Can someone tell me when it was that Gays had different drinking fountains?...

[ABikerSailor]

Hey mal...............I answered your post, now wanna comment on it, or are you going to keep ducking the issue?

 

[1751_Texan]

And Gays have ever single one that I have... And if Marriage is a "Right" as the SCOTUS said when they called it "Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival" then they have that one also.

Of course they can't Defy their Natural Design and that is at the Core of "Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival"...

There is nothing Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival about Man/Man or Woman/Woman... That is Distinctly a Man/Woman thing...

And by the way, why each and every single one of them Exists.

Fact not Fiction.



peace...

That is partially correct, the Justices in the Loving v Virgina ruling were affirming marriage as a fundamental Constitutional right. What the Court did not do is establish that marriage was solely THE function of Human existance.

Im sure the Justices were well aware that marriage in not nessasary to procreate or to keep the human species alive.

Just as well... any future Court will fully understand that affirming Same Gender Marriage rights would not cause the human race to cease.

Just as well... any future Court will fully understand that affirming Animal/Human Marriage rights would not cause the human race to cease

Just as well... any future Court will fully understand that affirming Sibling Marriage rights would not cause the human race to cease

Just as well... any future Court will fully understand that affirming Adult/Child Marriage rights would not cause the human race to cease

It's this simple... It's not Religious... It's not Opinion:

Man/Woman is NOT Equal to Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

^Fact.



peace...

You are correct. If in the future, any of those options make it before the Court...then I am sure that the Court would understand that any marriage option other than M-W option... would not cause the Human race to cease.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You are conflating Civil Rights with the Civil Rights struggles of 1950's-70's.

Civil Rights belong to every Ameircan.

And Gays have ever single one that I have... And if Marriage is a "Right" as the SCOTUS said when they called it "Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival" then they have that one also.

Of course they can't Defy their Natural Design and that is at the Core of "Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival"...

There is nothing Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival about Man/Man or Woman/Woman... That is Distinctly a Man/Woman thing...

And by the way, why each and every single one of them Exists.

Fact not Fiction.



peace...

That is partially correct, the Justices in the Loving v Virgina ruling were affirming marriage as a fundamental Constitutional right. What the Court did not do is establish that marriage was solely THE function of Human existance.

Im sure the Justices were well aware that marriage in not nessasary to procreate or to keep the human species alive.

Just as well... any future Court will fully understand that affirming Same Gender Marriage rights would not cause the human race to cease.

Correct.

The ability to procreate or not has no bearing on the right to marry, or the right of citizens to access the marriage law of their state, as infertile opposite-sex couples are allowed to marry.

 

[mal]

You haven't taken issue with what I said because you can't... Instead you opt for the "Bigot" meme...

My Wife and I talked a close Friend into coming out in our Kitchen... I have plenty of Gay Friends and Family and we don't agree on one thing... Marriage vs Civil Unions.

Funny thing is 10 and 15 years ago I was a Crusader for their Cause because I as Pro-Civil Union... Now I'm a Bigot.

Let's try this again and see if you will be just another in a long line of Activists who simply Ignore this Reality:

Man/Woman is not Naturally, Biologically, Physically or Factually Equal to Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

^That is not up for Debate, it's what is.



peace...

[MENTION=11763]ABikerSailor[/MENTION]

It's in red... Take issue with it with it and Illustrate how it's Wrong.



peace...

So..................only people who are equal to each other should be allowed to marry? What about a black man marrying a white woman? Prior to the 60's, whites and blacks were considered to be unequal on all counts you mentioned.

Like I said..................bigot much?

If two people want to marry, it shouldn't matter what gender they are, just like color no longer matters. Several years from now, people are going to look back and wonder what the big fuss was.

Skin Color doesn't Negate "our very Existence"... All Races can Reflect Marriage... Races being Denied Marriage Defied our very Existence since the Possibility of Procreations Exists with mixing Race and ALWAYS has.

Man and Women aren't Equal to each other... You are missing the point or deliberately Ignoring it.

But ALL Individuals have Equal Rights... ALL Individuals.

But when two people come together Man/Woman is "Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival" and is Inherently, Naturally, Biologically and Factually NOT Equal to Man/Man and Woman/Woman.

Every single Living Homosexual is a Product of Man/Woman.

Not ONE is the Product of Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

Ever.

This has nothing to do with Opinion or Religion... It is what IS.



peace...

 

[Pop23]

Where does it say in the Constitution that gay people can't get married?

It doesn't say that? So would that mean that gay people can get married since there isn't anything illegal about it in the first place?

Where does it say Martians can't marry?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Man/Woman is not Naturally, Biologically, Physically or Factually Equal to Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

Prior to the 1960's, that statement could have been written White/White is not naturally, biologically, physically or factually equal to Black/White.

And.............back then, many people would have agreed. Why else do you think that interracial marriage was illegal in some places in the U.S. until 1967?

 

[mal]

Man/Woman is not Naturally, Biologically, Physically or Factually Equal to Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

Prior to the 1960's, that statement could have been written White/White is not naturally, biologically, physically or factually equal to Black/White.

And.............back then, many people would have agreed. Why else do you think that interracial marriage was illegal in some places in the U.S. until 1967?

I don't care if People were that Fucking Stupid or still are...

Man/Woman is not Naturally, Biologically, Physically or Factually Equal to Man/Man or Woman/Woman <That is a Fact no matter when it's said or what Laws are Passed.

Man/Man and Woman/Woman have never Reproduced and NEVER will Naturally... 100% of the time.

That Possibility only lies with what Created them.

Man/Woman.

Stop with the Race shit, it's UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLY Dishonest.



peace...

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know..........people thought that blacks were somehow inferior as well, but then saner people prevailed and states started to legalize marriage between any races.

Kinda like what's happening now with states starting to legalize gay marriage.

And.............got news for you................reproduction isn't the only reason for getting married. If it was then everyone who was infertile would be denied marriage.

But............keep up with the bigotry mal..............it seems to suit you.

 

[mal]

You know..........people thought that blacks were somehow inferior as well, but then saner people prevailed and states started to legalize marriage between any races.

Kinda like what's happening now with states starting to legalize gay marriage.

And.............got news for you................reproduction isn't the only reason for getting married. If it was then everyone who was infertile would be denied marriage.

But............keep up with the bigotry mal..............it seems to suit you.

Some People still FEEL that Blacks are Inferior you Tiresome Twat...

Irrelevant to the FACT that Man/Woman is NOT Equal to Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

None of what you've Posted yet Negates that Natural FACT.

How you FEEL about the Subject does NOT Negate what is.

As for your Tired Meme of Punishing the Possibly Infertile... Absurd. Do I have to Explain it or will you just Concede it's all you've got and it Failed?

I'll Explain it...

Plenty of People who have been told they can end up getting Pregnant.

No two Men or two Woman have EVER gotten Pregnant together... Ever.

And if Reproduction is Irrelevant to Marriage as you seem to FEEL, then why would you Deny two Sisters the same Special Rights you are Demanding for Gays?...

You got nothin'... As always.



peace...

 

[Pop23]

You know..........people thought that blacks were somehow inferior as well, but then saner people prevailed and states started to legalize marriage between any races.

Kinda like what's happening now with states starting to legalize gay marriage.

And.............got news for you................reproduction isn't the only reason for getting married. If it was then everyone who was infertile would be denied marriage.

But............keep up with the bigotry mal..............it seems to suit you.

Dude. Ad a black male to a white female, the dynamic of the couple only changes in a very superficial way. Not true if you change it to black male and white male.

Is there really an argument about that.

Group one, in a demographic group, must worry about a pregnancy that can result in death of one of the couple by having intercourse. Change the color that does not change, change to same gender and it does.

The argument that this is simply a natural extension of the fight for racial equality fails this simple test.

 

[KNB]

Group one, in a demographic group, must worry about a pregnancy that can result in death of one of the couple by having intercourse. Change the color that does not change, change to same gender and it does.

What does that mean? A heterosexual interracial married couple has to worry about complications during pregnancy and delivery, but same-sex couples don't?

Two women can have a baby without a man's sperm involved. That is a scientific reality now. The pregnant female in that relationship is then subject to the same biological risks as every other pregnant woman who has ever lived.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

This means that female same-sex couples are subject to the exact same risks and complications as heterosexual married couples. Male same-sex couples obviously don't have to worry about pregnancy complications.

 

[mal]

You know..........people thought that blacks were somehow inferior as well, but then saner people prevailed and states started to legalize marriage between any races.

Kinda like what's happening now with states starting to legalize gay marriage.

And.............got news for you................reproduction isn't the only reason for getting married. If it was then everyone who was infertile would be denied marriage.

But............keep up with the bigotry mal..............it seems to suit you.

Dude. Ad a black male to a white female, the dynamic of the couple only changes in a very superficial way. Not true if you change it to black male and white male.

Is there really an argument about that.

Group one, in a demographic group, must worry about a pregnancy that can result in death of one of the couple by having intercourse. Change the color that does not change, change to same gender and it does.

The argument that this is simply a natural extension of the fight for racial equality fails this simple test.

He's Emotional about the Issue... Liberals want things to be other than the way they are and they get Frustrated and Angry when face with Reality.

He wishes I just said, "Gays are Disgusting" and "God Hates Fags" but I don't say those things...

I say what is Fact: Man/Woman is NOT Equal to Man/Man and Woman/Woman and he can't counter this Natural Fact.

Every Homosexual is a Product of Man/Woman.

No Human in History has been the Product of Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

Society does not need to Burden the Insecurities that Homosexual Inherently Suffer from by giving them Special Rights in Marriage.

Civil Unions deal with EVERY Issue that Gays face...

Save one...

Validation... And even if it's Law Nationally, "Marriage" will not get them the Validation they Inherently Lack.

Laws forcing People to say Gay is Great won't...

Laws forcing People to not say Gay is Sin won't...

Nothing will.

There are Liberal Societal Anarchists who joined the cause for the same reason they Defend Islam...

They want the Shithouse to Burn... Why?... Because they are Mentally Ill and we used to House them back in the day.

Thanks to overblown reports of Abuse in the Nuthouses they went bye-bye for the most part.

Now these Fuckers walk the Streets... Many of them Trained by Political People the Game the System and Vote.

If Liberals REALLY Cared about all of these People they would have Honestly "Changed" their Failing Policies before Generations were Ruined by them.

Sick thing is after Liberal City after Liberal City has Failed with the same Policies, they continue to Insist they be continued or tried in areas they aren't in now.

It's Scary shit.... Seriously Scary shit.

And they REALLY Hate people who see what they are doing.



peace...

 

[mal]

Group one, in a demographic group, must worry about a pregnancy that can result in death of one of the couple by having intercourse. Change the color that does not change, change to same gender and it does.

What does that mean? A heterosexual interracial married couple has to worry about complications during pregnancy and delivery, but same-sex couples don't?

Two women can have a baby without a man's sperm involved. That is a scientific reality now. The pregnant female in that relationship is then subject to the same biological risks as every other pregnant woman who has ever lived.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

This means that female same-sex couples are subject to the exact same risks and complications as hetersexual interracial married couples. Male same-sex couples obviously don't have to worry about pregnancy complications.

Woman can't Produce Sperm... No two Woman have ever or will ever Create Life.

This level of Brain Damage is Fucking Concerning, it really is.



peace...

 

[KNB]

No Human in History has been the Product of Man/Man or Woman/Woman.

Read something other than the Bible.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

 

[KNB]

Group one, in a demographic group, must worry about a pregnancy that can result in death of one of the couple by having intercourse. Change the color that does not change, change to same gender and it does.

What does that mean? A heterosexual interracial married couple has to worry about complications during pregnancy and delivery, but same-sex couples don't?

Two women can have a baby without a man's sperm involved. That is a scientific reality now. The pregnant female in that relationship is then subject to the same biological risks as every other pregnant woman who has ever lived.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

This means that female same-sex couples are subject to the exact same risks and complications as hetersexual interracial married couples. Male same-sex couples obviously don't have to worry about pregnancy complications.

Woman can't Produce Sperm... No two Woman have ever or will ever Create Life.

This level of Brain Damage is Fucking Concerning, it really is.



peace...

It says in the article how two women can have a baby without sperm.

Does the Bible explain human genetics? No. Science, however, does.

 

[mal]

What does that mean? A heterosexual interracial married couple has to worry about complications during pregnancy and delivery, but same-sex couples don't?

Two women can have a baby without a man's sperm involved. That is a scientific reality now. The pregnant female in that relationship is then subject to the same biological risks as every other pregnant woman who has ever lived.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

This means that female same-sex couples are subject to the exact same risks and complications as hetersexual interracial married couples. Male same-sex couples obviously don't have to worry about pregnancy complications.

Woman can't Produce Sperm... No two Woman have ever or will ever Create Life.

This level of Brain Damage is Fucking Concerning, it really is.



peace...

It says in the article how two women can have a baby without sperm.

Does the Bible explain human genetics? No. Science, however, does.

This is a Fact: Two Woman can't make a Baby.

You can't Argue that Fact.

Science can make a Woman and Dog have a Baby... But in Fact a Woman and Dog can NOT make a Baby.

Got anything else?...

I didn't think so.

NEXT!



peace...

 

[Pop23]

Group one, in a demographic group, must worry about a pregnancy that can result in death of one of the couple by having intercourse. Change the color that does not change, change to same gender and it does.

What does that mean? A heterosexual interracial married couple has to worry about complications during pregnancy and delivery, but same-sex couples don't?

Two women can have a baby without a man's sperm involved. That is a scientific reality now. The pregnant female in that relationship is then subject to the same biological risks as every other pregnant woman who has ever lived.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

This means that female same-sex couples are subject to the exact same risks and complications as heterosexual married couples. Male same-sex couples obviously don't have to worry about pregnancy complications.

Did you not read the article or the date?

They are/were experimenting. It has not happened

It appears this was to be a reality.................

Wait for it...........

In 2002?

Oh, and it was to be successful within 18 month! Appears about 10 years late for launch!

Wow, do yourself a favor, DO NOT Bet the farm on this one!

OMG and you want to be taken seriously?

 

[KNB]

From the article:

US scientists are now trying to produce viable human embryos after the process, known as haploidisation, proved successful in experiments on mice.

That sounds like reality. Even if it hasn't happened yet, it can happen and then the argument that marriage is sacred because of procreation will be even dumber than it is now.

 

[Pop23]

From the article:

US scientists are now trying to produce viable human embryos after the process, known as haploidisation, proved successful in experiments on mice.

That sounds like reality. Even if it hasn't happened yet, it can happen and then the argument that marriage is sacred because of procreation will be even dumber than it is now.

I'm sorry but I can't stop myself

The article was published in 2002 moron!

Read the freaking date for god sakes. It appears it was a monumental failure

Then consider this. Your the tech that creates this, you implant it in a women, it's born with a defect, there ain't enough insurance in the world to cover your ass.

Short and sweet, it never happened and never will

 

[mal]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/350235-idiocy-doubled-down-knb.html



Dumbest person today, KNB is.



peace...