A Poll Businesses Boycotting Laws Protecting Christians Might Want To Look At First..

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The entire thread premise is moot because all humans have a specific singular mother and a specific singular father.
Left wing agitators and fascists want to force alternatives to those two specific people raising the children they create. An absolute violation of the natural right of a human to be raised by its actual parents.

Who wants to force alternatives on anyone raising the children they create?? If a man & woman create a child, they raise it. It is simple, and not part of this discussion. What IS being discussed is people who, while they are the same gender, wish to raise a child that someone else refused to raise.

Gay couples who adopt are taking children that straight couples created and then threw away. And they also adopt a higher percentage of children is medical and mental issues. Again, that straight couples threw away.

Refusing to raise a child you create is a violation of the natural right of that human to be raised by his actual parents.
You just posts the typical logic-challenged lefty response.

Natural rights? Lmao!! Are you really going to use the parenting attributes of animals here? Plenty of animals abandon their young. Plenty of males kill the young of other males. And in many species, the female has no choice in the mating.

Like it or not, there are still very innate traits when it comes to humans. Lefties try to obfuscate that reality to fit their fascist agendas.

 

[Silhouette]

Like it or not, there are still very innate traits when it comes to humans. Lefties try to obfuscate that reality to fit their fascist agendas.

The stunning part of that is that businesses climb on board with that blindly, even with polls running 90% of folks of all walks believing it's important for a child to have both a mother and father...and the implications of that with regards to "gay marriage"...trannies etc. You'd think the people at the top of companies would have their thinker-boxes in better working order than that?

 

[WinterBorn]

We are talking about sexuality, not love.

What is there of value in homosexuality in the grand scheme of things?

Same sex marriage serves the same purpose that traditional marriages serve.

No it doesn't.

Oh? What function does marriage serve that gay marriage does not? And please spare us the "having children" line. The marriage has nothing to do with that.

The whole reason why governments got into the marriage business was to create and foster stable families for children to be raised in, which in turn would create more stable families and well adjusted citizens.

Spare me your ignorance.

Well, since 50% of marriages end in divorce, the plan failed miserably.

And same sex marriages also create stable families, raise stable & well adjusted kids. So yes, it does accomplish the same thing.

 

[WinterBorn]

The entire thread premise is moot because all humans have a specific singular mother and a specific singular father.
Left wing agitators and fascists want to force alternatives to those two specific people raising the children they create. An absolute violation of the natural right of a human to be raised by its actual parents.

Who wants to force alternatives on anyone raising the children they create?? If a man & woman create a child, they raise it. It is simple, and not part of this discussion. What IS being discussed is people who, while they are the same gender, wish to raise a child that someone else refused to raise.

Gay couples who adopt are taking children that straight couples created and then threw away. And they also adopt a higher percentage of children is medical and mental issues. Again, that straight couples threw away.

Refusing to raise a child you create is a violation of the natural right of that human to be raised by his actual parents.
You just posts the typical logic-challenged lefty response.

Natural rights? Lmao!! Are you really going to use the parenting attributes of animals here? Plenty of animals abandon their young. Plenty of males kill the young of other males. And in many species, the female has no choice in the mating.

Like it or not, there are still very innate traits when it comes to humans. Lefties try to obfuscate that reality to fit their fascist agendas.

LOL! Spare me the "Lefties" nonsense. What you are using as a reason to not allow gays to marry is a fairytale.

I am discussing reality. And in that reality, straight couples create children and then abandon them. Some are adopted by gay couples.

 

[WinterBorn]

Like it or not, there are still very innate traits when it comes to humans. Lefties try to obfuscate that reality to fit their fascist agendas.

The stunning part of that is that businesses climb on board with that blindly, even with polls running 90% of folks of all walks believing it's important for a child to have both a mother and father...and the implications of that with regards to "gay marriage"...trannies etc. You'd think the people at the top of companies would have their thinker-boxes in better working order than that?

You think there are many CEOs on these forums? Do you think there are many business owners among the 100 people who responded to your poll?

 

[Syriusly]

As far as the federal government's concerned anyone can marry anyone, anything as many as they want or whatever they want, it doesn't matter - that's why it should be a states issue.

The institution of marriage has become meaningless - let people marry a fencepost of they want to. Who gives a shit?

Rustic once again displaying not only his profound bigotry- but his profound ignorance on the Constitution and the courts.

As a man, who has been happily married to my wife for over 20 years- the institution of marriage hasn't changed for me at all.

But apparently now Rustic thinks it is meaningless.

Does that mean that Rustic is single and has no clue about marriage- or that gays being allowed to marry made his own marriage fall apart?

It means that the federal government should stay out of personal lives, including financial....

The Federal government is not forcing anyone to get married.

However, the United States Constitution does protect all of our 'personal' rights- and we all have a right to marriage.

Even you.

 

[Syriusly]

As far as the federal government's concerned anyone can marry anyone, anything as many as they want or whatever they want, it doesn't matter - that's why it should be a states issue.

The institution of marriage has become meaningless - let people marry a fencepost of they want to. Who gives a shit?

I am sorry to hear that the legalizing of gay marriage has ruined your faux marriage.

Never said any such thing, just that when the federal government is involved it fucks everything up…

Really/

 

[Syriusly]

Perhaps you should take a college course in statistics. Your poll, of +/-100 people, on a single web site, does not translate into 90% of the real world. It simply does not.

OK then what's the magic number that does if not 100 people? I've seen many a poll from between 100-150 people be taken by the media and others as "the word of God". If I was a business, I'd err on the side of caution that these 100 people from all walks are a good cross section of America; as good as any other 100 people polled..

That only shows you never took a single stats class- ever.

If you were a business you would be out of business because of your delusional beliefs.

 

[Syriusly]

The entire thread premise is moot because all humans have a specific singular mother and a specific singular father.
Left wing agitators and fascists want to force alternatives to those two specific people raising the children they create. An absolute violation of the natural right of a human to be raised by its actual parents.

Funny that.

Silhouette was a single mother. 'those two specific people' didn't raise her children.

Right Wingers and Fascists love divorcing and abandoning their children- and then proclaim self rightiously that the problem is with children being raised by two gay parents.

"An absolute violation of the natural right of a human to be raised by its actual parents"

Maybe you should tell that to the millions of children being raised in the United States by a single mom or dad?

Or the thousands of children abandoned by both their mom's and dad's and waiting for some surrogate to adopt them?

Or the child who is conceived through invitro with a sperm donation, because the husband became infertile after being shot in Iraq- tell those parents that they are abusing their child.

You Fascists want to tell every parent in America exactly how they are allowed to raise their children- and are pissed off that you can't do it.

 

[Syriusly]

The entire thread premise is moot because all humans have a specific singular mother and a specific singular father.
Left wing agitators and fascists want to force alternatives to those two specific people raising the children they create. An absolute violation of the natural right of a human to be raised by its actual parents.

Who wants to force alternatives on anyone raising the children they create?? If a man & woman create a child, they raise it. It is simple, and not part of this discussion. What IS being discussed is people who, while they are the same gender, wish to raise a child that someone else refused to raise.

Gay couples who adopt are taking children that straight couples created and then threw away. And they also adopt a higher percentage of children is medical and mental issues. Again, that straight couples threw away.

Refusing to raise a child you create is a violation of the natural right of that human to be raised by his actual parents.
You just posts the typical logic-challenged lefty response.

Natural rights? Lmao!! Are you really going to use the parenting attributes of animals here? Plenty of animals abandon their young. Plenty of males kill the young of other males. And in many species, the female has no choice in the mating.

Like it or not, there are still very innate traits when it comes to humans. Lefties try to obfuscate that reality to fit their fascist agendas.

There are innate traits that humans have.

Conservo Fascists like you try to make them illegal when you disagree with them.

 

[Syriusly]

We are talking about sexuality, not love.

What is there of value in homosexuality in the grand scheme of things?

Same sex marriage serves the same purpose that traditional marriages serve.

No it doesn't.

Oh? What function does marriage serve that gay marriage does not? And please spare us the "having children" line. The marriage has nothing to do with that.

The whole reason why governments got into the marriage business was to create and foster stable families for children to be raised in, which in turn would create more stable families and well adjusted citizens.

Spare me your ignorance.

Except of course- the government didn't actually do any of that.

Your ignorance is inexcusable.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

We are talking about sexuality, not love.

What is there of value in homosexuality in the grand scheme of things?

Same sex marriage serves the same purpose that traditional marriages serve.

No it doesn't.

Oh? What function does marriage serve that gay marriage does not? And please spare us the "having children" line. The marriage has nothing to do with that.

The whole reason why governments got into the marriage business was to create and foster stable families for children to be raised in, which in turn would create more stable families and well adjusted citizens.

Spare me your ignorance.

Well, since 50% of marriages end in divorce, the plan failed miserably.

And same sex marriages also create stable families, raise stable & well adjusted kids. So yes, it does accomplish the same thing.

Yes, so why do you think it failed miserably?

And no...no it doesn't the most stable citizens had both a Father and a Mother...look into successful people's backgrounds sometime and you'll have not a thing to say in response. Fags create faggotry. And that's all they do.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

We are talking about sexuality, not love.

What is there of value in homosexuality in the grand scheme of things?

Same sex marriage serves the same purpose that traditional marriages serve.

No it doesn't.

Oh? What function does marriage serve that gay marriage does not? And please spare us the "having children" line. The marriage has nothing to do with that.

The whole reason why governments got into the marriage business was to create and foster stable families for children to be raised in, which in turn would create more stable families and well adjusted citizens.

Spare me your ignorance.

Except of course- the government didn't actually do any of that.

Your ignorance is inexcusable.

Prove it.

 

[Syriusly]

Same sex marriage serves the same purpose that traditional marriages serve.

No it doesn't.

Oh? What function does marriage serve that gay marriage does not? And please spare us the "having children" line. The marriage has nothing to do with that.

The whole reason why governments got into the marriage business was to create and foster stable families for children to be raised in, which in turn would create more stable families and well adjusted citizens.

Spare me your ignorance.

Except of course- the government didn't actually do any of that.

Your ignorance is inexcusable.

Prove it.

You made the claim- you prove it.

But what I can do is prove that marriage is not based upon creating foster stable families for children.

Wisconsin State law provides that certain couples can only get married to each other if they prove to the state that they are unable to procreate.

 

[Syriusly]

Same sex marriage serves the same purpose that traditional marriages serve.

No it doesn't.

Oh? What function does marriage serve that gay marriage does not? And please spare us the "having children" line. The marriage has nothing to do with that.

The whole reason why governments got into the marriage business was to create and foster stable families for children to be raised in, which in turn would create more stable families and well adjusted citizens.

Spare me your ignorance.

Well, since 50% of marriages end in divorce, the plan failed miserably.

And same sex marriages also create stable families, raise stable & well adjusted kids. So yes, it does accomplish the same thing.

Yes, so why do you think it failed miserably?

And no...no it doesn't the most stable citizens had both a Father and a Mother...look into successful people's backgrounds sometime and you'll have not a thing to say in response. Fags create faggotry. And that's all they do.

LOL- 'f*gs'- (I presume you call African Americans n*ggers too) were created almost exclusively by heterosexuals.

Millions of Americans have been raised by a single mother or father, or by their grandparents- and done well- frankly you are just slandering every good single mother and father out there- besides of course of your just plain bigotry towards homosexuals.

 

[Skylar]

You believe that gays are soooooo fantastic that they can manipulate large national polls, put on by actual trained statisticians....

But were inept to manipulate your silly faux poll here at USMB that would allow anyone to sign onto USMB with a new ID and vote multiple times?

What a maroon.

What possible condition of the human mind could exist where at once it could feel a child having both a mother and father is important; while at the same time supporting a lifelong contract where a child is deprived of either a mother or father ("gay marriage")? What is the bridge for that paradox? You still haven't said. And so far the number who have felt it's important for a child to have both is running 90%.

90%!

Your straw poll never so much as mentions same sex marriage. Or any type of marriage. You've hallucinated it.

And no business is going to take your mental illness as 'information' when deciding its policies.

 

[Skylar]

So you would take kids away from single parents?

No because they aren't bound that way by contract and their situation can still be remedied. Gay marriage binds children away from either a mother or father for life via contract. You're getting better...practice some more!

Those children do not count b/c you can't use them to smear queers. Spare us all your self-serving exemption.

Laughing....shocker! Silly exempts herself from her own imaginary, made up pseudo-legal gibberish

I'm sure no one saw that coming.

Thankfully, none of the thumbsucking Sil does on this topic has the slightest relevance to anyone's marriage, any law, or the policies of any the businesses she's cited.

 

[Silhouette]

LOL- 'f*gs'- (I presume you call African Americans n*ggers too) were created almost exclusively by heterosexuals.

Millions of Americans have been raised by a single mother or father, or by their grandparents- and done well- frankly you are just slandering every good single mother and father out there- besides of course of your just plain bigotry towards homosexuals.

Yet 90% of people believe it's important for children to have both a mother and father. Whereas everyone hopes a single parent will find the missing mother or father, everyone understands that "gay marriage" can never, ever, provide both, as a matter of binding contract....for the child's entire life.

So, businesses pay attention. Know your consumer's actual mind.

 

[Skylar]

LOL- 'f*gs'- (I presume you call African Americans n*ggers too) were created almost exclusively by heterosexuals.

Millions of Americans have been raised by a single mother or father, or by their grandparents- and done well- frankly you are just slandering every good single mother and father out there- besides of course of your just plain bigotry towards homosexuals.

Yet 90% of people believe it's important for children to have both a mother and father. Whereas everyone hopes a single parent will find the missing mother or father, everyone understands that "gay marriage" can never, ever, provide both, as a matter of binding contract....for the child's entire life.

So, businesses pay attention. Know your consumer's actual mind.

Business certainly will pay attention.....to this:

As Gallup actually asked about same sex marriage. And they're reputable.

No one really cares what sad, silly lies you tell yourself it yet another thumbsucker thread. Get used to the idea.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The entire thread premise is moot because all humans have a specific singular mother and a specific singular father.
Left wing agitators and fascists want to force alternatives to those two specific people raising the children they create. An absolute violation of the natural right of a human to be raised by its actual parents.

Who wants to force alternatives on anyone raising the children they create?? If a man & woman create a child, they raise it. It is simple, and not part of this discussion. What IS being discussed is people who, while they are the same gender, wish to raise a child that someone else refused to raise.

Gay couples who adopt are taking children that straight couples created and then threw away. And they also adopt a higher percentage of children is medical and mental issues. Again, that straight couples threw away.

Refusing to raise a child you create is a violation of the natural right of that human to be raised by his actual parents.
You just posts the typical logic-challenged lefty response.

Natural rights? Lmao!! Are you really going to use the parenting attributes of animals here? Plenty of animals abandon their young. Plenty of males kill the young of other males. And in many species, the female has no choice in the mating.

Like it or not, there are still very innate traits when it comes to humans. Lefties try to obfuscate that reality to fit their fascist agendas.

LOL! Spare me the "Lefties" nonsense. What you are using as a reason to not allow gays to marry is a fairytale.

I am discussing reality. And in that reality, straight couples create children and then abandon them. Some are adopted by gay couples.

Lefties is accurate. And you're doing the lefty anecdotal dance in order to wag the dog of normalcy. The George Burns routine. George Burns smoked cigars daily and lived to 100. Using your lefty anecdotal (lack of) logic, that means smoking is good for you.