my opinion, YOU shouldn't be allowed to have children because you have such a warped idea of what a family should be. Guess what bucko? Families these days are not like Ozzie and Harriet. Hell, I was a kid when that series was on TV and even back then they weren't. 

My Aunt had a 10 week old son when her husband was killed in a car accident. She never remarried and raised him all on her own. He played sports and she went to every game. When he was young, he was into that fake wrestling and every time they came to the coliseum she took him and even took him backstage to meet the wrestlers. This was a woman who was tall, very feminine, and drop dead gorgeous and did things for her son that many men never did. Today he is a successful businessman thanks to her. She owned her own business from the time he was a toddler until her death a couple of years ago and instilled work ethics and values into him. She was a kind and loving person and passed that along to him also. So take your antiquated ideas and shove them up your ass. Oh, and how many people in prison came from a two parent house?  

And, we keep giving you examples of how gays can reproduce but you keep embarrassing yourself by saying that they can't. Do you enjoy looking foolish?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 24, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Why?
> ...



Cant' reproduce? So what? They can be and are parents!

Harmful to children? Bigoted and ignorant debunked bovine excrement.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 24, 2019)

SweetSue92 said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > impuretrash said:
> ...



Too weird! Strange "diary" entries. "Overlords"...??? Flowing skirts??? You sound like you need help. A lot of it.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > YOU are the one who brought up "The Consequences of Single Motherhood" in YOUR posts #934 and #935.
> ...



Oh, shut up. Even if it was Kittymom who first raised the topic, it was YOU who ran with it. Now you have the unmitigated gall to lecture me??? Get off your high horse and stay on topic.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 24, 2019)

Kittymom1026 said:


> I told him that several post age but for some reason he chooses to ignore it.



Poodle only sees what he wants to see.   I think I mocked him too many times and he put me back on ignore.


----------



## mdk (Mar 25, 2019)

Silhouette said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Silhouette said:
> ...



Not anymore.

State-Funded Adoption Agencies In Michigan Barred From Refusing LGBTQ Parents


----------



## Kittymom1026 (Mar 25, 2019)

mdk said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Good!


----------



## Erinwltr (Mar 27, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> SweetSue92 said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


Yeah, I stopped reading her arrogant, condescending comments eons ago.  Sue ain't worth the spit it would take to cuss her.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 27, 2019)

Lysistrata said:


> Oh, shut up.


That’s what every left-wing lunatic says when they are proven wrong.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 27, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > You don’t need to be married to have two people in a home
> ...


Yeah...when one is a man and the other is a woman.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 27, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Appeal to ignorance fallacy. That’s all you have 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Erinwltr (Mar 27, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, shut up.
> ...


That poster is not a left wing lunatic.    And was not proven wrong.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 27, 2019)

Erinwltr said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Lysistrata said:
> ...


Yes she was. She claimed I brought up a topic - when in fact I was responding to someone else. It’s an indisputable *fact*.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 27, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Appeal to ignorance fallacy. That’s all you have


I’ve already proven you wrong. That’s why you respond with nonsense like that.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 27, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Appeal to ignorance fallacy. That’s all you have
> ...


You proved me wrong.?? Are you serious ? I fear that you are which does not speak well for your relationship to reality. EXACTLY how did you prove me wrong?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 27, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You proved me wrong.?? Are you serious ? I fear that you are which does not speak well for your relationship to reality. EXACTLY how did you prove me wrong?


With links to data which indisputably proves children do exponentially better in homes with a mother and a father.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 27, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > You proved me wrong.?? Are you serious ? I fear that you are which does not speak well for your relationship to reality. EXACTLY how did you prove me wrong?
> ...


Horseshit!!Where are those links.? I have a treasure trove of peer reviewed sties that say otherwise. I also know who all of the charlatans and quacks are who published bullshit studies. You can't win with me. I've been at this too long.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 27, 2019)

Erinwltr said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > SweetSue92 said:
> ...



Sue definitely has, as we used to say, "a creative view of reality." Writing fictional "diary" entries in another person's voice really shows that her cheese is definitely slipping off her cracker.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 27, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You can't win with me.


Oh we know that. There is no “winning” with left-wing lunatics who deny science, reason, reality, etc. The responses aren’t for partisan extremists like you. It’s for other people who are rational and reasonable.


TheProgressivePatriot said:


> I've been at this too long.


One would _think_ you wouldn’t be so ignorant then.


----------



## Lysistrata (Mar 27, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, shut up.
> ...



Assuming that you mean me to be a "left-wing lunatic," you still never proved me wrong. You were the one who continued to yap about a subject that you then said was off topic, and then lectured me. You have been extremely arrogant. Try taking personal responsibility.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Um, I was agreeing with you. It was Poodle who was saying stupid shit... because he's Poodle.


----------



## Erinwltr (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > You can't win with me.
> ...


It's a really good thread.  No need to be nasty. _ But one would think..._


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > You can't win with me.
> ...


I'll be waiting for you "proof " that I am wrong about parenting, but not holding my breath. By the way, parenting is a separate issue from the topic of this thread,


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

JoeB131 said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


I know, my mistake. I dropped it in the wrong place.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

Erinwltr said:


> It's a really good thread.  No need to be nasty. _But one would think..._


Telling the truth isn’t “being nasty” (despite the left’s claims that it is).


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> > It's a really good thread.  No need to be nasty. _But one would think..._
> ...


Speaking of "truth"  You stated that you had proof that parenting by same sex couples was bad for kids. I asked you to back that up. It has been-what 24hrs? No proof. Obviously you lie!


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Erinwltr said:
> ...


I’ve posted it serval times in this thread already. You’ve seen it. You can’t pretend it away like you do with your gender and sexuality, snowflake.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Hey. I'm not going to go back through 975 fucking posts to find something that may or not be there , and which is no doubt horseshit if it is there. Put up or shut up.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Hey. I'm not going to go back through 975 fucking posts to find something that may or not be there , and which is no doubt horseshit if it is there. Put up or shut up.


*A.* Typical lazy leftist.

*B.* You don’t have to. The site is indexed and can be searched by individual thread + individual user.

It’s been posted (and you saw it too).


----------



## Natural Citizen (Mar 28, 2019)

The right to freedom of association is fundamental.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Hey. I'm not going to go back through 975 fucking posts to find something that may or not be there , and which is no doubt horseshit if it is there. Put up or shut up.
> ...


I'm lazy. You claim that you have something but can't be bothered to post it again. ? What a fucking joke. Your making a damned fool of yourself-as usual.

I don't think that you want me to see it-if it exists at all-because it's some dredged up debunked horseshit and you know that I'll rip it to shreads


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> I'm lazy.


At least we agree on _something_.


TheProgressivePatriot said:


> I *don't think that you want me to see it*-if it exists at all-because it's some dredged up debunked horseshit and you know that I'll rip it to shreads


That’s why I posted it in _this_ thread (and you already commented on it).


----------



## White_MAGA_Man (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


You do know same sex marriage is immoral? They are doing Satan's bidding and wilI spend eternity is hell. As a Christian it comforts me that I will be blessed by God in granting me eternity in Heaven.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You claim that you have something but can't be bothered to post it again. ? What a fucking joke. Your making a damned fool of yourself-as usual.
> 
> I don't think that you want me to see it-if it exists at all-because it's some dredged up debunked horseshit and you know that I'll rip it to shreads


Here is just one of the links I posted proving you’re a nitwit - and your dumb ass responded to it in post #674.

And yet your ignorant ass has spent the past 3 pages claiming nothing exists.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

White_MAGA_Man said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Oh get the fuck out of here with your moronic moralizing . Satin only exists in you small diseased  mind . You might well be unpleasantly surprised on judgement day- if there is such a thing- that God does not want haters in his paradise


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Speaking of "truth"  You stated that you had proof that parenting by same sex couples was bad for kids. I asked you to back that up. It has been-what 24hrs? No proof. Obviously you lie!


24 hours? Actually it’s been 21 _days_ since I posted the link proving it. The link your dumb ass responded to in post #674 (as you sit here denying it exists).


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Oh get the fuck out of here with your moronic moralizing . *Satin* only exists in you small diseased  mind .


Yeah...that would be “Satan” you imbecile. Satin is a smooth, soft fabric somewhat similar to silk and most definitely exists in the real world, outside of MAGA’s mind.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> I asked you to back that up. It has been-what 24hrs? No proof. *Obviously you lie*!


God, I love the fact that your dumb ass already responded to one of my posts with a link. You’re the poster-child for not being an idiot hippie. Stay in school and away from drugs. You can’t remember your own discussions and you can’t spell basic words. Your brain is so destroyed, you’re not even functional.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > I'm lazy.
> ...


OH yes ! It was so unmemorable. It was, as I thought total horseshit, This was my response and I stand by it. 
T


> this is a pathetically piss poor argument against same sex marriage. Here we have a kid who has some gripes about his upbringing. One of those gripes is that he was "exposed to sexuality" whatever that means. Not a good thing if true, but I'm here to tell you, as a former CPS investigator , that inappropriate sexual expression-and worse- happens in all sorts of families.
> 
> Then he complains that he felt unable to express himself. Again that is a lot of families. But then he goes on to express some very positive thoughts about his father.
> 
> ...



Is this really the best that you can do to discredit sane sex marriage. ? Holy shit it is!


----------



## P@triot (Mar 28, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Is this really the best that you can do to discredit sane sex marriage. ? Holy shit it is!


Are the words of an individual who actually lived through it the best I can do? Yes. Yes it is. In fact, it’s the best _anyone_ can do. Actual *real* life experience trumps academic theory, my triggered little snowflake.


----------



## Erinwltr (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> > It's a really good thread.  No need to be nasty. _But one would think..._
> ...


You are being nasty.   It is painfully apparent in you comments right here on USMB.  I mean, really. 
 There is no truth in what you post.  Just programmed hate from wherever you get your life beliefs from. 
And why do you  blame this on the Left?  I'm not a leftist.  A lot of folks engaging you on this board are not leftist.  But you just keep posting that you truth is the only truth and everyone is a leftist.  Makes no sense to me.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Mar 28, 2019)

JGalt said:


> There is no "gay marriage right." You're confusing "rights" with "privileges".
> 
> You also have no "right" to an abortion, a free education, free internet, free housing, free food, or a free telephone. Go back and re-read the Constitution and get back to me when you're done.




You are absolutely right!

In fact, using your logic, you have VERY FEW RIGHTS AT ALL in this country that BOASTS about "RIGHTS"
guns
voting

that's about it....

no right to own a car
to drive
to marry
to have kids


I love it when conservatives complain that "liberals want to take ALL of my rights away!"

then they tell us that we don't actually have ANY rights.....just a few "privileges"


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 28, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Is this really the best that you can do to discredit sane sex marriage. ? Holy shit it is!
> ...


Really? This is about you? I feel for you . I really do. But you know what? I had a shitty childhood too, and I was raised by a mom and a dad. Your story is, in no way, a case against same sex marriage or parenting by same sex couples for the reason that I stated above. As I suspected, you really have nothing . Your personal anecdote does not make your case or in anyway refute the reams of data that exists that shows that children of same sex couples do just fine. Furthermore, as I have previously pointed out, using the issue of parenting as an argument against same sex marriage is totally stupid  because people can and do have children-married or not. This is just a thinly vailed attempt to justify your vicious bigotry and I am not impressed.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 29, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


Uh..._what_? What are you talking about? Are you intoxicated right now? The words of someone who lived through it are from the *woman who wrote the article*. Not me, you dumb shit. I had a good mom and a good dad.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 29, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Your personal anecdote does not make your case or in anyway refute the reams of data that exists that shows that children of same sex couples do just fine.


The “reams of data” show you’re a pathological liar. Because all of it proves that children do exponentially worse without a mother and a father. I’ve posted it here in this thread already.


----------



## deanrd (Mar 29, 2019)

It’s amazing to me how Republicans figure out brand new ways to hate people they don’t know when will never meet.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 29, 2019)

White_MAGA_Man said:


> You do know same sex marriage is immoral? They are doing Satan's bidding and wilI spend eternity is hell. As a Christian it comforts me that I will be blessed by God in granting me eternity in Heaven.



So you think that your God is going to reward you for hating people who are different than you are?  That's kind of sad.


----------



## JoeB131 (Mar 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Uh..._what_? What are you talking about? Are you intoxicated right now? The words of someone who lived through it are from the *woman who wrote the article*. Not me, you dumb shit. I had a good mom and a good dad.



Any woman who has to write an article about how the people who raised her messed up has serious issues... but i don't think they involve her parents.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Your personal anecdote does not make your case or in anyway refute the reams of data that exists that shows that children of same sex couples do just fine.
> ...


Horseshit!!  And yes I was intoxicated . Sue me. Now lets see the data that you imagine exists.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Mar 29, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...



And don't forget, conservatives use different logic on others than they do for themselves;

To them, one bad gay (or lib or fem or dem or atheist) is PROOF that ALL gays (etc) are bad.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > I asked you to back that up. It has been-what 24hrs? No proof. *Obviously you lie*!
> ...


Nice smoke screen to hide the fact that you can't back up your idiotic assertion that gays are inferior parents- and the even more absurd assertion that it is a valid  argument against same sex marriage.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Mar 29, 2019)

Natural Citizen said:


> The right to freedom of association is fundamental.




So you think liberal businesses have a right to refuse to hire conservatives based upon "right to freedom of association"?


----------



## Natural Citizen (Mar 29, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> So you think liberal businesses have a right to refuse to hire conservatives based upon "right to freedom of association"?



People can hire whomever they want, it's none of my business.

But you're talking to a real liberal. And I'd remind you that liberalism is conservatism.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 29, 2019)

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > TheProgressivePatriot said:
> ...


I already did. You just don’t remember


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot (Mar 30, 2019)

P@triot said:


> TheProgressivePatriot said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


----------

