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.
Your disdain for marriage equality makes you a bigot.
Society? What was "kosher", in society, in the past, does not define society today. Things change. People change. Try to come into the 21st century.
I hold no disdain for equality, but I have respect for tradition and the meaning of words. I AM in the 21st century, poet. The dictionary definition of "marriage" is still the legal and spiritual union of one adult man and one adult woman.
You would like to scrap that definition. Perhaps you would like to change it to a union of 2 or more mammals with no restrictions on species, age, sex or the number of participants. Not me. Words have meanings sir. THAT doesn't make me a bigot
You couldn't possibly have respect for equality, which is the whole point. Obviously, the definition in the dictionary is "outdated", and it will be modified. Society, not I, is rapidly "scrapping" that definition. And typically, you want to stretch the definition to include animals, polygamy, and pedophilia. No one is suggesting that. But that doesn't stop you, does it? Yes....it most certainly makes you a bigot.
I hold no disdain for equality, but I have respect for tradition and the meaning of words. I AM in the 21st century, poet. The dictionary definition of "marriage" is still the legal and spiritual union of one adult man and one adult woman.
You would like to scrap that definition. Perhaps you would like to change it to a union of 2 or more mammals with no restrictions on species, age, sex or the number of participants. Not me. Words have meanings sir. THAT doesn't make me a bigot
You couldn't possibly have respect for equality, which is the whole point. Obviously, the definition in the dictionary is "outdated", and it will be modified. Society, not I, is rapidly "scrapping" that definition. And typically, you want to stretch the definition to include animals, polygamy, and pedophilia. No one is suggesting that. But that doesn't stop you, does it? Yes....it most certainly makes you a bigot.
Who the fuck are YOU to doubt my respect for anything, except maybe you?
Hey if we're going to redefine marriage, why stop with gays. Why NOT multiple spouses, children, sheep? Where does it stop. We need constants in life.
I vote we make Pi 3.25 It will be a lot more convenient.
I thought the gay community wanted equal treatment as a couple in a civil arrangement or union?
I cannot and will not argue with the 'spiritual' part. That's between you and God. But the legal part is what can and must be debated because we the people determine the legality of the marriage contract. The license issued by the state, the contract granted by the state, the union recognized by the state. Denying access to this license, these protections, this contract to two committed individuals simply because they do not meet the requirements set forth by someone's interpretation of Scripture is on its face wrong.
We do not conduct business based on Scripture in America. If you're looking for a society that DOES legislate according to a Holy mandate, try Iran. We the people make the laws.
And there is no sense, no logic, no valid argument against same sex marriage in America today. Sober, tax paying citizens of the age of majority have the same rights to contract law protections as any other sober, tax paying citizen of the age of majority.
I have no problem with civil unions whatsoever. My problem is with the constant redefinition of words.
Take "racism" for example. A racist used to be a guy in a white robe and a pointy hat that considered one race superior to another. Today, the left is seeking to change that to anyone who disagrees with the President.
The truth of the matter is "why" you disagree with the President. Is it for policy and politics or, is it because he is "black"? As much as you'd like to deny it, I believe the latter is true.
You couldn't possibly have respect for equality, which is the whole point. Obviously, the definition in the dictionary is "outdated", and it will be modified. Society, not I, is rapidly "scrapping" that definition. And typically, you want to stretch the definition to include animals, polygamy, and pedophilia. No one is suggesting that. But that doesn't stop you, does it? Yes....it most certainly makes you a bigot.
Who the fuck are YOU to doubt my respect for anything, except maybe you?
Hey if we're going to redefine marriage, why stop with gays. Why NOT multiple spouses, children, sheep? Where does it stop. We need constants in life.
I vote we make Pi 3.25 It will be a lot more convenient.
Because most sane and "normal" human beings wouldn't "go there", thinking that polygamy, pedophilia or bestiality is synonymous with same sex marriages. It stops at consensual human beings, not related and of legal age. The world is changing, and you can't stop it...your only option is to accept and adapt. Sorry.
I thought the gay community wanted equal treatment as a couple in a civil arrangement or union?
In the end....Gays want to be able to say "This is my husband" or "This is my wife"
Just like straights can
I thought the gay community wanted equal treatment as a couple in a civil arrangement or union?
I hold no disdain for equality, but I have respect for tradition and the meaning of words. I AM in the 21st century, poet. The dictionary definition of "marriage" is still the legal and spiritual union of one adult man and one adult woman.
You would like to scrap that definition. Perhaps you would like to change it to a union of 2 or more mammals with no restrictions on species, age, sex or the number of participants. Not me. Words have meanings sir. THAT doesn't make me a bigot
You couldn't possibly have respect for equality, which is the whole point. Obviously, the definition in the dictionary is "outdated", and it will be modified. Society, not I, is rapidly "scrapping" that definition. And typically, you want to stretch the definition to include animals, polygamy, and pedophilia. No one is suggesting that. But that doesn't stop you, does it? Yes....it most certainly makes you a bigot.
Who the fuck are YOU to doubt my respect for anything, except maybe you?
Hey if we're going to redefine marriage, why stop with gays. Why NOT multiple spouses, children, sheep? Where does it stop. We need constants in life.
I vote we make Pi 3.25 It will be a lot more convenient.
[
So you are fine with Congress exceeding their enumerated powers to pass DOMA in the first place and instead of them repealing it themselves, nah - take it to the courts.
>>>>
Why is it that bigots invariably try to equate homosexuality with bestiality and/or incest and/or pedophilia, EVERY TIME!?
I thought the gay community wanted equal treatment as a couple in a civil arrangement or union?
In the end....Gays want to be able to say "This is my husband" or "This is my wife"
Just like straights can
So, it is about pushing a social, not a legal agenda.
[
So you are fine with Congress exceeding their enumerated powers to pass DOMA in the first place and instead of them repealing it themselves, nah - take it to the courts.
>>>>
Marriage is a state issue according to our constitution - as is abortion and welfare and most issues the feds have stuck their nose into.
You couldn't possibly have respect for equality, which is the whole point. Obviously, the definition in the dictionary is "outdated", and it will be modified. Society, not I, is rapidly "scrapping" that definition. And typically, you want to stretch the definition to include animals, polygamy, and pedophilia. No one is suggesting that. But that doesn't stop you, does it? Yes....it most certainly makes you a bigot.
Who the fuck are YOU to doubt my respect for anything, except maybe you?
Hey if we're going to redefine marriage, why stop with gays. Why NOT multiple spouses, children, sheep? Where does it stop. We need constants in life.
I vote we make Pi 3.25 It will be a lot more convenient.
Classic slippery slope fallacy.
You cannot use a harmless activity as justification for legalizing a harmful one. Gay marriage is harmless. Pedophilia is not.
Why is it that bigots invariably try to equate homosexuality with bestiality and/or incest and/or pedophilia, EVERY TIME!?
In the end....Gays want to be able to say "This is my husband" or "This is my wife"
Just like straights can
So, it is about pushing a social, not a legal agenda.
You have to win the legal battle first
So, it is about pushing a social, not a legal agenda.
You have to win the legal battle first
I appreciate the legal, but the legal can be solved with a civil union.
Forcing people to accept a social agenda is entirely different.
[
You cannot use a harmless activity as justification for legalizing a harmful one. Gay marriage is harmless. Pedophilia is not.
I thought the gay community wanted equal treatment as a couple in a civil arrangement or union?
That's what they say but as always it's a lie. Their real goal is special treatment to make up for all the "past injustice".
So, it is about pushing a social, not a legal agenda.
You have to win the legal battle first
I appreciate the legal, but the legal can be solved with a civil union.
Forcing people to accept a social agenda is entirely different.
Odd then that California, a decidedly liberal state voted down the homosexual initiative for what you term "civil rights".Actually, there is no such thing as ‘gay rights,’ homosexuals have the same rights as everyone else – no more, no less.
The problem is the ignorant and hateful social right and reactionary conservatives who seek to deny homosexuals their civil rights.
After all, only conservatives can ignorant and hateful. Go figure.
"Spearheaded" by the homophobic black church, in California. The "black church", is as hypocritical as any evangelicals or the moral majority/Christian Right.
