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.
Why do you have to be so defensive? Haven't you notices that Northeasterners are much more reticent with their emotions and physical contact?I see it as a blowback from the Puritans.....^^^^ So angry. So repressed.
I swear everyone, I didn't arrange this as a prop to prove my point. It just sorta happened.
I'm not angry, I think it's funny how much like a dictator you are and yet you prolly think you somehow espouse freedom. Yet here you are condemning people for freely not wanting to be gay.
Or how about this. What phisical action must I do with another male to prove I'm not homophobic?
Think REEEeeEeeeeEEeaalalllllly hard. You might just see how fucking stupid you have sounded in your thread.
Dude, you're an American. Americans need three feet of space. You're going to be fine.
Unless you're within three feet of SMDT.
And I see people like you as blowback from the nazi's getting defeated.
Look, we both said something stupid, yay! Lets start a club, we can call it the Democratic party!
No, I'm not talking about the term as it's popularly used, I'm talking about real homophobia, the fear of affectionate gestures between men.
In Asia, men who are friends walk hand in hand while talking. In Europe they greet each other with a kiss on each cheek. Here we fist bump. It got me wondering if fear of homosexuality fuels our obsession with it, whether it be affinity or angry opposition to it.
That's another thing the rest of the world has in common, a lack of passion on homosexuality either way. They have a live and let live attitude toward alternative lifestyle whereas here people are either pushing it in everyone's face or fighting against it. Fathers fear intimacy with their sons because it might turn them gay, friends dread a simple backrub because in our culture that kind of thing is always sexual.
I have to wonder if we really do have a problem with homophobia in America and why our culture is so terrified of the male to male affection that seems to come so naturally to the rest of the world.
What's wrong with us?
I guess losing a lot of "sword fights" might have done it.Reminds me of the "sword fights" we boys used to have peeing in the same toilet. Being afraid of other guys definitely is a learned behavior. We didn't start out that way.OP: I"m sure you'll find someone to have a sword fight with; don't worry.
Do you think that's at the root of your homosexuality?
You're insane, and it's not glorification, it's a celebration...one they need because of people like you trying to tell them their very existence is wrong. They don't say that to you, and I'd rather see the whole world gay, and just artifically inseminate gays and lesbians to perpetuate the species, than have a whole world with nothing but people like youWhy don't you organize a straight pride day?I'm seriously at a loss to answer that. This thread doesn't have an agenda. I really don't know why we're like this.What do you think it is?
I was always pretty much a live and let live kind of guy until the faghadist started pushing their agenda in the schools, in scouting and other areas that had religious beginnings. Now I'm seriously thinking about insisting that they allow my hetro and proud float in the next gay pride parade. Or going all Al Sharpton on the sponsors of the gay pride parade and insisting they sponsor my heterosexual pride parade or threating a boycott.
That would be an awesome parade.
You could have the divorce lawyer float, and the spousal abuse float, and the "married people have sex twice a year" float, and the $25,000 wedding float. Or you could just have people dress in outrageous and scant costumes, and have a good time, and some laughs
What you would find if you did that...is not one gay couple coming out to tell you you're wrong, and not one complaint about how you're recruiting children to be straight.
Honestly because like being white we just don't need self glorification based on our sexuality or skin color.
Well look at it this way. The state provides subsidies and tax advantages to marriage, and performs marriages. This is an artificial construct of the state, which puts married couples in a financially advantageous position as opposed to single people.I always find it funny when people claim 'the government shouldn't be involved in marriage' and then demand that a state or federal government authority 'protect the sanctity of marriage'; thus contradicting and undermining their whole argument.It's a state issue, but I like how you blamed Congress thereby bolstering the error that regulating marriage is a power granted to the federal government.And for the record I feel Obama as well as the Dem congress as well as the Republican presidents and Republican congress have failed the gay community by doing just that.... Keeping them separate from the community of the rest of us. There should be no reason the Government does not allow gays to get married and then write tax code and laws benefiting those allowed to obtain a marriage licence.
It should be up to the individuals getting married.
Hey were you born somewhat retarded by any chance? Because I know I covered marriage should not be something Government (state or Federal) controls.... And yes, I'm honestly asking, are you retarded?
I agree, it was odd to get attacked for promoting "the federal Government" be involved in marriage when it was beyond clear I was against it, but then that same person who attacked me advocates states control marriage. What's the fucking difference? So 2 dude married in Oregon are now just buds in California? How does that effect taxes? What gives the states the rights to say who can and can't be married. Pretty much the same arguments I made against the federal government doing the same stupid chit.
So, naturally if you create a state sanctioned 'marriage', then same sex couples, are going to want the same advantage.
But rather than push for keeping the state out of the marriage business, by removing the artificial construct of marriage, they insist that states pass laws against same-sex marriage - making a civil rights issue.
With the state out of marriage, it would be purely a religious and social issue, not one that is discrimination vs equality. In framing it as a state issue, it was only a matter of time till someone pointed out an inconsistency in the law, and challenged it.
So there are no St Patricks Day Parades self glorifying being Irish?So there are no St Patricks Day Parades self glorifying being Irish?Why don't you organize a straight pride day?I'm seriously at a loss to answer that. This thread doesn't have an agenda. I really don't know why we're like this.
I was always pretty much a live and let live kind of guy until the faghadist started pushing their agenda in the schools, in scouting and other areas that had religious beginnings. Now I'm seriously thinking about insisting that they allow my hetro and proud float in the next gay pride parade. Or going all Al Sharpton on the sponsors of the gay pride parade and insisting they sponsor my heterosexual pride parade or threating a boycott.
That would be an awesome parade.
You could have the divorce lawyer float, and the spousal abuse float, and the "married people have sex twice a year" float, and the $25,000 wedding float. Or you could just have people dress in outrageous and scant costumes, and have a good time, and some laughs
What you would find if you did that...is not one gay couple coming out to tell you you're wrong, and not one complaint about how you're recruiting children to be straight.
Honestly because like being white we just don't need self glorification based on our sexuality or skin color.
No, it exists to drink you dumb ass. I don't think a single person on planet earth thinks St Patrick's day is about celebrating being white.
You're insane, and it's not glorification, it's a celebration...one they need because of people like you trying to tell them their very existence is wrong. They don't say that to you, and I'd rather see the whole world gay, and just artifically inseminate gays and lesbians to perpetuate the species, than have a whole world with nothing but people like youWhy don't you organize a straight pride day?I'm seriously at a loss to answer that. This thread doesn't have an agenda. I really don't know why we're like this.What do you think it is?
I was always pretty much a live and let live kind of guy until the faghadist started pushing their agenda in the schools, in scouting and other areas that had religious beginnings. Now I'm seriously thinking about insisting that they allow my hetro and proud float in the next gay pride parade. Or going all Al Sharpton on the sponsors of the gay pride parade and insisting they sponsor my heterosexual pride parade or threating a boycott.
That would be an awesome parade.
You could have the divorce lawyer float, and the spousal abuse float, and the "married people have sex twice a year" float, and the $25,000 wedding float. Or you could just have people dress in outrageous and scant costumes, and have a good time, and some laughs
What you would find if you did that...is not one gay couple coming out to tell you you're wrong, and not one complaint about how you're recruiting children to be straight.
Honestly because like being white we just don't need self glorification based on our sexuality or skin color.
So there are no St Patricks Day Parades self glorifying being Irish?So there are no St Patricks Day Parades self glorifying being Irish?Why don't you organize a straight pride day?I was always pretty much a live and let live kind of guy until the faghadist started pushing their agenda in the schools, in scouting and other areas that had religious beginnings. Now I'm seriously thinking about insisting that they allow my hetro and proud float in the next gay pride parade. Or going all Al Sharpton on the sponsors of the gay pride parade and insisting they sponsor my heterosexual pride parade or threating a boycott.
That would be an awesome parade.
You could have the divorce lawyer float, and the spousal abuse float, and the "married people have sex twice a year" float, and the $25,000 wedding float. Or you could just have people dress in outrageous and scant costumes, and have a good time, and some laughs
What you would find if you did that...is not one gay couple coming out to tell you you're wrong, and not one complaint about how you're recruiting children to be straight.
Honestly because like being white we just don't need self glorification based on our sexuality or skin color.
No, it exists to drink you dumb ass. I don't think a single person on planet earth thinks St Patrick's day is about celebrating being white.
I don't like straight people making PDA's.What's wrong with us? Maybe it's the Bill of Rights. Americans have the Constitutional right to be disgusted by open displays of homosexuality and "alternate lifestyles" just as sissies have the Constitutional right to use the word "homophobe". Live with it or keep whining. Most normal people don't give a shit anyway.
No. I am not supporting your position, in fact it isn't 'your position', as I have mentioned the alternative to marriage as enforced by government, before on this forum - last year in fact. So if you are going to push me on what I have said on this forum, ask me first, before making up shit.Well look at it this way. The state provides subsidies and tax advantages to marriage, and performs marriages. This is an artificial construct of the state, which puts married couples in a financially advantageous position as opposed to single people.I always find it funny when people claim 'the government shouldn't be involved in marriage' and then demand that a state or federal government authority 'protect the sanctity of marriage'; thus contradicting and undermining their whole argument.It's a state issue, but I like how you blamed Congress thereby bolstering the error that regulating marriage is a power granted to the federal government.
It should be up to the individuals getting married.
Hey were you born somewhat retarded by any chance? Because I know I covered marriage should not be something Government (state or Federal) controls.... And yes, I'm honestly asking, are you retarded?
I agree, it was odd to get attacked for promoting "the federal Government" be involved in marriage when it was beyond clear I was against it, but then that same person who attacked me advocates states control marriage. What's the fucking difference? So 2 dude married in Oregon are now just buds in California? How does that effect taxes? What gives the states the rights to say who can and can't be married. Pretty much the same arguments I made against the federal government doing the same stupid chit.
So, naturally if you create a state sanctioned 'marriage', then same sex couples, are going to want the same advantage.
But rather than push for keeping the state out of the marriage business, by removing the artificial construct of marriage, they insist that states pass laws against same-sex marriage - making a civil rights issue.
With the state out of marriage, it would be purely a religious and social issue, not one that is discrimination vs equality. In framing it as a state issue, it was only a matter of time till someone pointed out an inconsistency in the law, and challenged it.
So like I said multiple times... Thanks for repeating me after attacking me. I advocated no Government involvement in marriage, you attacked me as pushing Federal Government having power over marriage then YOU claimed it should be a states issue.... Now you are taking my position of no Government involvement. Do you not see how you keep creating "fights" created by your own ignorance and incoherent desire to be at odds with others.
And for the record being gay does not mean your dick has to be in someone guys ass (if you too are a guy.) Just like being strait does not mean you fuck pussy.... So yes, the picture of the 2 guys cuddling could easily be viewed at as gay, and in fact that would be the far far far far far more accurate opinion of what that picture displays. You are obsessied with redefining what is gay while not actually defining what is gay.
No, I'm not talking about the term as it's popularly used, I'm talking about real homophobia, the fear of affectionate gestures between men.
In Asia, men who are friends walk hand in hand while talking. In Europe they greet each other with a kiss on each cheek. Here we fist bump. It got me wondering if fear of homosexuality fuels our obsession with it, whether it be affinity or angry opposition to it.
That's another thing the rest of the world has in common, a lack of passion on homosexuality either way. They have a live and let live attitude toward alternative lifestyle whereas here people are either pushing it in everyone's face or fighting against it. Fathers fear intimacy with their sons because it might turn them gay, friends dread a simple backrub because in our culture that kind of thing is always sexual.
I have to wonder if we really do have a problem with homophobia in America and why our culture is so terrified of the male to male affection that seems to come so naturally to the rest of the world.
What's wrong with us?
No. I am not supporting your position, in fact it isn't 'your position', as I have mentioned the alternative to marriage as enforced by government, before on this forum - last year in fact. So if you are going to push me on what I have said on this forum, ask me first, before making up shit.Well look at it this way. The state provides subsidies and tax advantages to marriage, and performs marriages. This is an artificial construct of the state, which puts married couples in a financially advantageous position as opposed to single people.I always find it funny when people claim 'the government shouldn't be involved in marriage' and then demand that a state or federal government authority 'protect the sanctity of marriage'; thus contradicting and undermining their whole argument.It should be up to the individuals getting married.
Hey were you born somewhat retarded by any chance? Because I know I covered marriage should not be something Government (state or Federal) controls.... And yes, I'm honestly asking, are you retarded?
I agree, it was odd to get attacked for promoting "the federal Government" be involved in marriage when it was beyond clear I was against it, but then that same person who attacked me advocates states control marriage. What's the fucking difference? So 2 dude married in Oregon are now just buds in California? How does that effect taxes? What gives the states the rights to say who can and can't be married. Pretty much the same arguments I made against the federal government doing the same stupid chit.
So, naturally if you create a state sanctioned 'marriage', then same sex couples, are going to want the same advantage.
But rather than push for keeping the state out of the marriage business, by removing the artificial construct of marriage, they insist that states pass laws against same-sex marriage - making a civil rights issue.
With the state out of marriage, it would be purely a religious and social issue, not one that is discrimination vs equality. In framing it as a state issue, it was only a matter of time till someone pointed out an inconsistency in the law, and challenged it.
So like I said multiple times... Thanks for repeating me after attacking me. I advocated no Government involvement in marriage, you attacked me as pushing Federal Government having power over marriage then YOU claimed it should be a states issue.... Now you are taking my position of no Government involvement. Do you not see how you keep creating "fights" created by your own ignorance and incoherent desire to be at odds with others.
And for the record being gay does not mean your dick has to be in someone guys ass (if you too are a guy.) Just like being strait does not mean you fuck pussy.... So yes, the picture of the 2 guys cuddling could easily be viewed at as gay, and in fact that would be the far far far far far more accurate opinion of what that picture displays. You are obsessied with redefining what is gay while not actually defining what is gay.
No, I'm not talking about the term as it's popularly used, I'm talking about real homophobia, the fear of affectionate gestures between men.
In Asia, men who are friends walk hand in hand while talking. In Europe they greet each other with a kiss on each cheek. Here we fist bump. It got me wondering if fear of homosexuality fuels our obsession with it, whether it be affinity or angry opposition to it.
That's another thing the rest of the world has in common, a lack of passion on homosexuality either way. They have a live and let live attitude toward alternative lifestyle whereas here people are either pushing it in everyone's face or fighting against it. Fathers fear intimacy with their sons because it might turn them gay, friends dread a simple backrub because in our culture that kind of thing is always sexual.
I have to wonder if we really do have a problem with homophobia in America and why our culture is so terrified of the male to male affection that seems to come so naturally to the rest of the world.
What's wrong with us?
Ya.. having to see grown men engage in groping and kissing makes me physically il. So what?
What is it about faggots that makes them NEED MY APPROVAL???
I don't desire THEIR approval. I don't give a damn how their fucked up brain processes information. To me they might as well be aliens from Mars. They don't get it at the most basic level of human existence. I don't trust anything that comes out of their mouths. If every fag in the world got some disease and died I wouldn't lose a wink of sleep. Their input in society is worse than useless. It is a poison. What I REALLY hope for is the discovery of the Gay Gene so proper human beings can abort these freaks before they get born. I keep hearing that gay isn't a "choice" it is genetic. Fine! Thank you you stupid fags for driving home THAT point. Now let's get busy weeding these fucked up people out.
This IS an interesting topic. I find Latins (French, Italian, Spanish) to be more physical, more affectionate....and it doesn't seem to interfer with Machismo. Slavics also are very manly yet very affectionate. It's the Anglo-Saxon WASP types that have this invisible barrier up.As do I. Puritans have fostered such a dread of homosexuality that we either loathe it or love it. Either way it's an obsession. Meanwhile men mistake intimacy with homosexuality so that we fear closeness in friendship and in family. I blame the Protestant puritans for much of our problems today.I see it as a blowback from the Puritans.....^^^^ So angry. So repressed.I'm not uptight, I just dont wana hold another dudes hand... Your the one says
Hollychit you're a small minded one.
Your point was if you don't feel "cool" with walking down the streets holding hands with your bro then you're homophobic....
My point is there is a line crossed once you touch someone else, male to male, female to female or male to female and female to male.
Do you walk down the street holding your females friends hand? Does this happen often? Are you full of shit?
To prove ones self as not homophobic the bar should not be to demand they have physical interactions with the same sex.
Hey ladies!!!!!!! To prove your not homophobic SMDT wants you to hold hands.... mmmm, maybe touch her boob.... Hmmm, maybe kiss, tough, fingers in her ass now or you're a homophone and the rest of the world hates you! YES THE REST OF THE WORLD HATES YOU!!!
I love the part where you speak for the other 6 billion people on planet earth, that right there seals the deal, you're a fucking moron. You know in some places in the world they still kill you for being gay, but I guess that does not count as "the rest of the world."
I swear everyone, I didn't arrange this as a prop to prove my point. It just sorta happened.
I'm not angry, I think it's funny how much like a dictator you are and yet you prolly think you somehow espouse freedom. Yet here you are condemning people for freely not wanting to be gay.
Or how about this. What phisical action must I do with another male to prove I'm not homophobic?
Think REEEeeEeeeeEEeaalalllllly hard. You might just see how fucking stupid you have sounded in your thread.
Dude, you're an American. Americans need three feet of space. You're going to be fine.
Unless you're within three feet of SMDT.
No, I'm not talking about the term as it's popularly used, I'm talking about real homophobia, the fear of affectionate gestures between men.
What's wrong with us?
This IS an interesting topic. I find Latins (French, Italian, Spanish) to be more physical, more affectionate....and it doesn't seem to interfer with Machismo. Slavics also are very manly yet very affectionate. It's the Anglo-Saxon WASP types that have this invisible barrier up.As do I. Puritans have fostered such a dread of homosexuality that we either loathe it or love it. Either way it's an obsession. Meanwhile men mistake intimacy with homosexuality so that we fear closeness in friendship and in family. I blame the Protestant puritans for much of our problems today.I see it as a blowback from the Puritans.....^^^^ So angry. So repressed.
I swear everyone, I didn't arrange this as a prop to prove my point. It just sorta happened.
I'm not angry, I think it's funny how much like a dictator you are and yet you prolly think you somehow espouse freedom. Yet here you are condemning people for freely not wanting to be gay.
Or how about this. What phisical action must I do with another male to prove I'm not homophobic?
Think REEEeeEeeeeEEeaalalllllly hard. You might just see how fucking stupid you have sounded in your thread.
Dude, you're an American. Americans need three feet of space. You're going to be fine.
Unless you're within three feet of SMDT.
How long does it take to pull your head out of your ass each morning?No. I am not supporting your position, in fact it isn't 'your position', as I have mentioned the alternative to marriage as enforced by government, before on this forum - last year in fact. So if you are going to push me on what I have said on this forum, ask me first, before making up shit.Well look at it this way. The state provides subsidies and tax advantages to marriage, and performs marriages. This is an artificial construct of the state, which puts married couples in a financially advantageous position as opposed to single people.I always find it funny when people claim 'the government shouldn't be involved in marriage' and then demand that a state or federal government authority 'protect the sanctity of marriage'; thus contradicting and undermining their whole argument.
I agree, it was odd to get attacked for promoting "the federal Government" be involved in marriage when it was beyond clear I was against it, but then that same person who attacked me advocates states control marriage. What's the fucking difference? So 2 dude married in Oregon are now just buds in California? How does that effect taxes? What gives the states the rights to say who can and can't be married. Pretty much the same arguments I made against the federal government doing the same stupid chit.
So, naturally if you create a state sanctioned 'marriage', then same sex couples, are going to want the same advantage.
But rather than push for keeping the state out of the marriage business, by removing the artificial construct of marriage, they insist that states pass laws against same-sex marriage - making a civil rights issue.
With the state out of marriage, it would be purely a religious and social issue, not one that is discrimination vs equality. In framing it as a state issue, it was only a matter of time till someone pointed out an inconsistency in the law, and challenged it.
So like I said multiple times... Thanks for repeating me after attacking me. I advocated no Government involvement in marriage, you attacked me as pushing Federal Government having power over marriage then YOU claimed it should be a states issue.... Now you are taking my position of no Government involvement. Do you not see how you keep creating "fights" created by your own ignorance and incoherent desire to be at odds with others.
And for the record being gay does not mean your dick has to be in someone guys ass (if you too are a guy.) Just like being strait does not mean you fuck pussy.... So yes, the picture of the 2 guys cuddling could easily be viewed at as gay, and in fact that would be the far far far far far more accurate opinion of what that picture displays. You are obsessied with redefining what is gay while not actually defining what is gay.
Ooh not, not a year ago! How many lifetimes did it take you to finally catch on to such an incredibly old concept???
I'm seriously at a loss to answer that. This thread doesn't have an agenda. I really don't know why we're like this.What do you think it is?
I was always pretty much a live and let live kind of guy until the faghadist started pushing their agenda in the schools, in scouting and other areas that had religious beginnings. Now I'm seriously thinking about insisting that they allow my hetro and proud float in the next gay pride parade..
