Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
Translatrion: I am a retard.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.I have a cogent argument based on fact. That you cannot understand it isnt my problem.Due, you havebeen totally wiped in this debate. You are reduced to repeating childish slogans that frankly arent even very clever. Give it up.
Simpler just to copy and paste than waste time on your absurdities.
Let me know when you have a cogent argument based upon fact.
In the meantime- Rabbi drools.
Well your inability to make a cogent argument based upon fact is not my problem.
Like I said
Well your inability to make a cogent argument based upon fact is not my problem.
I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No, they understand that if the two old people are male/female, the structure of "those who may marry" (we are arguing about qualifications after all) isn't harmed at all. It's when two people of the same gender, or numbers more than two apply. That causes a rupture to the definition set for the benefit of children.
The courts have answered it dozens of times, and found it to be utter BS.I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
No one is stopping single gay parents from marrying singles of the opposite sex.Single gay parents already have that ability. Single straught parents also cannot marry members of the same sex.How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
There is no discrimination, as you just showed.Single gay parents already have that ability. Single straught parents also cannot marry members of the same sex.How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
There is no discrimination, as you just showed.
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
Even straight single parents cannot marry anyone of the same sex.
Still alleging discrimination?
Nobody is stopping us from marrying people of the same sex...in 35 out of 50 states. 35 > 15
Not slow at all. The fastest shift I've ever seen in decades of watching American politics.No one is stopping single gay parents from marrying singles of the opposite sex.Single gay parents already have that ability. Single straught parents also cannot marry members of the same sex.Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
There is no discrimination, as you just showed.Single gay parents already have that ability. Single straught parents also cannot marry members of the same sex.Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
There is no discrimination, as you just showed.
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
Even straight single parents cannot marry anyone of the same sex.
Still alleging discrimination?
Nobody is stopping us from marrying people of the same sex...in 35 out of 50 states. 35 > 15
35 of 50! Slow and steady progress!
Deflection. Declarations of victory.I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
If you have an argument to make about gay marriage, make it. Your every post, for the last 3 pages...have been excuses why you won't discuss the topic, why you can't state you position, why you won't address any of the crippling holes in the gay marriage ban arguments.
If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon them. And your refusal to state your own argument is most definitely abandoning them.
I'll be happy to discuss gay marriage with you. I have no interest in discussing your excuses why you won't discuss gay marriage.
Deflection. Declarations of victory.I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
If you have an argument to make about gay marriage, make it. Your every post, for the last 3 pages...have been excuses why you won't discuss the topic, why you can't state you position, why you won't address any of the crippling holes in the gay marriage ban arguments.
If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon them. And your refusal to state your own argument is most definitely abandoning them.
I'll be happy to discuss gay marriage with you. I have no interest in discussing your excuses why you won't discuss gay marriage.
You are incapable of grasping this.
Deflection. Declarations of victory.I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
If you have an argument to make about gay marriage, make it. Your every post, for the last 3 pages...have been excuses why you won't discuss the topic, why you can't state you position, why you won't address any of the crippling holes in the gay marriage ban arguments.
If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon them. And your refusal to state your own argument is most definitely abandoning them.
I'll be happy to discuss gay marriage with you. I have no interest in discussing your excuses why you won't discuss gay marriage.
You are incapable of grasping this.
How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
Only you and Skyzax. Silhouette seems to understand it too.Deflection. Declarations of victory.I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.NO, I made the argument. I challenged you to show you understood it by repeating it. You failed to do that. Obviously you dont understand it. Since then you've simply repeated tripe and spewed insults. You are not capable of debate. That is clear. Alll that remains is to mock you.
If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
If you have an argument to make about gay marriage, make it. Your every post, for the last 3 pages...have been excuses why you won't discuss the topic, why you can't state you position, why you won't address any of the crippling holes in the gay marriage ban arguments.
If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon them. And your refusal to state your own argument is most definitely abandoning them.
I'll be happy to discuss gay marriage with you. I have no interest in discussing your excuses why you won't discuss gay marriage.
You are incapable of grasping this.
Apparently all sane people are..........
How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
You don't think Silo actually believes his '100 blood from both parents' nonsense, do you?
Only you and Skyzax. Silhouette seems to understand it too.Deflection. Declarations of victory.I have made the aergument many times. You deflect, claim I never made one, etc.If you have an argument to make, make it. If you can't, don't.
Your 'argument' has degenerated into you insisting we make your claims for you. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon it
No one has been able to answer the argument that the state favors some relationships over other because some relationships are likely to produce future citizens while others cannot do so.
If you have an argument to make about gay marriage, make it. Your every post, for the last 3 pages...have been excuses why you won't discuss the topic, why you can't state you position, why you won't address any of the crippling holes in the gay marriage ban arguments.
If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have needed to abandon them. And your refusal to state your own argument is most definitely abandoning them.
I'll be happy to discuss gay marriage with you. I have no interest in discussing your excuses why you won't discuss gay marriage.
You are incapable of grasping this.
Apparently all sane people are..........
How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
You don't think Silo actually believes his '100 blood from both parents' nonsense, do you?
I believe that Silo believes that any lie or misrepresentation that she makes is defensible so long as she is creating an environment of hate towards homosexuals.
Shrugs......I'm here to discuss gay marriage. If Rabbi won't do it,
How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
You don't think Silo actually believes his '100 blood from both parents' nonsense, do you?
I believe that Silo believes that any lie or misrepresentation that she makes is defensible so long as she is creating an environment of hate towards homosexuals.
Almost all of the 'harm' cited by Silo is caused by straight couples. Why then would we deny gays and lesbians the right to marry....based on 'harm' caused almost exclusively by straights?
There's no part of Silo's argument that makes the slightest sense.
Shrugs......I'm here to discuss gay marriage. If Rabbi won't do it,
How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
You don't think Silo actually believes his '100 blood from both parents' nonsense, do you?
I believe that Silo believes that any lie or misrepresentation that she makes is defensible so long as she is creating an environment of hate towards homosexuals.
Almost all of the 'harm' cited by Silo is caused by straight couples. Why then would we deny gays and lesbians the right to marry....based on 'harm' caused almost exclusively by straights?
There's no part of Silo's argument that makes the slightest sense.
Confusing cause and effect.Shrugs......I'm here to discuss gay marriage. If Rabbi won't do it,
How do you feel about all those millions of children of single parents who are being deprived of the benefits of marriage? Suppose people choose to be single parents, must they marry another person to save their children the distress of not being in a married home? Couldn't people choose to love and marry themselves? Or are society's mores not quite ready for that? Maybe that's off in the future eh?
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
You don't think Silo actually believes his '100 blood from both parents' nonsense, do you?
I believe that Silo believes that any lie or misrepresentation that she makes is defensible so long as she is creating an environment of hate towards homosexuals.
Almost all of the 'harm' cited by Silo is caused by straight couples. Why then would we deny gays and lesbians the right to marry....based on 'harm' caused almost exclusively by straights?
There's no part of Silo's argument that makes the slightest sense.
From the 6th Circuit:
For although my colleagues in the majority pay lip service to marriage as an institution conceived for the purpose of providing a stable family unit "within which children may flourish," they ignore the destabilizing effect of its absence in the homes of tens of thousands of same-sex parents throughout the four states of the Sixth Circuit.
Gay marriages are so far causing no effect, except for some happy gay people and those who provide services to weddings. nearly without exception.Confusing cause and effect.Shrugs......I'm here to discuss gay marriage. If Rabbi won't do it,
Luckily single parents are permitted by law to marry.
Something single gay parents want to have the same ability to do.
You don't think Silo actually believes his '100 blood from both parents' nonsense, do you?
I believe that Silo believes that any lie or misrepresentation that she makes is defensible so long as she is creating an environment of hate towards homosexuals.
Almost all of the 'harm' cited by Silo is caused by straight couples. Why then would we deny gays and lesbians the right to marry....based on 'harm' caused almost exclusively by straights?
There's no part of Silo's argument that makes the slightest sense.
From the 6th Circuit:
For although my colleagues in the majority pay lip service to marriage as an institution conceived for the purpose of providing a stable family unit "within which children may flourish," they ignore the destabilizing effect of its absence in the homes of tens of thousands of same-sex parents throughout the four states of the Sixth Circuit.
Not that you would understand that.
