Be honest. "Gay rights" is code for more affirmative action.

[FA_Q2]

[

You cannot use a harmless activity as justification for legalizing a harmful one. Gay marriage is harmless. Pedophilia is not.

The priest scandal proved most gay men are child molesters.

WOW.

That, by the way, is COLOSSALLY ignorant.

Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation

Child molestation is a heinous act that has nothing to do with sexual orientation. The act itself is irrelevant to the sex of the child – child molesters pray on children period. It takes a person that is fucked up beyond belief to commit such an act.

 

[poet]

[

You cannot use a harmless activity as justification for legalizing a harmful one. Gay marriage is harmless. Pedophilia is not.

The priest scandal proved most gay men are child molesters.

illogical fallacy. Most gay men are not priests, who may or may not be child molesters.
The conclusion to be drawn is that many priests are not celibate and violate their vows....not that most gay men are child molesters. Most child molesters are heterosexual, by far.

 

[poet]

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!?

What is wrong with incest if it is two consenting adults?

Pedophilia is strictly a power trip.

Are you speaking from experience?

 

[poet]

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.

No one can force you to accept an agenda. But neither can you deny them their agenda.

 

[Darkwind]

Call it what it is.

Legislating morality.

 

[g5000]

The priest scandal proved most gay men are child molesters.

It takes a great deal of illogic and innumeracy to make a statement like that!

 

[g5000]

Call it what it is.

Legislating morality.

Just like letting black men marry white women was legislating morality.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I've heard gays ask for special treatment about as often as I've heard shootspeeders make any valid points.




Never

 

[WorldWatcher]

Call it what it is.

Legislating morality.

Then are not all the laws passed since 2000 to deny same-sex couples Civil Marriage, are they also not "legislating morality" be attempting to deny equal treatment to same-sex couples because the upset the moral of the majority at the time?



>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

[

You cannot use a harmless activity as justification for legalizing a harmful one. Gay marriage is harmless. Pedophilia is not.

The priest scandal proved most gay men are child molesters.

Most child molesters are not gay.

 

[Katzndogz]

Sam sex marriage is about marriage elasticity with the end goal of marriage extinction.

 

[Harry Dresden]

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.

hey Poet.....can anyone in this Country disagree with the President without it being racial?.....i was in a thread where i was disagreeing with the President,and explained why i disagreed,called him President Obama,treated him respectably and i was still told it was because he is black.....and i do realize there are those who are against him because he is black.....but you can tell them by how they address his name....is he supposed to be allowed to do whatever he wants because he is black without anyone questioning him?.....

 

[Gadawg73]

I've heard gays ask for special treatment about as often as I've heard shootspeeders make any valid points.




Never

That is the way I see it.

 

[g5000]

Sam sex marriage is about marriage elasticity with the end goal of marriage extinction.

It's funny how some people didn't mind government interference in our private choices as long as it benefitted them in some way. But the moment someone else wants the same privileges, IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!

You didn't care about the government's social engineering and behavioral manipulation before. Why cry now?

You didn't mind government penalizing those who aren't married with higher taxes.

You didn't mind government penalizing those who don't have kids with higher taxes.

You didn't mind goverment penalizing those who didn't buy the right refrigerator with higher taxes.


Suddenly, you are all up in arms over the government penalizing you with higher taxes for not buying health insurance or allowing people you hate to enjoy the same cash and prizes you do.

It's a problem now. Hmmmm...

 

[Seawytch]

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

Actually, we already can. It's the legal recognition that goes with it we are demanding.

 

[Seawytch]

[

You cannot use a harmless activity as justification for legalizing a harmful one. Gay marriage is harmless. Pedophilia is not.

The priest scandal proved most gay men are child molesters.

No, the priest scandal proved that the Catholic Church's celibacy rule needs to end.

 

[FA_Q2]

Call it what it is.

Legislating morality.

Just like letting black men marry white women was legislating morality.

Well yes except that you have it backwards.

PREVENTING white and black people from marring (just like preventing gays) is legislating morality – and legislating morality is inherently incorrect because morality is not a universal government truth.

 

[Ernie S.]

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.

Ernie does not need any defense as he is quite capable but let me give you my experience this as I am in the deep south:
1. Homophobes which is Ernie is not.
2. Against gay marriage which Ernie is and I believe him to be wrong but that does not make Ernie a bigot.

I, tacitly, disagree, on each point. Of course.

Look guy. I'm going to assume by your rhetoric that you are a black gay man. I really don't much care. I disrespect you for your rhetoric and false assumptions, not your skin color or sexuality.

In other words, I find you to be dishonest, distasteful, delusional and intellectually bankrupt. Can I be more plain?

 

[g5000]

Call it what it is.

Legislating morality.

Just like letting black men marry white women was legislating morality.

Well yes except that you have it backwards.

PREVENTING white and black people from marring (just like preventing gays) is legislating morality – and legislating morality is inherently incorrect because morality is not a universal government truth.

I was making a point for Darkwind.

 

[poet]

Ernie does not need any defense as he is quite capable but let me give you my experience this as I am in the deep south:
1. Homophobes which is Ernie is not.
2. Against gay marriage which Ernie is and I believe him to be wrong but that does not make Ernie a bigot.

I, tacitly, disagree, on each point. Of course.

Look guy. I'm going to assume by your rhetoric that you are a black gay man. I really don't much care. I disrespect you for your rhetoric and false assumptions, not your skin color or sexuality.

In other words, I find you to be dishonest, distasteful, delusional and intellectually bankrupt. Can I be more plain?

Mission accomplished. Can I be more in your face?