Breaking News: Supreme Court Has Chosen Not To Hear Any Of The 7 Marriage Equality Cases.

[Katzndogz]

As a heterosexual married white man with 4 kids, please describe how this issue deserves my attention. How is it a threat to me?

Because you have four children growing up in a country becoming increasingly perverted

 

[Pop23]

Please explain how explaining that same sex coupling, like masturbating, cannot make babies is bigotry?

Stopping there isn't. When you say we shouldn't be able to legally marry because of that is where it becomes bigotry...but you knew that.

Am I also bigoted when I said that lawyers shouldn't be able to legally perform brain surgery?

Nope...just an idiot for coming up with unrelated analogies.

It would be more like giving licenses to practice law only to straight lawyers.

Sillywytch just don't get it.

please let us know when you have something to say that is above the level of a pre-schooler

Because.......

You have a hard time keeping up aye?

Next time I'll type slower then

Happy to oblige

 

[dilloduck]

That was the intent of the amendment, which has been perverted to the point of making it a catch all for any progressive tripe you clowns come up with (and find a pliable judge for).

Where is the part of the equal protection clause that specifically states it's only to apply to race issues?

We all know the intent of the amendment, its a historical fact. It's being stretched beyond its intent. Its that simple.

Translation:"I know I'm right! Quit trying to confuse me with the facts!!!"

What facts are you referencing? The Reconstruction amendments were created to protect the freedmen from local laws. Its a fact. It was not intended to be a foot in the door for things like gay marriage.

yup...and marriage was supposed to mean "between a man and a woman", even though it never said that until you guys shat yourselves over the "faggoes" getting married.

Marriage still means between a man and a woman.

 

[Pop23]

Where is the part of the equal protection clause that specifically states it's only to apply to race issues?

We all know the intent of the amendment, its a historical fact. It's being stretched beyond its intent. Its that simple.

Translation:"I know I'm right! Quit trying to confuse me with the facts!!!"

What facts are you referencing? The Reconstruction amendments were created to protect the freedmen from local laws. Its a fact. It was not intended to be a foot in the door for things like gay marriage.

yup...and marriage was supposed to mean "between a man and a woman", even though it never said that until you guys shat yourselves over the "faggoes" getting married.

Marriage still means between a man and a woman.

Yeppers, and always will

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not any more. Tough that for the deniers.

 

[Pop23]

Not any more. Tough that for the deniers.

Reality sucks aye?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Only for you, Pop.

 

[Pop23]

Only for you, Pop.

You make me yawn!

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I just gave you the elements of study. Empirical data. You act like the Black Knight after he had his limbs severed.

Sorry but your anecdotal story is not evidence. The actual facts are that our children are at no disadvantage to yours. All studies show that children do best with two parents, period. The gender of the two parents has to effect on outcomes.

Those studies are full of shit, common sense tells you that kids having a balance of both a male and female role model will obviously give the child a better perspective.

You can't pick and choose which scientific studies are valid just because you don't agree with their results. You have to pick and choose which scientific studies are valid based on their methods and the fitness of the data. If these studies are done properly, are rigorous, and the methodology is sound you can't just invalidate or ignore them in one big sweep without analyzing them simply because the results don't fit with your beliefs. That is simply bias. Recognize bias and minimize it.

Yes I can, studies that show two people of the same sex as parents is just as good as two of the opposite sex, goes against common sense.
As children age, they benefit from gaining the perspective of both sexes. Out in the real world they will be learning, playing, working with both sexes. It only makes sense that being raised by both gives them that balance that is needed in life.

and yet studies do not show any difference in parenting success based on whether the parents are same or opposite gender. studies do show that being wanted and nurtured benefit children.

Every failing jurisdiction in the country suffers from significant depletion of structured families.

I just gave you the elements of study. Empirical data. You act like the Black Knight after he had his limbs severed.

Sorry but your anecdotal story is not evidence. The actual facts are that our children are at no disadvantage to yours. All studies show that children do best with two parents, period. The gender of the two parents has to effect on outcomes.

Those studies are full of shit, common sense tells you that kids having a balance of both a male and female role model will obviously give the child a better perspective.

You can't pick and choose which scientific studies are valid just because you don't agree with their results. You have to pick and choose which scientific studies are valid based on their methods and the fitness of the data. If these studies are done properly, are rigorous, and the methodology is sound you can't just invalidate or ignore them in one big sweep without analyzing them simply because the results don't fit with your beliefs. That is simply bias. Recognize bias and minimize it.

Yes I can, studies that show two people of the same sex as parents is just as good as two of the opposite sex, goes against common sense.
As children age, they benefit from gaining the perspective of both sexes. Out in the real world they will be learning, playing, working with both sexes. It only makes sense that being raised by both gives them that balance that is needed in life.

and yet studies do not show any difference in parenting success based on whether the parents are same or opposite gender. studies do show that being wanted and nurtured benefit children.

This is what is so disturbing about today's democrat party and left wingers. The proof is directly in front of them but if it is inconvenient to their agendas the agendas overrule.
Contriving homo-led families contributes to unstructured families and depleted
family structure is at the core of social demise. A post -1960's development. But democrats can't progress past the 1960's.
2+2 really does equal four. Except when lefties don't feel like it.

 

[Czernobog]

Same sex couplings have never and will never reproduce a child. Ever

Which means nothing in the marriage equality discussion, ever

It means everything. The life altering circumstance brought about by child rearing are cause for the gov protections of legal marriage.

No it's not. None of the rights and privileges have anything to do with child rearing. They are all about recognizing, and protecting people who are committed to spending their lives together. Procreation has nothing to do with it. The fact is there are many many things that homosexual couples are not allowed to do, simply because repressive bigots keep wanting to dismiss them because they don't happen to like their lifestyle.

You're full of lefty conditioning, aren't you? I don't care if homos want to figuratively marry or do whatever they want to do -- in private. That's real tolerance, not bigotry. Using the gov to force others to acquiesce to and grant privileges, including the counterproductive and potentially harmful privilege of adoption, in the name of that personal behavior choice, is extremely intolerant and bigoted. You have the shoe planted squarely on the wrong foot.

To the Highlighted part: That is the bigotry. Do you know what "potentially harmful" means? It means "I don't have any actual evidence that gay couples adopting kids is harmful, but I think they're icky, and they give me the wiggens, so I don't like the idea of them around kids."

 

[Czernobog]

Okay. so you realize that you have just discounted every sterile - whether naturally, through accident, or surgery - and infertile heterosexual couple in the country, right? Well done, Sir. Well done. Your side tried this argument - it resulted in ridicule.

Your misapprehension is not shared. You either missed, failed to understand or willfully disregarded the part about kids needing a man and a woman as parents.

Of course you can produce a study that supports your claim that children need a mother and father?

I live it. Everyday. Look at every predominantly black locale in this country and you'll see what a majority of unstructured families does. And it's not poverty. Where I live the median household income is $20k higher than the national. He schools are failing and the crime rate is the highest.
Granting adoption to homos adds to that problem. Move forward.

All you had to say was "no" you have no study and can produce only anal facts...as in those pulled out of your ass.

See, because there ARE studies that show that our children are at no disadvantage to yours and that children need parents, not parents of the opposite gender.

I just gave you the elements of study. Empirical data. You act like the Black Knight after he had his limbs severed.

Actually, "I live it", assuming you're not lying, is what is called "anecdotal evidence", and is completely useless, and unreliable for anything other than one's own personal opinions. Thank you for playing.

 

[Czernobog]

We all know the intent of the amendment, its a historical fact. It's being stretched beyond its intent. Its that simple.

Translation:"I know I'm right! Quit trying to confuse me with the facts!!!"

What facts are you referencing? The Reconstruction amendments were created to protect the freedmen from local laws. Its a fact. It was not intended to be a foot in the door for things like gay marriage.

yup...and marriage was supposed to mean "between a man and a woman", even though it never said that until you guys shat yourselves over the "faggoes" getting married.

Marriage still means between a man and a woman.

Yeppers, and always will

Well, as of now that is no longer the case in 35 out of 50 states. So, apparently it won't "always"...

 

[Katzndogz]

People who care will just have to learn how to protect themselves, their families and their own children. Learn different ways of conducting your businesses. Choose friends more wisely. Pay more attention to your children's friends.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“This is what is so disturbing about today's democrat party and left wingers. The proof is directly in front of them but if it is inconvenient to their agendas the agendas overrule.
Contriving homo-led families contributes to unstructured families and depleted
family structure is at the core of social demise. A post -1960's development. But democrats can't progress past the 1960's.
2+2 really does equal four. Except when lefties don't feel like it.”


This is comprehensively ignorant, ridiculous, and hateful.

There is no 'evidence' that families with same-sex parents 'deplete family structure' or contribute to 'social demise,' the notion is inane demagoguery, hyperbolic nonsense, and fails as a slippery slope fallacy. In fact, all the evidence presented at trial indicates that families with same-sex parents are happy, stable, and well-adjusted.

And terms such as 'homo-led' indicate nothing more than bigotry and hate, confirming the fact that the 14th Amendment is needed as much today as any time since its ratification, to protect citizens from those who would seek to codify their bigotry and hate.

What's disturbing is that this issue sheds a very bright light on the authoritarianism common to most on the right, social conservatives in particular.

 

[Czernobog]

People who care will just have to learn how to protect themselves, their families and their own children. Learn different ways of conducting your businesses. Choose friends more wisely. Pay more attention to your children's friends.

I know you're not going to actually answer this. After all, none of you right-wing hacks ever do, but here it goes.

What, precisely, do you have to protect yourself, your family, and your children from? What threat, exactly, does marriage equality present to you, and your family?

You morons keep spewing that stupid rhetoric, but whenever you're asked for clarification, you all just shut the fuck up, and pretend the question was never asked.

 

[jillian]

As a heterosexual married white man with 4 kids, please describe how this issue deserves my attention. How is it a threat to me?

Because you have four children growing up in a country becoming increasingly perverted

what is perverse is a group of bigots thinking they should be able to divest others of their human rights.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As a heterosexual married white man with 4 kids, please describe how this issue deserves my attention. How is it a threat to me?

Because you have four children growing up in a country becoming increasingly perverted

what is perverse is a group of bigots thinking they should be able to divest others of their human rights.

So when are you going to push for incest as a legal right? I guess that isn't a perversion to you either.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

yep the queens screamed and yelled until a god damn judge let them have their cookie and cream

A judge? There were like a score of rulings for equality. How many against?

Anyone? Anyone? Bheuler?

there is no god damn constitution right that allows queens to lock up and suck dick as husband and bitch

That why you hate gays so much? You were forced to suck it in the pen?

Freak I would take up your sick habits nor have I been in the pen maybe you have.
Fucking freak.

YOU'RE A POS COWARD

I live in Kannapolis North Carolina come gets some freak

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As a heterosexual married white man with 4 kids, please describe how this issue deserves my attention. How is it a threat to me?

When a nation loses it's morality it slowly starts to lose it's freedom. That's fucking why.

 

[jillian]

As a heterosexual married white man with 4 kids, please describe how this issue deserves my attention. How is it a threat to me?

Because you have four children growing up in a country becoming increasingly perverted

what is perverse is a group of bigots thinking they should be able to divest others of their human rights.

So when are you going to push for incest as a legal right? I guess that isn't a perversion to you either.

i'm sorry, i don't entertain false analogies which are intended to make people feel better about their own bigotry.

have a good day, reb