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

[Skylar]

There is no such thing as "Gay Rights".

Homosexual rights are limited to the same rights as everyone else.

What the militancy of the homo-cult will lead to, is the eradication of the homosexual.

In my personal experience with homosexuals, they've been courteous, decent people who reject the notion that they are suitable for marriage. And they resent to the core of their being, the radical mouthy nonsense common to the cult on this and most other message boards.

Well Gilligan, when Jesus does return, you're not going to care much for how that works out for you... given that everything you think you know about Christ, defines him as a door mat, who forgives everyone for everything.

That wasn't who he was, nor was it why he came to earth. He died for your sins... to give you a chance to avoid the consequences for those sins. You've passed on that offer. And at that Gilligan, is a very bad place to be.

Jesus died for whatever sins homosexuals may have committed as well.

Yep... and all they need to get the benefit of that good news, is to recognize what he did, thank him for it, accept him as their lord and savior... and repent from that sin.

Or forfeit the gift by their failure to do so.

I don't recall any evidence that Christ believed same sex marriage was a sin.

The dictionary wins every time.

Yes... it does and that winning streak is NEVER more consistent than where the individual using it, understands what the dictionary is saying.

To wit:

Says you. The dictionary says otherwise:

LOL!

You're speaking colloquially.

COLLOQUIALISM: a word or phrase that is not formal or literary; not literal; suitable for informal, familiar conversation.

You see, there is no evidence that anyone is afraid is homosexuals... contesting the normalization of such, is not evidence of fear, only the recognition of the unsustainable nature of such.

Now, FWIW: the same holds true for "Gay". Which refers to a happy, festive, carefree attitude. Until such was hijacked by the Homo-cult, it had no relevance to such.

The purpose of the hijacking was a marketing ploy,as a means to misrepresent the homo-cult as something other that what it is.

The use of such is a Deceit, FRAUDULENTLY advanced as a means to influence the Ignorant.

That the Dictionary states: "gay" is:

1 (of a person, especially a man) homosexual. It lists this sense the primary colloquial meaning of the word, that in no way alters the fact that the etymology of the word has absolutely no association with homosexuals.

The historical etymological definition is listed as the second sense... in the same dictionary.
2 lighthearted and carefree:

Now... proving that Nature has a brilliant sense of humor and that ignoring its law is futile, the nature of the homosexual is coming on strong, in the third defined sense of the word:

#3 Gay: offensively foolish, stupid, or unimpressive.

And you GOTTA LOVE THAT!

And with that... your final concession of the night is duly noted and summarily accepted.

If you have nothing to fear from homosexuals, then you have no legitimate reason to deny them equal rights in a democratic society.

I have no fear of homosexuals.

Uh-huh.

The problem becomes exponentially worse when the culture normalizes sexual abnormality, by removing boundaries, wherein the already deviated minds are provided access to children in their earliest stages of development, who then trigger the same imprint on greater numbers, but this in a culture which encourages the behavior, as a result of the 'normalization', exponentially increasing the deviancy... which by its very nature is the inherent trigger for the species to destroy whatever culture succumbs to such.

Such literally accomplishes what Thermo-nuclear war, could not... the total annihilation of a culture.

Homosexuality is worse than thermo-nuclear war? You're oozing fear of gays in the above statement. Every time you deny it, I just quote you.


I also have no desire to be subjected to the catastrophe that normalizing mental disorder must produce.

So I will contest such, with every fiber of my being.

And being a sexual deviant does not provide you people with any rights beyond anyone else... and no one else has the right to demand their deviant behavior be accepted by others, and that the standards for marriage be removed so that you can feel better about yourselves.

Are we being too mean to him? lolol[/QUOTE]


There's very litle we could do to the poor soul that his irrelevance won't trump. This entire melodrama that Keys has created where he is 'battling evil' and 'fighting for the survival of our civilization' is just elaborate self deception, trying to justify his own hatred as something noble.

In reality, there is no battle. There is no fight. There's just a dude who hates with 'every fiber of his being'. And few if any people who give a shit.

 

[Skylar]

The label of 'colloquial' is irrelevant to the meaning, use or existence of the word you've dismissed as not existing.

ROFLMNAO!

Reader, imagine an irony so sweet that the Relativist simultaneously pleads the infallible sanctity of the dictionary, as it dismisses the relevance of the dictionary.

You CAN NOT MAKE THAT SHIT UP!

COLLOQUIALISM: a word or phrase that is not formal or literary; not literal; suitable for informal, familiar conversation.

You see, there is no evidence that anyone is afraid of homosexuals... contesting the normalization of such, is not evidence of fear, only the recognition of the unsustainable nature of such.

Now, FWIW: the same holds true for "Gay". Which refers to a happy, festive, carefree attitude. Until such was hijacked by the Homo-cult, it had no relevance to such.

The purpose of the hijacking was a marketing ploy,as a means to misrepresent the homo-cult as something other that what it is.

The use of such is a Deceit, FRAUDULENTLY advanced as a means to influence the Ignorant.

That the Dictionary states: "gay" is:

1 (of a person, especially a man) homosexual. It lists this sense the primary colloquial meaning of the word, that in no way alters the fact that the etymology of the word has absolutely no association with homosexuals.

The historical etymological definition is listed as the second sense... in the same dictionary.
2 lighthearted and carefree:

Now... proving that Nature has a brilliant sense of humor and that ignoring its law is futile, the nature of the homosexual is coming on strong, in the third defined sense of the word:

#3 Gay: offensively foolish, stupid, or unimpressive.

And you GOTTA LOVE THAT!

And with that... your final concession of the night is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Sounds like you really want the word, "gay," back.

Ok, you can have it back. From now on, you'll be gaykeys. You know ... as in happy, festive, keys.

Happy? I mean, gay?

I have taken full ownership of "Gay".

I have a t-shirt that I wear regularly that has "GAY!" in big Red, White and Blue Letters on the front.

On the back it has the International Sign for no with a couple of generic 'euro-males' engaged in sodomy on the back.

It gets a TON of attention... which gives me a chance to engage a lot of people face to face to discuss the issue.

Guess which one's threaten to scratch my eyes out?

Keys....you don't seem to get why your'e here. Your purpose on this board is to demonstrate how irrational, how void of logic, how hateful and fearful, how mindlessly hysteric homophobes can be.

That's it.

And you get tons of attention doing this. We funnel people to you to show them how awful the hatred of gays can get. You're a sign post to show us where homophobia leads.

And in that you've succeeded brilliantly.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So-called deviant behavior from which no one need fear harm has every right to exist and be legally accepted in a democratic society.

If there is a right to engage in deviant behavior Gilligan, that right is sustained ONLY through your responsibility to keep it to yourself.

As there is absolutely NO POTENTIAL for a Right to demand that others accept your behavior.

But... the right to live in a viable culture, is sustained by the responsibility to eradicate those who demand such and refuse to accept 'shut the fuck' as an answer.

Guess which one wins that... .

Here's a clue. You represent at the MOST 2% of the population.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

A catastrophe that is not fearful? lol

Fearful of what, Gilligan? A catastrophe? Yes.

What's that have to do with being fearful of a perv?

 

[Skylar]

So-called deviant behavior from which no one need fear harm has every right to exist and be legally accepted in a democratic society.

If there is a right to engage in deviant behavior Gilligan, that right is sustained ONLY through your responsibility to keep it to yourself.

You don't define anyone's rights. Nor do any of your imaginary limits to those rights actually exist. You're functionally irrelevant to this entire process.

As there is absolutely NO POTENTIAL for a Right to demand that others accept your behavior.

Your acceptance isn't required. You've imagined it. No one really cares what you accept and what you don't. Again, your perspective has no real relevance to the lives of any gay people.

But... the right to live in a viable culture, is sustained by the responsibility to eradicate those who demand such and refuse to accept 'shut the fuck' as an answer.

You don't have the right to eradicate anyone. Only the desire to. And your hateful craving to hurt gay people doesn't translate into a right to hurt gays.

Remember, you define no rights.

Guess which one wins that... .

Here's a clue. You represent at the MOST 2% of the population.

Not you. You're simply lying to yourself that 98% of the population wants to 'eradicate gay people' if they don't 'shut the fuck up'. You're projecting.

A solid majority of folks find gays morally acceptable: 58% as of last year. With 60% feeling gays should be able to be married. But these same people want to eradicate gays?

Um, no. Your claims are just illogical, hate filled gibberish.

 

[Faun]

The problem becomes exponentially worse when the culture normalizes sexual abnormality, by removing boundaries, wherein the already deviated minds are provided access to children in their earliest stages of development, who then trigger the same imprint on greater numbers, but this in a culture which encourages the behavior, as a result of the 'normalization', exponentially increasing the deviancy... which by its very nature is the inherent trigger for the species to destroy whatever culture succumbs to such.

Such literally accomplishes what Thermo-nuclear war, could not... the total annihilation of a culture.

Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Can't really tell the fundamental difference between that hatred and this ...

For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.

 

[Faun]

The label of 'colloquial' is irrelevant to the meaning, use or existence of the word you've dismissed as not existing.

ROFLMNAO!

Reader, imagine an irony so sweet that the Relativist simultaneously pleads the infallible sanctity of the dictionary, as it dismisses the relevance of the dictionary.

You CAN NOT MAKE THAT SHIT UP!

COLLOQUIALISM: a word or phrase that is not formal or literary; not literal; suitable for informal, familiar conversation.

You see, there is no evidence that anyone is afraid of homosexuals... contesting the normalization of such, is not evidence of fear, only the recognition of the unsustainable nature of such.

Now, FWIW: the same holds true for "Gay". Which refers to a happy, festive, carefree attitude. Until such was hijacked by the Homo-cult, it had no relevance to such.

The purpose of the hijacking was a marketing ploy,as a means to misrepresent the homo-cult as something other that what it is.

The use of such is a Deceit, FRAUDULENTLY advanced as a means to influence the Ignorant.

That the Dictionary states: "gay" is:

1 (of a person, especially a man) homosexual. It lists this sense the primary colloquial meaning of the word, that in no way alters the fact that the etymology of the word has absolutely no association with homosexuals.

The historical etymological definition is listed as the second sense... in the same dictionary.
2 lighthearted and carefree:

Now... proving that Nature has a brilliant sense of humor and that ignoring its law is futile, the nature of the homosexual is coming on strong, in the third defined sense of the word:

#3 Gay: offensively foolish, stupid, or unimpressive.

And you GOTTA LOVE THAT!

And with that... your final concession of the night is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Sounds like you really want the word, "gay," back.

Ok, you can have it back. From now on, you'll be gaykeys. You know ... as in happy, festive, keys.

Happy? I mean, gay?

I have taken full ownership of "Gay".

I have a t-shirt that I wear regularly that has "GAY!" in big Red, White and Blue Letters on the front.

On the back it has the International Sign for no with a couple of generic 'euro-males' engaged in sodomy on the back.

It gets a TON of attention... which gives me a chance to engage a lot of people face to face to discuss the issue.

Guess which one's threaten to scratch my eyes out?

I'm glad to see you wear it proud. You should, you're as gay as anyone else I've seen on this forum.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The label of 'colloquial' is irrelevant to the meaning, use or existence of the word you've dismissed as not existing.

ROFLMNAO!

Reader, imagine an irony so sweet that the Relativist simultaneously pleads the infallible sanctity of the dictionary, as it dismisses the relevance of the dictionary.

You CAN NOT MAKE THAT SHIT UP!

COLLOQUIALISM: a word or phrase that is not formal or literary; not literal; suitable for informal, familiar conversation.

You see, there is no evidence that anyone is afraid of homosexuals... contesting the normalization of such, is not evidence of fear, only the recognition of the unsustainable nature of such.

Now, FWIW: the same holds true for "Gay". Which refers to a happy, festive, carefree attitude. Until such was hijacked by the Homo-cult, it had no relevance to such.

The purpose of the hijacking was a marketing ploy,as a means to misrepresent the homo-cult as something other that what it is.

The use of such is a Deceit, FRAUDULENTLY advanced as a means to influence the Ignorant.

That the Dictionary states: "gay" is:

1 (of a person, especially a man) homosexual. It lists this sense the primary colloquial meaning of the word, that in no way alters the fact that the etymology of the word has absolutely no association with homosexuals.

The historical etymological definition is listed as the second sense... in the same dictionary.
2 lighthearted and carefree:

Now... proving that Nature has a brilliant sense of humor and that ignoring its law is futile, the nature of the homosexual is coming on strong, in the third defined sense of the word:

#3 Gay: offensively foolish, stupid, or unimpressive.

And you GOTTA LOVE THAT!

And with that... your final concession of the night is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Sounds like you really want the word, "gay," back.

Ok, you can have it back. From now on, you'll be gaykeys. You know ... as in happy, festive, keys.

Happy? I mean, gay?

I have taken full ownership of "Gay".

I have a t-shirt that I wear regularly that has "GAY!" in big Red, White and Blue Letters on the front.

On the back it has the International Sign for no with a couple of generic 'euro-males' engaged in sodomy on the back.

It gets a TON of attention... which gives me a chance to engage a lot of people face to face to discuss the issue.

Guess which one's threaten to scratch my eyes out?

Keys....you don't seem to get why your'e here. Your purpose on this board is to demonstrate how irrational, how void of logic, how hateful and fearful, how mindlessly hysteric homophobes can be.

That's it.

And you get tons of attention doing this. We funnel people to you to show them how awful the hatred of gays can get. You're a sign post to show us where homophobia leads.

And in that you've succeeded brilliantly.

Wow Skylar you are in a roll!

Your most recent concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm glad to see you wear it proud. You should, you're as gay as anyone else I've seen on this forum.

ROFLMNAO!

Well thank you Faun...

I do try to keep thing merry and festive!

That is mighty white of us!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The problem becomes exponentially worse when the culture normalizes sexual abnormality, by removing boundaries, wherein the already deviated minds are provided access to children in their earliest stages of development, who then trigger the same imprint on greater numbers, but this in a culture which encourages the behavior, as a result of the 'normalization', exponentially increasing the deviancy... which by its very nature is the inherent trigger for the species to destroy whatever culture succumbs to such.

Such literally accomplishes what Thermo-nuclear war, could not... the total annihilation of a culture.

Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Can't really tell the fundamental difference between that hatred and this ...

For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.

Oh golly...

Sadly Faun... And I know this is gonna hurt, but your cult has rejected fundamental...

Now just between you and me... The difference, fundamentally and otherwise is that Histler was targeting a specifc breed of person. The Genetic Semite, of the Hebrew persuasion.

I have no concern with the race the Relativist is... It's the mental disorder that represents the threat, not the race, heritage or national origin.

That and Histler was a sexual deviant... Along with the bulk of his cult-mates. Who killed other sexual deviants because he instinctively understood that such was wrong... and Shameful.

Word is that he feared that other deviants knew what he was. And they couldn't have THAT for a group of emotional men who prided themselves on their highly organized fashion and polished leather.

 

[francoHFW]

Religious fundamentalist haters- the world's major problem these days...

 

[Faun]

I'm glad to see you wear it proud. You should, you're as gay as anyone else I've seen on this forum.

ROFLMNAO!

Well thank you Faun...

I do try to keep thing merry and festive!

That is mighty white of us!

you're welcome, GayKeys. Being as gay as you is like having a rainbow permanently glowing over your head.

 

[Faun]

The problem becomes exponentially worse when the culture normalizes sexual abnormality, by removing boundaries, wherein the already deviated minds are provided access to children in their earliest stages of development, who then trigger the same imprint on greater numbers, but this in a culture which encourages the behavior, as a result of the 'normalization', exponentially increasing the deviancy... which by its very nature is the inherent trigger for the species to destroy whatever culture succumbs to such.

Such literally accomplishes what Thermo-nuclear war, could not... the total annihilation of a culture.

Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Can't really tell the fundamental difference between that hatred and this ...

For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.

Oh golly...

Sadly Faun... And I know this is gonna hurt, but your cult has rejected fundamental...

Now just between you and me... The difference, fundamentally and otherwise is that Histler was targeting a specifc breed of person. The Genetic Semite, of the Hebrew persuasion.

I have no concern with the race the Relativist is... It's the mental disorder that represents the threat, not the race, heritage or national origin.

No, Hitler was against all Jews, even those not born Jewish but chose to become Jewish. He shared the same fear for his nation being destroyed by an enemy within. When I read your quote, I immediately drew a connection to Hitler's infamous quote.

It all stems from irrational hatred and bigotry. Like being gay, you own that too.

 

[Toro]

Pubes doesn't know which side of the border Canada is on.

 

[HappyJoy]

<----that

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

is that what the voices in your head are telling you that was?

no rightwingnut has ever shown what aspect of marriage is "eroded" by marriage equality.

if you don't want to get "gay married" don't. and please leave other people alone.

thanks.

No?

LOL!

What color is the sky in your world? Maybe if you can describe it, we can find you.

In REALITY... Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

This the consequence of design intrinsic in human physiology, wherein nature provided two distinct but complimenting genders, each respectively designed both physically and emotionally with the other; wherein two bodies are joined into one sustainable body.

There is nothing about the attempt to qualify homosexuals for entry into marriage that does not erode marriage... As marriage is about nothing except the standards that define it. And such requires the standards be erased. And erasing is pretty much all erosion is.

As most of your fellow cultist have already indicated... All that needs to happen to qualify homosexuals is marrige to be rendered MEANINGLESS.

Which again... Is fairly erosive.

See how that works?

In other words, gay marriage is a thing, it's legal and hasn't hurt anybody else's marriage. You personal definition doesn't matter.

(Reader, do you see what stands as 'Reality' for the Cult seeking to normalize sexual deviancy?

The Reality of that cult is the same alas it is for every cult. Their Reality is pretense... The deceit that they conjure in their imaginations.

The above post is a classic demonstration of just that, wherein the cultist comes to state what it feels is real... By stating what it read ... Which has absolutely no kinship with that was actually said.

It's suffuering delusion ....

Now... Reader ... Ask yourself, what are the potential
Upsides to allowing the delusional to speak publicly?

Now withy that in mind, what are the downsides?)

Just curious, why bother using parentheses? You're not making an aside. You're having a pretend conservation with an imaginary person.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

WHERE_R_MY_KEYS SAID:

“As there is absolutely NO POTENTIAL for a Right to demand that others accept your behavior.”

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

Citizens' civil rights concern solely the relationship between government and those governed, placing restrictions on the state's authority to seek to limit those rights, having nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship between and among private citizens.

Prohibiting the state from violating citizens' civil rights – such as the right of same-sex couples to equal protection of the law – has no impact on private citizens or organizations, in no way 'demanding' anyone to 'accept' anything.

 

[bripat9643]

WHERE_R_MY_KEYS SAID:

“As there is absolutely NO POTENTIAL for a Right to demand that others accept your behavior.”

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

Citizens' civil rights concern solely the relationship between government and those governed, placing restrictions on the state's authority to seek to limit those rights, having nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship between and among private citizens.

Prohibiting the state from violating citizens' civil rights – such as the right of same-sex couples to equal protection of the law – has no impact on private citizens or organizations, in no way 'demanding' anyone to 'accept' anything.

As you've demonstrated countless times, you don't have the slightest clue what a straw man fallacy is. You don't even comprehend the meaning of the term "fallacy." Your attempts to use logic are positively comical.

 

[Toro]

Thank goodness the courts look at our Constitution and laws as the basis for their rulings and not some foreigner with an axe to grind.

Doesn't matter what the Courts say anymore on this issue. Texas has effectively told the Courts to stuff it. And most other states not already lost to Leftism will soon follow suit.

But I wouldn't worry about it, history shows that Nature has a cure for this sort of problem... and we're quickly approaching that fix. And all indications are that such is comin' sooner, rather than later.

Global warming is going to kill us all?



And when did Pubes stop believing in the Constitution?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

WHERE_R_MY_KEYS SAID:

“As there is absolutely NO POTENTIAL for a Right to demand that others accept your behavior.”

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

Citizens' civil rights concern solely the relationship between government and those governed, placing restrictions on the state's authority to seek to limit those rights, having nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship between and among private citizens.

Prohibiting the state from violating citizens' civil rights – such as the right of same-sex couples to equal protection of the law – has no impact on private citizens or organizations, in no way 'demanding' anyone to 'accept' anything.

Demanding that you have rights requires that you identify the right. That you recognize the right in everyone else .

You're claiming that you have a right to marriage. Which no one disputes. As no one has the right to demand that an institution built around normal human physiology needs to accept those who refuse to meet that standard.

The problem becomes exponentially worse when the culture normalizes sexual abnormality, by removing boundaries, wherein the already deviated minds are provided access to children in their earliest stages of development, who then trigger the same imprint on greater numbers, but this in a culture which encourages the behavior, as a result of the 'normalization', exponentially increasing the deviancy... which by its very nature is the inherent trigger for the species to destroy whatever culture succumbs to such.

Such literally accomplishes what Thermo-nuclear war, could not... the total annihilation of a culture.

Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Can't really tell the fundamental difference between that hatred and this ...

For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.

Oh golly...

Sadly Faun... And I know this is gonna hurt, but your cult has rejected fundamental...

Now just between you and me... The difference, fundamentally and otherwise is that Histler was targeting a specifc breed of person. The Genetic Semite, of the Hebrew persuasion.

I have no concern with the race the Relativist is... It's the mental disorder that represents the threat, not the race, heritage or national origin.

No, Hitler was against all Jews, even those not born Jewish but chose to become Jewish. He shared the same fear for his nation being destroyed by an enemy within. When I read your quote, I immediately drew a connection to Hitler's infamous quote.

It all stems from irrational hatred and bigotry. Like being gay, you own that too.

Yes just because being Jewish was a death sentence doesn't mean that Hislter hated all Jews. What a reasonable position you have there. That must be a sign of you being rational.

Of course of Histler was not interested in anything except the racial component... On the erroneous premise that race was an indicator of character and intellectual means... Your position would tend to indicate your irrational, subjective, this Relativist nature.

And I want you to know that I feel that your 'a nation can never be infected with internal enemies is just adorable.

 

[Faun]

WHERE_R_MY_GAY_KEYS SAID:

“As there is absolutely NO POTENTIAL for a Right to demand that others accept your behavior.”

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

Citizens' civil rights concern solely the relationship between government and those governed, placing restrictions on the state's authority to seek to limit those rights, having nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship between and among private citizens.

Prohibiting the state from violating citizens' civil rights – such as the right of same-sex couples to equal protection of the law – has no impact on private citizens or organizations, in no way 'demanding' anyone to 'accept' anything.

Demanding that you have rights requires that you identify the right. That you recognize the right in everyone else .

You're claiming that you have a right to marriage. Which no one disputes. As no one has the right to demand that an institution built around normal human physiology needs to accept those who refuse to meet that standard.

The problem becomes exponentially worse when the culture normalizes sexual abnormality, by removing boundaries, wherein the already deviated minds are provided access to children in their earliest stages of development, who then trigger the same imprint on greater numbers, but this in a culture which encourages the behavior, as a result of the 'normalization', exponentially increasing the deviancy... which by its very nature is the inherent trigger for the species to destroy whatever culture succumbs to such.

Such literally accomplishes what Thermo-nuclear war, could not... the total annihilation of a culture.

Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Can't really tell the fundamental difference between that hatred and this ...

For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.

Oh golly...

Sadly Faun... And I know this is gonna hurt, but your cult has rejected fundamental...

Now just between you and me... The difference, fundamentally and otherwise is that Histler was targeting a specifc breed of person. The Genetic Semite, of the Hebrew persuasion.

I have no concern with the race the Relativist is... It's the mental disorder that represents the threat, not the race, heritage or national origin.

No, Hitler was against all Jews, even those not born Jewish but chose to become Jewish. He shared the same fear for his nation being destroyed by an enemy within. When I read your quote, I immediately drew a connection to Hitler's infamous quote.

It all stems from irrational hatred and bigotry. Like being gay, you own that too.

Yes just because being Jewish was a death sentence doesn't mean that Hislter hated all Jews. What a reasonable position you have there. That must be a sign of you being rational.

Of course of Histler was not interested in anything except the racial component... On the erroneous premise that race was an indicator of character and intellectual means... Your position would tend to indicate your irrational, subjective, this Relativist nature.

And I want you to know that I feel that your 'a nation can never be infected with internal enemies is just adorable.

Of course that's not what I said. I said Hitler was against all Jews, even those who were not born Jewish but became Jewish. Who knows how your brain translated those words into thinking I said Hitler didn't hate all Jews?

What you both share in common is an irrational hatred for a group of people you idiotically think will lead to the destruction of your country. It's cute, though, watching you try to distance your beliefs from his by drawing on the differences between gays and Jews. Oh, and by the way, Hitler hated gays too.