Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Stops Gay Marriage In Utah

[Kondor3]

Yes, words change meanings.

GAY today means Good As You.

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, words change meanings.

GAY today means Good As You.

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

Right...'cause all the polls that show majority support for marriage equality are lying, right? Kinda like the polls that showed Romney losing, they lied too, right?

I don't feel that I'm "on the outside looking in". Certainly not now that my legal marriage is treated exactly like yours in over a dozen states. Now, if we can just get the rest of DOMA repealed...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, words change meanings.

GAY today means Good As You.

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

Majority of Americans now will say that it is you, Kondor, looking in from the outside.

 

[SwimExpert]

Yes, words change meanings.

GAY today means Good As You.

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

No, no, you've got it all wrong. Lesbians do it on the outside. Gay dude do it very much on the inside. Actually, even lesbians do it on the inside a little bit too. They just use assisting devices most of the time.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, words change meanings.

GAY today means Good As You.

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

Majority of Americans now will say that it is you, Kondor, looking in from the outside.

No, they won't. The majority isn't represented by the homo bloc, and the majority understands that homosexuality is a deviance, and a choice.

 

[Kondor3]

Yes, words change meanings.

GAY today means Good As You.

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

Majority of Americans now will say that it is you, Kondor, looking in from the outside.

We don't have to look much further than the popular clamor in support of Chick-Fil-A and Phil Robertson (the A&E incident, including the sudden flood of Duck merchandise sales immediately after the story broke) to begin to suspect that there's something not quite right with those polls, after all.

The Gay Lobby (primary stakeholders, and their sympaticos) have never had a good feel for when they're pushing the other 97% too far, so, it comes as no surprise that many of those on the 3% side of the aisle will cling to sampling polls as prima facie evidence that most of the 97% are on their side, and that they haven't reached and exceeded the limits of the goodwill and benefit of a doubt formerly extended to them.

If one cannot see the tolerance threshold, one cannot understand when one has gone beyond it.

The 3% will figure it out, and come to understand that they've crossed that line, but only long after the 97% reach that conclusion. Such is the arrogant, self-aggrandizing, smug and self-congratulatory nature of the Gay Lobby beast. A nature that engenders amusement and little sympathy from the 97%, when the 3% are handed a massive public relations defeat like the Robertson/A&E incident.

 

[Seawytch]

Gay today still means 'on the outside, looking in', and probably always will.

Majority of Americans now will say that it is you, Kondor, looking in from the outside.

No, they won't. The majority isn't represented by the homo bloc, and the majority understands that homosexuality is a deviance, and a choice.

Yeah, actually we are. You know why? Because you simply cannot insulate yourselves from "those people" no matter how much you want to...because we end up being YOUR family members.

U.S. Acceptance of Gay/Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now he'll show up and say about me exactly what I've said about him, and pretend that he's being original. He might follow me to another thread to write it, in the hopes that nobody notices.

Miss Hattie/koshergrl is right: she follows me around. And she is wrong again: U.S. Acceptance of Gay/Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

and for our entertainment:

 

[koshergrl]

Majority of Americans now will say that it is you, Kondor, looking in from the outside.

No, they won't. The majority isn't represented by the homo bloc, and the majority understands that homosexuality is a deviance, and a choice.

Yeah, actually we are. You know why? Because you simply cannot insulate yourselves from "those people" no matter how much you want to...because we end up being YOUR family members.

U.S. Acceptance of Gay/Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

How'd that chicken boycott work out for you?

Duck Dynasty?

How about Prop 8 in Cali?

The majority is sick of you. The majority isn't interested in your parades, in your public displays, in your political push to bring depravity to the market place.

People would be more inclined to take you seriously and consider you normal if you didn't deny reality and lie continually.

 

[Barb]

No, they won't. The majority isn't represented by the homo bloc, and the majority understands that homosexuality is a deviance, and a choice.

Yeah, actually we are. You know why? Because you simply cannot insulate yourselves from "those people" no matter how much you want to...because we end up being YOUR family members.

U.S. Acceptance of Gay/Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

How'd that chicken boycott work out for you?

Duck Dynasty?

How about Prop 8 in Cali?

The majority is sick of you. The majority isn't interested in your parades, in your public displays, in your political push to bring depravity to the market place.

People would be more inclined to take you seriously and consider you normal if you didn't deny reality and lie continually.

What a change in attitude from the Lily Tomlin thread.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...lin-marries-longtime-partner.html#post8425210

http://www.usmessageboard.com/reputation.php?p=8425244

 

[Katzndogz]

No one cares what homosexuals do privately. Keep it in your own bedroom. How's that for a concept?

 

[kaz]

There should be no government "civil unions." I don't just oppose the word marriage with regard to government. Government should not be involved in this. If a couple want to back up their marriage with a contract, that's for them to specify. But civil unions are just an end around the word. It should not be a function of government.

The government has to be involved and will continue to be involved however all this shakes out.

Did you have any content with that, or were you just here to demonstrate the logical fallacy of begging the question?

 

[kaz]

Thank you. To Seawytch: I think you are misrepresenting what she is saying.

As long as the government is in the marriage business (I prefer the government to do civil unions and churches to do private marriages), yes, same sex couples should have the same benefits as do you and I.

She has stated and repeated that I should divorce my wife because I oppose government marriage. I've made the points that it's far more important to my wife many times, she blows it off and says I should divorce her anyway. I am misunderstanding and misstating nothing.

Now you're just making shit up in a fit of pique. I never told you to divorce your wife so stop acting the drama queen.

Being a reluctant hypocrite is still a hypocrite. You speak against the idea of gays having access to the exact same rights, benefits and privileges you enjoy...even if you don't like enjoying them. It's still hypocritical whether you feel you were "forced" into it or not.

You said that repeatedly, stop being the drama queen for getting called on it.

And to say that following my values is hypocrisy because you can hair split and word parse is to eliminate all meaning of the word. If you believe in following the rules of the road, but speed to avoid an accident, it's hypocrisy! Bull crap. Values are prioritized. I'm tired of this stupid discussion with you, which is all I ever have with you because all you care about are gays and making every discussion and government policy a plan to validate your relationship and give you door prizes.

Have a good one.

 

[Unkotare]

There should be no government "civil unions." I don't just oppose the word marriage with regard to government. Government should not be involved in this. If a couple want to back up their marriage with a contract, that's for them to specify. But civil unions are just an end around the word. It should not be a function of government.

The government has to be involved and will continue to be involved however all this shakes out.

Did you have any content with that, or were you just here to demonstrate the logical fallacy of begging the question?

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you could reason on your own. Perhaps I was mistaken.

 

[kaz]

The government has to be involved and will continue to be involved however all this shakes out.

Did you have any content with that, or were you just here to demonstrate the logical fallacy of begging the question?

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you could reason on your own. Perhaps I was mistaken.

I love it. So I said that we don't need government involvement in marriage. You replied yes we do. And from that I was supposed to say, oh, you're right, I guess we do.

That is why I like debating liberals. You're a hoot.

 

[Seawytch]

She has stated and repeated that I should divorce my wife because I oppose government marriage. I've made the points that it's far more important to my wife many times, she blows it off and says I should divorce her anyway. I am misunderstanding and misstating nothing.

Now you're just making shit up in a fit of pique. I never told you to divorce your wife so stop acting the drama queen.



Being a reluctant hypocrite is still a hypocrite. You speak against the idea of gays having access to the exact same rights, benefits and privileges you enjoy...even if you don't like enjoying them. It's still hypocritical whether you feel you were "forced" into it or not.

You said that repeatedly, stop being the drama queen for getting called on it.



And to say that following my values is hypocrisy because you can hair split and word parse is to eliminate all meaning of the word. If you believe in following the rules of the road, but speed to avoid an accident, it's hypocrisy! Bull crap. Values are prioritized. I'm tired of this stupid discussion with you, which is all I ever have with you because all you care about are gays and making every discussion and government policy a plan to validate your relationship and give you door prizes.



Have a good one.

We're following our values by seeking legal civil marriage just like your wife. Do you hold her in as much contempt as you do gays that want to be married?

 

[Silhouette]

How'd that chicken boycott work out for you?

Duck Dynasty?

How about Prop 8 in Cali?

The majority is sick of you. The majority isn't interested in your parades, in your public displays, in your political push to bring depravity to the market place.

People would be more inclined to take you seriously and consider you normal if you didn't deny reality and lie continually.

Good points koshergrl. You mean the majority are sick of this? I can't imagine why...

 

[Nosmo King]

How'd that chicken boycott work out for you?

Duck Dynasty?

How about Prop 8 in Cali?

The majority is sick of you. The majority isn't interested in your parades, in your public displays, in your political push to bring depravity to the market place.

People would be more inclined to take you seriously and consider you normal if you didn't deny reality and lie continually.

Good points koshergrl. You mean the majority are sick of this? I can't imagine why...

I'd you're willing to stand by anecdotal evidence about the gay community, are you willing to defend heterosexual porn as virtuous? Or ar you just engaging. In some good old fashioned gay bashing due to utter foolishness and ignorance?

 

[Silhouette]

How'd that chicken boycott work out for you?

Duck Dynasty?

How about Prop 8 in Cali?

The majority is sick of you. The majority isn't interested in your parades, in your public displays, in your political push to bring depravity to the market place.

People would be more inclined to take you seriously and consider you normal if you didn't deny reality and lie continually.

Good points koshergrl. You mean the majority are sick of this? I can't imagine why...

I'd you're willing to stand by anecdotal evidence about the gay community, are you willing to defend heterosexual porn as virtuous? Or ar you just engaging. In some good old fashioned gay bashing due to utter foolishness and ignorance?

Care to discuss the venue in context? As in, the porn act you're seeing reinacted in the picture was in broad daylight, in the Heartland, down Main Street in the presence of children who came to see what all the bright rainbow colors were all about. You know how children like rainbow colors right? Quite the lure for them.

There's the context...

...And in related news... Harvey Milk is the icon of the LGBT movement "across the nation and the world"...

 

[Unkotare]

That is why I like debating liberals.

You should go find a liberal and debate it. Have fun.




As for me, I guess I need to apologize for assuming you weren't an idiot.

Ok, get your crayons ready: Marriage is necessarily a public contract. Otherwise, the 'agreement' would have no force of law and one party - typically the woman - would be left without recourse in the event that the agreement didn't work out. Any children resulting from said agreement would be likewise vulnerable and this would be to the detriment to society as a whole. Therefore, the government must be involved in order to enforce the terms of the contract like any other. Nothing necessarily relating to religion or political affiliation.