An Alabama Pastor's Epic Speech against Gay Marriage (Please finish drinking your beverage first)

[Where_r_my_Keys]

They're already inventing fantasies to back their outrage of a ruling they know is coming.

Remember back in 2008 how people laughed at Beck when he said: "Before this man is out of office, you will look around and not recognize your country. Men will be marrying men, Iran will have nuclear weapons and Iraq will again be controlled by Islamic lunatics, as a direct result of the perverse reasoning that the Democrats have now set into the office of the President of the United States... "?

And here we are, with every single one of those points having come to pass... even as our own in-house deviants wring their hands that no less an authority than the Supreme Court of the United States will decide that the laws in the vast majority of the States, signed by the vast majority of the Governors, after having been written, debated and issued as bills by the vast majority of the legislators, elected by the vast majority of the people are violations of the US Constitution, despite the VERY FIRST AMENDMENT in the US Constitution GUARANTEEING that the US Government can NOT restrict the means of the people to assemble, speak out and pass law which sustains their means to exercise of their Religion.

The guy is Nostradamus, re-born. Truly an incredible sense of the otherwise obvious.

Who else could have known that when evil is licensed to do as it will, that chaos, calamity and catastrophe will follow?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And those 'religious belief's are as archaic and backward as the opposition to marriage equality...

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You have no method of demonstrating you're right, or could be right.

Not so... I have done this many times, but most recently I did so here... maybe you'll recognize it:

The Puritans executed for sodomy and adultery.

The Founders executed for sodomy but not adultery.

Modern Christians don't execute for either. Or call for the executions for either. Nor do you.

Hmm... Now let's see... The Puritans executed for sodomy and adultery, and this on the basis that such was a manifestation of evil and destructive to the community; having recognized this as self-evident and confirmed by the scriptures.

Then... because of the dire nature of that reasoning, some came to subjectively 'feel' that those laws were too harsh. And the laws were (subjectively) liberalized and the executions of both sodomites and adulterers were eventually, set aside.

Now... God's law, being objective, determined that homosexuality and adultery were destructive to mankind, thus destructive to civilization. Over time, SUBJECTIVE PEOPLE liberalized the enforcement of God's law.

Now... Objectivity was set aside for the easier subjectivity, on the SUBJECTIVE premise that the objectivity was too harsh and the threats claimed by God's objective law were overstated, that sodomy and adultery were not as destructive as God claimed; the subjective Liberals said that by liberalizing the culture's enforcement, the culture would not see an increase in either, if the standards were subjectively lowered.

So... the question is, which was true? God's Objective Law or The Liberal Subjective reduction in the enforcement of those laws?

Which is fairly easy to determine...

Let's consult the reader, shall we?

Reader:

In your own observation of the passing cultural scene, do you find that the liberalization of the sodomy laws, have increased or decreased the effect that sodomites have on your culture?

Have the removal of laws against Adultery; which existed and passed from existence long before you or I were born... did removing those laws cause the culture to see in increase in adultery or a decrease... ?

Another way to look at it, is have families been made stronger or weaker by the subjective removal of the cultural discipline against sodomy and adultery?

Which at the end of the day, simply brings us to which, objective reasoning or subjective reasoning... which has served the culture better?

Now... you should prepare yourself for the Relativists onslaught, wherein they rain hate upon those with opinions different from their own.

Where they claim a right to undermine the viability of your culture, by demanding that their deviancy is perfectly normal and quite literally... that YOU are a deviant for not accepting deviancy as normal. THEY further claim a right to their life, as they live it; with no responsibility on their part to not exercise their rights to the detriment of your means to exercise your own.

What's more they claim the right to force perversion upon you and your children; to undermine the legitimacy of your marriage, by forcing the lowering of the marriage standards, to accept illegitimacy... to promote the acceptance of infidelity and to force you to accept the endless other examples of sexual abnormality, as perfectly NORMAL!

In truth, God has not changed, thus as I have stated time and again, God... Nature is objective... and the concerted studied and adherence to nature; OKA: Religion, is likewise OBJECTIVE.

This while the nature of the human being is SUBJECTIVE.

The former viable, the objectivity being the essential element which sustains that human viability and the latter being destructive... .

Thus the necessity for the human being to focus upon the objectivity in nature, through the study of such; religion... which by virtue of the nature of the inherent evil common to humanity, can only slow the decay... what the above cited contributor is doing is what that evil does... conflating truth with falsity, demanding that the objectivity of natural law, equates with the human subjectivity... which is a deceit, fraudulently advanced, as a means to influence the ignorant.

To know the truth, you need simply ask yourself, if the liberalization of sodomy and adultery laws have improved the culture or made things worse.

Now here is the best part... You know that such have not made the culture worse, but made the culture MUCH WORSE.

Where you recognize the obvious, and perhaps... despite your own experience in adultery and/or sodomy such has been destructive to you and your own life... and by extension, made the plight of the culture: WORSE, you're practicing objective reasoning.

Where you see the obvious and rationalize that adultery has not been destructive and that removal of sodomy laws has not caused the sodomites to further infect the culture with their perverse reasoning... you're practicing subjective reasoning, OKA: Delusion... a presentation of psychosis, AKA: a mental disorder... .

See how that works?

The Puritans specifically cited the Bible and its commandments for the reason they executed both adulterers and those engaged in sodomy. Then...

Subjectivity, in defense of the assertion that your reasoning is subjective?

LOL! Not the way I'd have gone... but 'to each their own.'

And don't think that I don't appreciate it! (You've done the very best you can... .)

.

.

.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

All arguments citing God as a source are fallacious since the existence of God cannot be established as fact.

OH! A cling-on. (She too doesn't want to address the simple and otherwise irrefutable fact, that since the subjective removal of sodomy and adultery laws, has ... as nature [God] requires such must, only increased the destruction to the culture manifested through adultery and sodomy. But she can't do so because TO DO SO would not reflect well upon her relativist world... and in that, it becomes obvious that she chooses instead to yield from the argument, thus conceding to the standing positions, intrinsic to that argument.)


Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted, as well.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

This thread is a case-study in the absurdity of the evil that has risen within the US... . I recommend that Reader spend some time studying it, towards understanding the wedge cult that has been designed as the final thrust in killing the United States.

 

[Seawytch]

Promiscuity?

Same sex promiscuity?

All promiscuity.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In your opinion, would you consider someone who "doesn't agree or has a problem with" black men kissing white women in public as "hateful"?

STOP trying to compare homo marriage to blacks in any shape or form. Homosexuals are NOT a race

No, I think I'll continue to do so.

I know it makes your position harder to defend, but tough shit.

It only reveals your ignorance

Actually, no. It reveals your lack of critical thinking skills.

A black man kissing a black man is the same as a black man kissing a white woman?
Homosexuality and interracial issues are the same?

They are the same in that the freedom of choice is a protected liberty immune from attack by the state.

They are the same in that there is no rational basis to deny either a same-sex couple or interracial couple access to marriage law, there is no objective, documented evidence in support of such a prohibition, and such a prohibition fails to pursue a proper legislative end.

Laws seeking to deny either same-sex couples or interracial couples access to marriage law are predicated solely on an animus toward the couples in question, solely because of sexual orientation or race – and to discriminate against either violates the Constitution.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And those 'religious belief's are as archaic and backward as the opposition to marriage equality for same gender couples.

Except that the Bible says nothing about blacks and whites getting together, while it specifically condemns homosexuality. Care to refute me on that?

Why should anyone bother, religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant, having no bearing whatsoever on the issue.

The Constitution and its case law is the law of the land, not the bible.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No it's not.

Then why does the genetic structure of the human species suggest otherwise? No man ever reproduces with another man by sticking his Johnson in another man's backside, and no woman ever reproduces by playing strap ons with another woman. Homosexuality is not compatible with the species. Gay men need surrogate mothers, lesbians need artificial insemination.

So, there is your rational argument, but I gather it will bounce off of that thick skull of yours.

Ignorant nonsense.

It's this sort of hate and ignorance the Constitution guards against.

The ability to reproduce also has no bearing on the issue, as infertile opposite-sex couples are allowed to marry.

Your 'argument' fails as it is irrational and inconsistent.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You have no method of demonstrating you're right, or could be right.

Not so... I have done this many times, but most recently I did so here... maybe you'll recognize it:

The Puritans executed for sodomy and adultery.

The Founders executed for sodomy but not adultery.

Modern Christians don't execute for either. Or call for the executions for either. Nor do you.

Hmm... Now let's see... The Puritans executed for sodomy and adultery, and this on the basis that such was a manifestation of evil and destructive to the community; having recognized this as self-evident and confirmed by the scriptures.

Then... because of the dire nature of that reasoning, some came to subjectively 'feel' that those laws were too harsh. And the laws were (subjectively) liberalized and the executions of both sodomites and adulterers were eventually, set aside.

Now... God's law, being objective, determined that homosexuality and adultery were destructive to mankind, thus destructive to civilization. Over time, SUBJECTIVE PEOPLE liberalized the enforcement of God's law.

Now... Objectivity was set aside for the easier subjectivity, on the SUBJECTIVE premise that the objectivity was too harsh and the threats claimed by God's objective law were overstated, that sodomy and adultery were not as destructive as God claimed; the subjective Liberals said that by liberalizing the culture's enforcement, the culture would not see an increase in either, if the standards were subjectively lowered.

So... the question is, which was true? God's Objective Law or The Liberal Subjective reduction in the enforcement of those laws?

Which is fairly easy to determine...

Let's consult the reader, shall we?

Reader:

In your own observation of the passing cultural scene, do you find that the liberalization of the sodomy laws, have increased or decreased the effect that sodomites have on your culture?

Have the removal of laws against Adultery; which existed and passed from existence long before you or I were born... did removing those laws cause the culture to see in increase in adultery or a decrease... ?

Another way to look at it, is have families been made stronger or weaker by the subjective removal of the cultural discipline against sodomy and adultery?

Which at the end of the day, simply brings us to which, objective reasoning or subjective reasoning... which has served the culture better?

Now... you should prepare yourself for the Relativists onslaught, wherein they rain hate upon those with opinions different from their own.

Where they claim a right to undermine the viability of your culture, by demanding that their deviancy is perfectly normal and quite literally... that YOU are a deviant for not accepting deviancy as normal. THEY further claim a right to their life, as they live it; with no responsibility on their part to not exercise their rights to the detriment of your means to exercise your own.

What's more they claim the right to force perversion upon you and your children; to undermine the legitimacy of your marriage, by forcing the lowering of the marriage standards, to accept illegitimacy... to promote the acceptance of infidelity and to force you to accept the endless other examples of sexual abnormality, as perfectly NORMAL!

In truth, God has not changed, thus as I have stated time and again, God... Nature is objective... and the concerted studied and adherence to nature; OKA: Religion, is likewise OBJECTIVE.

This while the nature of the human being is SUBJECTIVE.

The former viable, the objectivity being the essential element which sustains that human viability and the latter being destructive... .

Thus the necessity for the human being to focus upon the objectivity in nature, through the study of such; religion... which by virtue of the nature of the inherent evil common to humanity, can only slow the decay... what the above cited contributor is doing is what that evil does... conflating truth with falsity, demanding that the objectivity of natural law, equates with the human subjectivity... which is a deceit, fraudulently advanced, as a means to influence the ignorant.

To know the truth, you need simply ask yourself, if the liberalization of sodomy and adultery laws have improved the culture or made things worse.

Now here is the best part... You know that such have not made the culture worse, but made the culture MUCH WORSE.

Where you recognize the obvious, and perhaps... despite your own experience in adultery and/or sodomy such has been destructive to you and your own life... and by extension, made the plight of the culture: WORSE, you're practicing objective reasoning.

Where you see the obvious and rationalize that adultery has not been destructive and that removal of sodomy laws has not caused the sodomites to further infect the culture with their perverse reasoning... you're practicing subjective reasoning, OKA: Delusion... a presentation of psychosis, AKA: a mental disorder... .

See how that works?

The Puritans specifically cited the Bible and its commandments for the reason they executed both adulterers and those engaged in sodomy. Then...

Subjectivity, in defense of the assertion that your reasoning is subjective?

LOL! Not the way I'd have gone... but 'to each their own.'

And don't think that I don't appreciate it! (You've done the very best you can... .)

.

.

.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

All arguments citing God as a source are fallacious since the existence of God cannot be established as fact.

OH! A cling-on. (She too doesn't want to address the simple and otherwise irrefutable fact, that since the subjective removal of sodomy and adultery laws, has ... as nature [God] requires such must, only increased the destruction to the culture manifested through adultery and sodomy. But she can't do so because TO DO SO would not reflect well upon her relativist world... and in that, it becomes obvious that she chooses instead to yield from the argument, thus conceding to the standing positions, intrinsic to that argument.)


Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted, as well.

Okay, so now you're admitting that part of your real agenda is to criminalize extra-marital sex.

lol

 

[Wildman]

Besides, what does batteries allegedly selling out have to do with gay marriage?

>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<
you never heard of VIBRATORS ?? ha ha ha

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

... They are the same in that there is no rational basis to deny either a same-sex couple or interracial couple access to marriage ... .

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. The rationale is that nature designed the human species with complimenting genders, wherein the two genders join as one sustainable body... . Marriage is the legal analogue to THAT coupling. And that is because as a CULTURE, it is wise to ENCOURAGE that coupling, as such is the coupling FOR which NATURE DESIGNED THE HUMAN BEING.

Which is to say that it is wise for the culture which seeks to promote VIABILITY, to DISCOURAGE coupling of the unsustainable variety, which would decidedly include: The Unsustainable Coupling of two people of the same GENDER.

Now why is it unwise?

It is unwise because such coupling is a function of deviant human reasoning.

Ya see scamp, homosexuality not only deviates from the human physiological norm, it deviates as FAR FROM THE HUMAN PHYSIOLOGICAL NORM AS IS HUMANLY POSSIBLE!

And encouraging perverse reasoning will only lead to more instances of it... and where a culture ENCOURAGE PERVERSE REASONING, it demonstrates itself as being on the fast track toward its own DESTRUCTION.

But... please, if you disagree, just go to history and find any civilization which normalized sexual abnormality and continues to thrive today.

Greeks?

Roman?

Samurai?

They all LOVED to party... and they all allowed themselves to set their perversions ahead of their survival and sure enough, they did not survive.

So... for those of you who have no concern for the survival of the US Culture... go ahead and promote its destruction through the advocacy to normalize the perversion of human reasoning. The rest of you however...

You need to understand that tolerance of those idiots is YOU tolerating that which is going to destroy you.

 

[Syriusly]

In your opinion, would you consider someone who "doesn't agree or has a problem with" black men kissing white women in public as "hateful"?

STOP trying to compare homo marriage to blacks in any shape or form. Homosexuals are NOT a race

No, I think I'll continue to do so.

I know it makes your position harder to defend, but tough shit.

It only reveals your ignorance

Actually, no. It reveals your lack of critical thinking skills.

A black man kissing a black man is the same as a black man kissing a white woman?
Homosexuality and interracial issues are the same?

I am old enough to remember when the sight of a black man kissing a white woman was considered to be shocking- as shocking as when I used to be shocked by the sight of a man kissing a man.

What was shocking then is not shocking anymore- and why should it be? Why should I be shocked at the sight of a black woman kissing a white man- or a woman kissing a woman? The shock was because both sights were the opposite of what I was raised to expect- and now I am more mature- and not shocked.

 

[Syriusly]

... They are the same in that there is no rational basis to deny either a same-sex couple or interracial couple access to marriage ... .

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman..

And in 37 states, Canada and other countries- marriage is also the joining of two men or two women.

And that is a good thing.

 

[Syriusly]

They're already inventing fantasies to back their outrage of a ruling they know is coming.

Remember back in 2008 how people laughed at Beck when he said: "Before this man is out of office, you will look around and not recognize your country. Men will be marrying men, Iran will have nuclear weapons and Iraq will again be controlled by Islamic lunatics, as a direct result of the perverse reasoning that the Democrats have now set into the office of the President of the United States... "

Iran now has nuclear weapons?

Obama has nothing to do with the wonderful expansion of marriage equality.

Iraq? If we had not driven Hussein out of office, there would be no ISIS- but ISIS does not control Iraq.

 

[NYcarbineer]

... They are the same in that there is no rational basis to deny either a same-sex couple or interracial couple access to marriage ... .

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. .

Then the Bible gets it wrong.

 

[TemplarKormac]

They're already inventing fantasies to back their outrage of a ruling they know is coming.

Remember back in 2008 how people laughed at Beck when he said: "Before this man is out of office, you will look around and not recognize your country. Men will be marrying men, Iran will have nuclear weapons and Iraq will again be controlled by Islamic lunatics, as a direct result of the perverse reasoning that the Democrats have now set into the office of the President of the United States... "

Iran now has nuclear weapons?

Obama has nothing to do with the wonderful expansion of marriage equality.

Iraq? If we had not driven Hussein out of office, there would be no ISIS- but ISIS does not control Iraq.

It's ironic too, that you don't mention how ISIS, as well as most of Islam, actively seek out and persecute homosexuals. But hey, it's just the Christians right? At least we don't throw them off the top of buildings.

 

[Seawytch]

They're already inventing fantasies to back their outrage of a ruling they know is coming.

Remember back in 2008 how people laughed at Beck when he said: "Before this man is out of office, you will look around and not recognize your country. Men will be marrying men, Iran will have nuclear weapons and Iraq will again be controlled by Islamic lunatics, as a direct result of the perverse reasoning that the Democrats have now set into the office of the President of the United States... "

Iran now has nuclear weapons?

Obama has nothing to do with the wonderful expansion of marriage equality.

Iraq? If we had not driven Hussein out of office, there would be no ISIS- but ISIS does not control Iraq.

It's ironic too, that you don't mention how ISIS, as well as most of Islam, actively seek out and persecute homosexuals. But hey, it's just the Christians right? At least we don't throw them off the top of buildings.

This is one of my favorite arguments EVAH! We shouldn't fight for equal rights here because extremist Muslims in other countries kill gays. (Often said with such longing too)

Extremist Christians want to too. Hello Uganda.

 

[Seawytch]

Human Rights Campaign

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

They're already inventing fantasies to back their outrage of a ruling they know is coming.

Remember back in 2008 how people laughed at Beck when he said: "Before this man is out of office, you will look around and not recognize your country. Men will be marrying men, Iran will have nuclear weapons and Iraq will again be controlled by Islamic lunatics, as a direct result of the perverse reasoning that the Democrats have now set into the office of the President of the United States... "

Iran now has nuclear weapons?

Obama has nothing to do with the wonderful expansion of marriage equality.

Iraq? If we had not driven Hussein out of office, there would be no ISIS- but ISIS does not control Iraq.

It's ironic too, that you don't mention how ISIS, as well as most of Islam, actively seek out and persecute homosexuals. But hey, it's just the Christians right? At least we don't throw them off the top of buildings.

This is one of my favorite arguments EVAH! We shouldn't fight for equal rights here because extremist Muslims in other countries kill gays. (Often said with such longing too)

Extremist Christians want to too. Hello Uganda.

The Sexually Abnormal enjoy the same rights as everyone else in the United States.

The claim that such is not the case is ABSURD!!

You are not seeking equal RIGHTS... you're seeking to be declared LEGITIMATE!

But because your behavior is ILLEGITIMATE, YOU are illegitimate and you don't 'feel' that it's fair that everyone else gets to be legitimate, when you aren't.

There's no right to act illegitimately and be accepted as legitimate.

You have a right to be legitimate... but do exercise that right, you must bear the responsibility which sustains that right to NOT ACT ILLEGITIMATELY.

See how that works?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Then the Bible gets it wrong.

ROFLMNAO! Did it?

How about Science?

Did science: 'get it wrong', too?

I ask, because science is what informs us that human physiological normality; which is to say the sustainable, natural defining traits of human sexuality, is established through the distinct but complimenting genders, each designed for sexual intercourse with the other.

Thus defining Marriage, which is the analogous union representing the consequential ramifications of sound intercourse... , wherein one man joins with one woman.

See how that works?

Now... I'd LOVE to take your word for it. I really would, but you're an imbecile, citing feckless drivel of the absurd variety... SOOoooo.... Given that such is about as weak as such gets, I'm going to have to go with Science and The Bible, which confirms science... in terms of its establishing that, as one might expect would be the case, nature follows God's will.

(Go figure, Right?)

LOL! Now be honest... THAT PISSES YOU OFF! ...

LMAO!

Don't it?