A Warning from Canada: Same-Sex Marriage Erodes Fundamental Rights

[PaintMyHouse]

Sorry Keys, you've passed the Bripiss test, which means you're a complete moron.

Well now THAT is BRILLIANT... one can't help but to admire the detail inherent in that profound analysis...

Once again, Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

The company you keep..,

 

[Jarlaxle]

WHERE_R_MY_KEYS SAID:

“You cannot make factual statements about homosexuality.”

One can make factual statements about the law, however.

It is a fact of Constitutional law that gay Americans enjoy the protected liberty of choice, the right to due process of law, and to equal protection of the law – including the right to access marriage law they're eligible to participate in.

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

No matter how many times you repeat that, it is STILL WRONG!

LOL!

NOOooo sweetheart...

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Factually incorrect.

Always has been, always will be.

Out and out lie.

Because that's the way Nature designed humanity.

Out and out lie.

All you are is an expression of evil, in a temporal rising of evil. History is clear on this... Evil rises and God SLAPS it down.

Random word salad meaning nothing.

Weak, boy, even by your standards.

 

[Political Junky]

That woman should move to a country that doesn't allow same sex marriage, maybe Iran.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Factually incorrect.

LOL!...

Yet another deluded individual coming to simply declare the otherwise irrefutable: FALSE!

And just look at how pitiful these little contests are construed... with such being entirely relegated to the heady level common to the 'Nuh HUH!' defense.

Again... the reason that these creatures must turn to abuse of the justice system to force their 'would-be views' on others, is that they've no other means to set those views into public policy.

And this is because those ideas are based in, constructed of and entirely coated by DECEIT!

Meaning that their entire point of view... is A LIE. From Soup to Socialism.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

That woman should move to a country that doesn't allow same sex marriage, maybe Iran.

LOL! So... to contest the argument that the Ideological Left is wholly intolerant of differing ideas... this particular Leftist chooses to bring profound INTOLERANCE!

Oh... now THAT is brilliant!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Factually incorrect.

LOL!...

Yet another deluded individual coming to simply declare the otherwise irrefutable: FALSE!

And just look at how pitiful these little contests are construed... with such being entirely relegated to the heady level common to the 'Nuh HUH!' defense.

Again... the reason that these creatures must turn to abuse of the justice system to force their 'would-be views' on others, is that they've no other means to set those views into public policy.

And this is because those ideas are based in, constructed of and entirely coated by DECEIT!

Meaning that their entire point of view... is A LIE. From Soup to Socialism.

Gay marriage is popular. What a shame for you.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Oh, you've definitely ignored nature as defining 'natural law'. You've ignored infanticide, you've ignored the predation of the sick or old, you've ignored homosexual behavior in nature.

Did I?

(ROFLMNAO

Reader I told you she'd need to pretend the argument didn't exist...

LOL! I say it HERE and it come out THERE.)

Let's review:

#335

... Infacide exists in nature. Homosexual behavior exists in nature. The predation of the sick, the old, the young exists in nature.

Yes... all those things exist in nature and are all common to the lower species.

Now, within the scope of Humanity, let's examine these lower traits and see if we can find any kinship, by taking them one at a time:

1- Infanticide: In humanity we refer to that as "The Right to Choose".

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess claims a "RIGHT" to murder the pre-born human life?

And which states that "All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with rights SO CERTAIN that such are inseparable from one's being, thus contests the notion that such a right is even possible?

What's next? Let's see... OH YES!

2 - Homosexuality...

Hmm... This seems rather obvious, but formalities require we ask: Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes Homosexuality, despite such being a presentation of Mental Disorder?

And finally:

3 - The predation of the sick, the old, the young.

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes the notion that only the viable are worthy of care, as demonstrated by the routine malfeasance of that OKA: Socialized Medicine?

Which promotes the abuse of programs established to care for the aged, by introducing greater and more egregious authorizations for subsidies to those who must apply through ever declining standards, inherently exhausting the resources of those programs?

Which undermines the standards regarding publicly acceptable thresholds regarding sexual intercourse, rejecting all sense of moral authority relevant to the responsible participation in such, until such time that the parents are living in a committed relationship, in which they intend to raise and care for their YOUNG?

And which recently passed, through illicit means, a series of laws which have now cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE, by economic policy which pushed the cost of such beyond their means to sustain such policies?

In my specific case, my health insurance premium is over $700/mo... with deductibles and co-pays that cost another $5000, which for the Asians in the group, is $13,400 EVERY FUCKING YEAR! Whether I get sick or NOT.

Now, before Healthcare was fixed, my premium was less than $400 month and co-pay and deductibles were less than $2000. Which I felt was outrageous, before I learned otherwise.

Now... of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promoted THAT BOONDOGGLE MESS that serves a predation upon the young, the sick and the aged?

Don't feel like you need to admit it... as everyone that read it, knew the answer as they were reading it, including YOU... .

(Reader, now... understand, Skylar will now pretend that this argument never happened.

That said, of the two competing sets of ideas and values, which do you find reflects the higher purpose of humanity and which more closely reflects the lower, sub-standard of humanity, OKA: Sub-humanity ?)

Obviously you did.

(Reader... just open the above discussion and note the GIANT RED POINTS IN WHICH I SPOKE IN SPECIFIC AND DETAILED TERMS to that which Skylars deluded perspective requires DID NOT HAPPEN.

She's literally and truly delusional... which is to say Skylar is suffering an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

This disorder also presents in some people through Sexual Deviancy... .

And in this you can see the potential for catastrophe in allowing this sort of person to get anywhere near power.

Hillary Clinton is such a person... Bill Clinton is such a person. The Brown Clown, is such a person. Bawney Fwank, the architect of the collapse of the International Financial Markets, is such a person and so on... the list is extensive.

These people are NOT capable of sound reason, they have no means to consider it... at all.

And that is why when they're tolerated and allowed to ascend to power, in terms of official power or that which influences populism... they inevitably usurp the means of innocent people to exercise their God-given rights.

Understand, on her best day, Skylar and 10,000 of her besties could not hope to prevail in any debate when an American, such as myself... is present.

As a result, under such circumstances they have absolutely no hope of getting their subjective needs and desires set into public policy.

So their alternative is purely to shut out the means of Americans to speak to their particular kink. And THAT is the threat to which the Author in the OP is speaking and, it is a very real threat indeed.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Oh, you've definitely ignored nature as defining 'natural law'. You've ignored infanticide, you've ignored the predation of the sick or old, you've ignored homosexual behavior in nature.

Did I?

(ROFLMNAO

Reader I told you she'd need to pretend the argument didn't exist...

LOL! I say it HERE and it come out THERE.)

Let's review:

#335

... Infacide exists in nature. Homosexual behavior exists in nature. The predation of the sick, the old, the young exists in nature.

Yes... all those things exist in nature and are all common to the lower species.

Now, within the scope of Humanity, let's examine these lower traits and see if we can find any kinship, by taking them one at a time:

1- Infanticide: In humanity we refer to that as "The Right to Choose".

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess claims a "RIGHT" to murder the pre-born human life?

And which states that "All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with rights SO CERTAIN that such are inseparable from one's being, thus contests the notion that such a right is even possible?

What's next? Let's see... OH YES!

2 - Homosexuality...

Hmm... This seems rather obvious, but formalities require we ask: Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes Homosexuality, despite such being a presentation of Mental Disorder?

And finally:

3 - The predation of the sick, the old, the young.

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes the notion that only the viable are worthy of care, as demonstrated by the routine malfeasance of that OKA: Socialized Medicine?

Which promotes the abuse of programs established to care for the aged, by introducing greater and more egregious authorizations for subsidies to those who must apply through ever declining standards, inherently exhausting the resources of those programs?

Which undermines the standards regarding publicly acceptable thresholds regarding sexual intercourse, rejecting all sense of moral authority relevant to the responsible participation in such, until such time that the parents are living in a committed relationship, in which they intend to raise and care for their YOUNG?

And which recently passed, through illicit means, a series of laws which have now cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE, by economic policy which pushed the cost of such beyond their means to sustain such policies?

In my specific case, my health insurance premium is over $700/mo... with deductibles and co-pays that cost another $5000, which for the Asians in the group, is $13,400 EVERY FUCKING YEAR! Whether I get sick or NOT.

Now, before Healthcare was fixed, my premium was less than $400 month and co-pay and deductibles were less than $2000. Which I felt was outrageous, before I learned otherwise.

Now... of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promoted THAT BOONDOGGLE MESS that serves a predation upon the young, the sick and the aged?

Don't feel like you need to admit it... as everyone that read it, knew the answer as they were reading it, including YOU... .

(Reader, now... understand, Skylar will now pretend that this argument never happened.

That said, of the two competing sets of ideas and values, which do you find reflects the higher purpose of humanity and which more closely reflects the lower, sub-standard of humanity, OKA: Sub-humanity ?)

Obviously you did.

(Reader... just open the above discussion and note the GIANT RED POINTS IN WHICH I SPOKE IN SPECIFIC AND DETAILED TERMS to that which Skylars deluded perspective requires DID NOT HAPPEN.

She's literally and truly delusional... which is to say Skylar is suffering an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

This disorder also presents in some people through Sexual Deviancy... .

And in this you can see the potential for catastrophe in allowing this sort of person to get anywhere near power.

Hillary Clinton is such a person... Bill Clinton is such a person. The Brown Clown, is such a person. Bawney Fwank, the architect of the collapse of the International Financial Markets, is such a person and so on... the list is extensive.

These people are NOT capable of sound reason, they have no means to consider it... at all.

And that is why when they're tolerated and allowed to ascend to power, in terms of official power or that which influences populism... they inevitably usurp the means of innocent people to exercise their God-given rights.

Understand, on her best day, Skylar and 10,000 of her besties could not hope to prevail in any debate when an American, such as myself... is present.

As a result, under such circumstances they have absolutely no hope of getting their subjective needs and desires set into public policy.

So their alternative is purely to shut out the means of Americans to speak to their particular kink. And THAT is the threat to which the Author in the OP is speaking and, it is a very real threat indeed.

Talk it up, dumbass.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What government statute has criminalized the use of 13 words about Hillary Clinton?

Oh!

Now aren't you the sharp little bowling ball... LOOK AT YOU GO GILLIGAN!

There you are suffering the inability to rise above the heady complexities of 'cause and effect'. Oh how those two element equations baffle you.

Here's the thing... the 13 forbidden words are forbidden by the Liberal Candidate for the CHIEF Law Enforcement Officer of the US.

The Claim of your Cult, thus of you be extension, is that "Liberals defend Free Speech"... which is to say that your entire argument here, is that because the US has a constitution which protects free speech and Canada being communist 'NEVER HAD FREE SPEECH...' (I think that was you, wasn't it?) and because Liberals DEFEND FREE SPEECH... that it was unreasonable to project that what happened in communist Canukistan, CAN NEVER HAPPEN HERE!

All I did was to offer a few irrefutable examples of US liberals, undermining the right to speak freely, through the illicit use of this communist Canadian notion of "HATE-SPEECH" and in so doing, I demonstrated that such was not only common among the rabble of the common comrade-liberal... but that such was being LEAD BY COMRADE CLINTON herself! The air-head apparent to the thrown of the Peasantpimpery.

Ya see Gilligan, that's the cause... the Effect are the laws, which have yet to come, but which the author of the article in the OP, makes us aware that have come to pass in communist Canada.

I know it's a horrifically complex thing to ask a person like you to understand, but you are the one that got you here, so... it's sorta your job to understand, not my job to teach you, by having to break everything down into the niblets that you can digest.

So try to bring it up a whole bunch of notches, OK??

(Reader, Gilligan will now be taking some time off, as it must now become FASCINATED with anything else, having had it's ass handed to it, once again. Not to worry tho', once this page is set well back from the current, it will be back to pretend that this never happened.

Maybe when you see it again, you can ask it why it failed to respond... and rest assured, it will have little interest in any such discussion.)

Translation: "None, and I will now post a wall of text trying to distract."

 

[Jarlaxle]

I once had Keys ignore me for a week because I wouldn't accept his personal faith in God as objective evidence. With Keys insisting that since God defines faith, his faith must be objective.

It was like watching a dog chase its own tail.

Strikes me more as a crazy little guy running around with a pair of Depends on his head while squeaking, "the end is coming!"

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What government statute has criminalized the use of 13 words about Hillary Clinton?

Oh!

Now aren't you the sharp little bowling ball... LOOK AT YOU GO GILLIGAN!

There you are suffering the inability to rise above the heady complexities of 'cause and effect'. Oh how those two element equations baffle you.

Here's the thing... the 13 forbidden words are forbidden by the Liberal Candidate for the CHIEF Law Enforcement Officer of the US.

The Claim of your Cult, thus of you be extension, is that "Liberals defend Free Speech"... which is to say that your entire argument here, is that because the US has a constitution which protects free speech and Canada being communist 'NEVER HAD FREE SPEECH...' (I think that was you, wasn't it?) and because Liberals DEFEND FREE SPEECH... that it was unreasonable to project that what happened in communist Canukistan, CAN NEVER HAPPEN HERE!

All I did was to offer a few irrefutable examples of US liberals, undermining the right to speak freely, through the illicit use of this communist Canadian notion of "HATE-SPEECH" and in so doing, I demonstrated that such was not only common among the rabble of the common comrade-liberal... but that such was being LEAD BY COMRADE CLINTON herself! The air-head apparent to the thrown of the Peasantpimpery.

Ya see Gilligan, that's the cause... the Effect are the laws, which have yet to come, but which the author of the article in the OP, makes us aware that have come to pass in communist Canada.

I know it's a horrifically complex thing to ask a person like you to understand, but you are the one that got you here, so... it's sorta your job to understand, not my job to teach you, by having to break everything down into the niblets that you can digest.

So try to bring it up a whole bunch of notches, OK??

(Reader, Gilligan will now be taking some time off, as it must now become FASCINATED with anything else, having had it's ass handed to it, once again. Not to worry tho', once this page is set well back from the current, it will be back to pretend that this never happened.

Maybe when you see it again, you can ask it why it failed to respond... and rest assured, it will have little interest in any such discussion.)

Translation: "None, and I will now post a wall of text trying to distract."

Well... as concessions go, that is a beautiful example?

What could concede better than a lament of the courtesy of a seriously considered response, set in detailed analysis of the points at issue?

'that said... Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Keys ignores nature and says adopted children aren't loved. Maybe he didn't love his adopted child but children know when they are loved and BOTH of my parents loved me as if I were their own, which of course I am.

The author of the book in the original post complained of the secrets and her father's shame and the effect it had on their lives.

The one thing I have noticed about my gay friends since they have achieved full legal rights in Canada is they are more relaxed, less fearful of being outed, of losing their jobs or their homes if anyone found out.

That can only be better not only for gays but for their children as well.

I suspect thay Keys is, entirely, INCAPABLE of love...at least, for anyone but himself.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Oh, you've definitely ignored nature as defining 'natural law'. You've ignored infanticide, you've ignored the predation of the sick or old, you've ignored homosexual behavior in nature.

Did I?

(ROFLMNAO

Reader I told you she'd need to pretend the argument didn't exist...

LOL! I say it HERE and it come out THERE.)

Let's review:

#335

... Infacide exists in nature. Homosexual behavior exists in nature. The predation of the sick, the old, the young exists in nature.

Yes... all those things exist in nature and are all common to the lower species.

Now, within the scope of Humanity, let's examine these lower traits and see if we can find any kinship, by taking them one at a time:

1- Infanticide: In humanity we refer to that as "The Right to Choose".

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess claims a "RIGHT" to murder the pre-born human life?

And which states that "All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with rights SO CERTAIN that such are inseparable from one's being, thus contests the notion that such a right is even possible?

What's next? Let's see... OH YES!

2 - Homosexuality...

Hmm... This seems rather obvious, but formalities require we ask: Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes Homosexuality, despite such being a presentation of Mental Disorder?

And finally:

3 - The predation of the sick, the old, the young.

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes the notion that only the viable are worthy of care, as demonstrated by the routine malfeasance of that OKA: Socialized Medicine?

Which promotes the abuse of programs established to care for the aged, by introducing greater and more egregious authorizations for subsidies to those who must apply through ever declining standards, inherently exhausting the resources of those programs?

Which undermines the standards regarding publicly acceptable thresholds regarding sexual intercourse, rejecting all sense of moral authority relevant to the responsible participation in such, until such time that the parents are living in a committed relationship, in which they intend to raise and care for their YOUNG?

And which recently passed, through illicit means, a series of laws which have now cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE, by economic policy which pushed the cost of such beyond their means to sustain such policies?

In my specific case, my health insurance premium is over $700/mo... with deductibles and co-pays that cost another $5000, which for the Asians in the group, is $13,400 EVERY FUCKING YEAR! Whether I get sick or NOT.

Now, before Healthcare was fixed, my premium was less than $400 month and co-pay and deductibles were less than $2000. Which I felt was outrageous, before I learned otherwise.

Now... of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promoted THAT BOONDOGGLE MESS that serves a predation upon the young, the sick and the aged?

Don't feel like you need to admit it... as everyone that read it, knew the answer as they were reading it, including YOU... .

(Reader, now... understand, Skylar will now pretend that this argument never happened.

That said, of the two competing sets of ideas and values, which do you find reflects the higher purpose of humanity and which more closely reflects the lower, sub-standard of humanity, OKA: Sub-humanity ?)

Obviously you did.

(Reader... just open the above discussion and note the GIANT RED POINTS IN WHICH I SPOKE IN SPECIFIC AND DETAILED TERMS to that which Skylars deluded perspective requires DID NOT HAPPEN.

She's literally and truly delusional... which is to say Skylar is suffering an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

This disorder also presents in some people through Sexual Deviancy... .

And in this you can see the potential for catastrophe in allowing this sort of person to get anywhere near power.

Hillary Clinton is such a person... Bill Clinton is such a person. The Brown Clown, is such a person. Bawney Fwank, the architect of the collapse of the International Financial Markets, is such a person and so on... the list is extensive.

These people are NOT capable of sound reason, they have no means to consider it... at all.

And that is why when they're tolerated and allowed to ascend to power, in terms of official power or that which influences populism... they inevitably usurp the means of innocent people to exercise their God-given rights.

Understand, on her best day, Skylar and 10,000 of her besties could not hope to prevail in any debate when an American, such as myself... is present.

As a result, under such circumstances they have absolutely no hope of getting their subjective needs and desires set into public policy.

So their alternative is purely to shut out the means of Americans to speak to their particular kink. And THAT is the threat to which the Author in the OP is speaking and, it is a very real threat indeed.

Talk it up, dumbass.

Well thank you... I will take you up on that...

Reader for your consideration I am going to repost the points to which the above creature is responding.

Enjoy:

Oh, you've definitely ignored nature as defining 'natural law'. You've ignored infanticide, you've ignored the predation of the sick or old, you've ignored homosexual behavior in nature.

Did I?

(ROFLMNAO

Reader I told you she'd need to pretend the argument didn't exist...

LOL! I say it HERE and it come out THERE.)

Let's review:

#335

... Infacide exists in nature. Homosexual behavior exists in nature. The predation of the sick, the old, the young exists in nature.

Yes... all those things exist in nature and are all common to the lower species.

Now, within the scope of Humanity, let's examine these lower traits and see if we can find any kinship, by taking them one at a time:

1- Infanticide: In humanity we refer to that as "The Right to Choose".

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess claims a "RIGHT" to murder the pre-born human life?

And which states that "All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with rights SO CERTAIN that such are inseparable from one's being, thus contests the notion that such a right is even possible?

What's next? Let's see... OH YES!

2 - Homosexuality...

Hmm... This seems rather obvious, but formalities require we ask: Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes Homosexuality, despite such being a presentation of Mental Disorder?

And finally:

3 - The predation of the sick, the old, the young.

Now of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promotes the notion that only the viable are worthy of care, as demonstrated by the routine malfeasance of that OKA: Socialized Medicine?

Which promotes the abuse of programs established to care for the aged, by introducing greater and more egregious authorizations for subsidies to those who must apply through ever declining standards, inherently exhausting the resources of those programs?

Which undermines the standards regarding publicly acceptable thresholds regarding sexual intercourse, rejecting all sense of moral authority relevant to the responsible participation in such, until such time that the parents are living in a committed relationship, in which they intend to raise and care for their YOUNG?

And which recently passed, through illicit means, a series of laws which have now cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE, by economic policy which pushed the cost of such beyond their means to sustain such policies?

In my specific case, my health insurance premium is over $700/mo... with deductibles and co-pays that cost another $5000, which for the Asians in the group, is $13,400 EVERY FUCKING YEAR! Whether I get sick or NOT.

Now, before Healthcare was fixed, my premium was less than $400 month and co-pay and deductibles were less than $2000. Which I felt was outrageous, before I learned otherwise.

Now... of the competition between the Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which would you guess promoted THAT BOONDOGGLE MESS that serves a predation upon the young, the sick and the aged?

Don't feel like you need to admit it... as everyone that read it, knew the answer as they were reading it, including YOU... .

(Reader, now... understand, Skylar will now pretend that this argument never happened.

That said, of the two competing sets of ideas and values, which do you find reflects the higher purpose of humanity and which more closely reflects the lower, sub-standard of humanity, OKA: Sub-humanity ?)

Obviously you did.

(Reader... just open the above discussion and note the GIANT RED POINTS IN WHICH I SPOKE IN SPECIFIC AND DETAILED TERMS to that which Skylars deluded perspective requires DID NOT HAPPEN.

She's literally and truly delusional... which is to say Skylar is suffering an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

This disorder also presents in some people through Sexual Deviancy... .

And in this you can see the potential for catastrophe in allowing this sort of person to get anywhere near power.

Hillary Clinton is such a person... Bill Clinton is such a person. The Brown Clown, is such a person. Bawney Fwank, the architect of the collapse of the International Financial Markets, is such a person and so on... the list is extensive.

These people are NOT capable of sound reason, they have no means to consider it... at all.

And that is why when they're tolerated and allowed to ascend to power, in terms of official power or that which influences populism... they inevitably usurp the means of innocent people to exercise their God-given rights.

Understand, on her best day, Skylar and 10,000 of her besties could not hope to prevail in any debate when an American, such as myself... is present.

As a result, under such circumstances they have absolutely no hope of getting their subjective needs and desires set into public policy.

So their alternative is purely to shut out the means of Americans to speak to their particular kink. And THAT is the threat to which the Author in the OP is speaking and, it is a very real threat indeed.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Factually incorrect.

LOL!...

Yet another deluded individual coming to simply declare the otherwise irrefutable: FALSE!

And just look at how pitiful these little contests are construed... with such being entirely relegated to the heady level common to the 'Nuh HUH!' defense.

Again... the reason that these creatures must turn to abuse of the justice system to force their 'would-be views' on others, is that they've no other means to set those views into public policy.

And this is because those ideas are based in, constructed of and entirely coated by DECEIT!

Meaning that their entire point of view... is A LIE. From Soup to Socialism.

Translation: "I concede."

 

[Lilah]

So what? Have those rights and freedoms expanded or retracted as a result of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality?

Which simply asks: Can one speak more freely because Homosexuals are finding power Gilligan, or has the things a person can say more limited?

Show where the U.S. government has limited such free speech...

Repeating this with the hope that where_is_my_brain will respond this time ...

Should we break out the ... oh my... How can I say this without being accused of Racism? You know... ( the 'N-Word') ?

Maybe we should take a gander at the only Democrat whose expressed her intention to run for Peasantpimp, regarding "The 13 words you can’t write about Hillary Clinton anymore..."

Do we need to discuss what can and cannot be asked when interviewing individuals for jobs?

Or what Bakers and Photographers can't say when they're taking orders for their services?

That's not how it works. Sex is not solely a reproductive function in humans. It is unnatural to believe it is.

Hammers are not solely used for pounding inanimate objects... that doesn't make such use sound, or morally justified, dumbass.

Oh, I see. Now you want to throw your longtime pal Nature under the bus and shift to man's concoctions of morality as the arbiter of right and wrong.

lol, good one.

Nature defines morality Gilligan, man merely observes the law set by nature.

Your attempt to make the observation into a concoction is simply you trying to reject the law, by claiming man doesn't have the authority.

I truth, the law is what it is... and you either respect it and prosper as a consequence or reject and suffer as a consequence.

For instance... one can be 'gay'; which is to say merry, festive and sportive... as a consequence of one's pursuit of legitimate endeavors, or one can DEMAND THAT THEY'RE "GAY", because words which accurately describe one's endeavors tend to identify one is illegitimate.

See how that works?

The Former produces the consequence of being happy... while the latter produces unenviable consequences forcing one to PRETEND that they're happy and using illicit measures to mislead others into falsely 'believing' that one is happy; which brings more unenviable consequences... but we do not need to dig all the way through the puss to see the presence of such.

What do you suggest be done with those darn gay penguins? And for that matter, all the other gay animals?

He has already conceded that humans are vastly different from the other species.

Gay is gay!

 

[Lilah]

What do you suggest be done with those darn gay penguins? And for that matter, all the other gay animals?

OH LILAH... You haven't heard?

Nature has already decided that for those poor little boogers... They've been dealt out of the gene-pool.

But hey... it's literally, for the best, of which they're not a part.

Of what gene pool are you referring?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What do you suggest be done with those darn gay penguins? And for that matter, all the other gay animals?

OH LILAH... You haven't heard?

Nature has already decided that for those poor little boogers... They've been dealt out of the gene-pool.

But hey... it's literally, for the best, of which they're not a part.

Of what gene pool are you referring?

The imaginary one, in his tiny mind.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"A Warning from Canada: Same-Sex Marriage Erodes Fundamental Rights"

Actually it's a false comparison fallacy, and the thread fails accordingly, exhibiting the ignorance and stupidity of the OP.

The United States is a Constitutional Republic, Canada, not; hate speech cannot be made 'illegal' in the United States because that would be un-Constitutional. Consequently, obeying the 14th Amendment by allowing same-sex couples access to marriage law they're eligible to participate in would in no way 'erode' any fundamental rights in this country.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Guess Keys needed to look up how to spell yes...

 

[Faun]

"A Warning from Canada: Same-Sex Marriage Erodes Fundamental Rights"

Actually it's a false comparison fallacy, and the thread fails accordingly, exhibiting the ignorance and stupidity of the OP.

The United States is a Constitutional Republic, Canada, not; hate speech cannot be made 'illegal' in the United States because that would be un-Constitutional. Consequently, obeying the 14th Amendment by allowing same-sex couples access to marriage law they're eligible to participate in would in no way 'erode' any fundamental rights in this country.

Bingo!