CNN A married gay man is running for president. That's a big deal?...Not if you are a DemonRAT!

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The most fundamental normal part of being an American is knowing that everyone is entitled to equal protection of the laws.

Racists like yourself are way outside the mainstream, kiddo.

Who said fags shouldn’t be protected?
You’re trying way too hard bud...relax.

All of those motherfuckers who supported laws making marriage between a man and a woman for starters.

lol, you justify your own bigotry by using someone else's supposed bigotry?

My bigotry...What the fuck does that even mean?

You seem bigoted against Christianity. Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I don't have a problem at all with a couple of homosexuals saying they are engaged in Gay Marriage. But if people don't want to participate in the charade they shouldn't have to.

One of the great theologians of our time was the late Dr. Jerry Falwell. I heard a message from him a number of years ago, Dr. Falwell put forth the idea that Almighty God put Adam and Eve in the Garden, it wasn't Adam and Steve. I looked in my bible, and he was actually incontrovertibly right.

A man and a broad ? That tells me all I need to know about your mentality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Avatar4321]

Haha...I wish you quacks knew how bizarre that shit sounds to NORMAL folks not fucked in the head.

Wait.

Do you actually believe you are NORMAL?!?!

The most fundamental NORMAL part of being a human being is knowing where your penis belongs....and it’s not in a mans 2-hole.
You knew that right?

The most fundamental normal part of being an American is knowing that everyone is entitled to equal protection of the laws.

Racists like yourself are way outside the mainstream, kiddo.

Who said fags shouldn’t be protected?
You’re trying way too hard bud...relax.

All of those motherfuckers who supported laws making marriage between a man and a woman for starters.

Because by definition marriage is between a man and a woman. You haven’t changed the definition by passing a law any more than you can make a dog turn into a cat by passing a law. All you end up doing is lying to yourself.

 

[Avatar4321]

Who said fags shouldn’t be protected?
You’re trying way too hard bud...relax.

All of those motherfuckers who supported laws making marriage between a man and a woman for starters.

lol, you justify your own bigotry by using someone else's supposed bigotry?

My bigotry...What the fuck does that even mean?

You are as big a bigot as anyone on this board.

What the fuck are you talking about. Hating those who hate for now reason -hating those who are hateful is not bigotry. It's a matter of self defense. To say that I'm a bigot is like saying that someone who defends themselves against violence is equally guilty of a violent crime. Bigots engage in unproved hatred . I don't

That’s exactly what a bigot would say

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You seem bigoted against Christianity.

No . I recognize the fact that there are many Christians who are supportive of human and civil rights and do not use their religion as weapon to advance their social and political agenda against those who they disapprove of. Obviously you are not such a Christian

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I do not concern myself with what your God has established. I am concerned about the Constitution and equal protection under the law, and due process. This is not your theocracy and you need to learn how to respect the beliefs of those who believe in a secular society.

 

[Silhouette]

Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I do not concern myself with what your God has established. I am concerned about the Constitution and equal protection under the law, and due process. This is not your theocracy and you need to learn how to respect the beliefs of those who believe in a secular society.

Behaviors don’t have mention in the Constitution. If they were, they’d have to be a very inclusive list. Is polygamy marriage legal yet?

 

[Polishprince]

Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I do not concern myself with what your God has established. I am concerned about the Constitution and equal protection under the law, and due process. This is not your theocracy and you need to learn how to respect the beliefs of those who believe in a secular society.

Marriage has nothing to do with two guys at all.

Almighty God is the author of marriage, and He is the one who defines it, not the Constitution.

In fact there isn't a syllable in the Constitution on marriage or on Gay Marriage either.


Almighty God destroyed a city which was named after a gay sex act back in antiquity, Sodom. I don't think that indicates approval for the gay lifestyle. If you translate the word "Sodom" into the English language, it would literally be "Buttfuck".

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I do not concern myself with what your God has established. I am concerned about the Constitution and equal protection under the law, and due process. This is not your theocracy and you need to learn how to respect the beliefs of those who believe in a secular society.

Behaviors don’t have mention in the Constitution. If they were, they’d have to be a very inclusive list. Is polygamy marriage legal yet?

Give it a fucking rest already. I have previously addressed that nonsense, but you are unable to deal with it. Make your case for plural marriage and we will listen. Your implication that I am opposed to it is just an appeal to hypocrisy logical fallacy and it is growing old.

 

[Silhouette]

Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I do not concern myself with what your God has established. I am concerned about the Constitution and equal protection under the law, and due process. This is not your theocracy and you need to learn how to respect the beliefs of those who believe in a secular society.

Behaviors don’t have mention in the Constitution. If they were, they’d have to be a very inclusive list. Is polygamy marriage legal yet?

Give it a fucking rest already. I have previously addressed that nonsense, but you are unable to deal with it. Make your case for plural marriage and we will listen. Your implication that I am opposed to it is just an appeal to hypocrisy logical fallacy and it is growing old.

The arguments were already made in 2015.

 

[sparky]

The most fundamental normal part of being an American is knowing that everyone is entitled to equal protection of the laws.

Racists like yourself are way outside the mainstream, kiddo.

Who said fags shouldn’t be protected?
You’re trying way too hard bud...relax.

All of those motherfuckers who supported laws making marriage between a man and a woman for starters.

lol, you justify your own bigotry by using someone else's supposed bigotry?

My bigotry...What the fuck does that even mean?

You seem bigoted against Christianity. Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I don't have a problem at all with a couple of homosexuals saying they are engaged in Gay Marriage. But if people don't want to participate in the charade they shouldn't have to.

One of the great theologians of our time was the late Dr. Jerry Falwell. I heard a message from him a number of years ago, Dr. Falwell put forth the idea that Almighty God put Adam and Eve in the Garden, it wasn't Adam and Steve. I looked in my bible, and he was actually incontrovertibly right.

'Ol Jerry!

Bummer his kid is gay, and his university is a mecca for them eh?

But his a Rep, in like flint!

~S~

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

I do not concern myself with what your God has established. I am concerned about the Constitution and equal protection under the law, and due process. This is not your theocracy and you need to learn how to respect the beliefs of those who believe in a secular society.

Marriage has nothing to do with two guys at all.

Almighty God is the author of marriage, and He is the one who defines it, not the Constitution.

In fact there isn't a syllable in the Constitution on marriage or on Gay Marriage either.


Almighty God destroyed a city which was named after a gay sex act back in antiquity, Sodom. I don't think that indicates approval for the gay lifestyle. If you translate the word "Sodom" into the English language, it would literally be "Buttfuck".

I am well aware of the fact that the constitution does not mention marriage. However , it does "mention" equal protection under the law. You cannot allow discriminatory laws without a damned good reason such as a compelling government interest, or at minimum , a rational basis.

Get it through you thick fucking skull that not everyone believes in the bible and fewer still believe that it should trump civil, secular law

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You seem bigoted against Christianity. Almighty God established Marriage to be between one man and one broad, and you are unwilling to accept that . That's bigotry by definition.

First of all, I recognize that fact that there are many fine Christians who -unlike you- support human and civil rights and do not seek to impose their beliefs on others . Secondly, to say that I am a bigot because I do not accept your Gods definition of marriage is as stupid as stupid gets.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Two consenting adults....in their house. Is being gay illegal? Your comparisons not arequate here. I don't live the lifestyle nor do I care what others do as long as it's within the law. Some things....most things...just aren't worth getting upset about. Just worry about yourself first and family second. Everything else down the list somewhere. I

How do you feel about consenting adults in multiple partnerships all marrying (polygamy)? Probably isn’t a good idea because of kids involved, right? I mean it wouldn’t hurt you but it might hurt them, which hurts society ultimately, which then hurts you indirectly. Is that fair to say?

How do you feel about children being raised in households without a mother or father? That indirectly harms me, harms them and society, right?

Worry about the happenings of your own roof, Mrs. Kravitz.

Seems a bit ridiculous to accuse people of being "nosy about private lives" when the guy put his life into a campaign ad. If he didn't want his relationship to be the central topic of his campaign, he shouldn't have made it the central topic of his campaign.

I still don't personally care. Wouldn't vote for him no matter what, so it doesn't matter to me.

How did he make it the "central topic of his campaign"?

Well, let me ask you something. Without doing an extensive Google search, what else do you know about him?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Two consenting adults....in their house. Is being gay illegal? Your comparisons not arequate here. I don't live the lifestyle nor do I care what others do as long as it's within the law. Some things....most things...just aren't worth getting upset about. Just worry about yourself first and family second. Everything else down the list somewhere. I

How do you feel about consenting adults in multiple partnerships all marrying (polygamy)? Probably isn’t a good idea because of kids involved, right? I mean it wouldn’t hurt you but it might hurt them, which hurts society ultimately, which then hurts you indirectly. Is that fair to say?

How do you feel about children being raised in households without a mother or father? That indirectly harms me, harms them and society, right?

Worry about the happenings of your own roof, Mrs. Kravitz.

Seems a bit ridiculous to accuse people of being "nosy about private lives" when the guy put his life into a campaign ad. If he didn't want his relationship to be the central topic of his campaign, he shouldn't have made it the central topic of his campaign.

I still don't personally care. Wouldn't vote for him no matter what, so it doesn't matter to me.

How did he make it the "central topic of his campaign"?

He didn't, but since he is gay and has a husband, he simply mentioned it. And, the haters would have blasted him for not mentioning it when they saw pictures of him with his husband. Damned if you do and damned if you don't here.

Uh huh. No one in this country even knew he existed, so what did he do to let people know he's here and wants to be President?

You can stop pissing down our legs and telling us it's raining. No one is going to buy, "Look, a gay 'married' man is going to run for President, how wonderful, if you notice it and talk about it, you're an obsessed hater!"

 

[Silhouette]

I am well aware of the fact that the constitution does not mention marriage. However , it does "mention" equal protection under the law. You cannot allow discriminatory laws without a damned good reason such as a compelling government interest, or at minimum , a rational basis.

How about the fact that in Obergefell the Court rationalized that marriage was a key benefit to children. Then in perverse irony went on to force all 50 states to allow marriage contracts (that the Court just said they share benefits of) that banish children for life from either a mother or father. This is detrimental to kids.

Is that good enough rationale for you to revisit Obergefell like the Court revisited Windsor so soon after & reverses it’s fundamenral Ruling: that marriage definition is the sole power of individual states?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have several gay friends and four of them are married, two men and two women. And a couple are single. In fact, several times when we go out to eat, I'm the only straight person in the group. But, these people are the kindest, most giving, and loving people I know. I consider it a privilege to call them my friends.

And, I think those here who are the most vocal about their hatred for gays just need to come out of the closet. It's always the loudest who end up being outed.

I hear the Browns of Sister Wives are really nice too. Does that mean polygamy should be legal?

The Brown Family sued to have their polygamous unions recognized as legal b/c they claimed not doing so was a violation of their religious liberties. Why don’t you support their religious liberties? I thought you were strong supporter of such things? We both know you don’t give a wet donkey shit about these liberties the second they can’t further your rabidly anti-gay crusade. You’re a phony.

I support the 14th Amendment which the Court said supports any sexual orientation between consenting adults that is legal behind closed doors (like polyamory) the right to marry. Of course the 14th & Windsor say nothing about this in reality, but the Court has legislated citing the 14th. And when they did that, they didn’t get to pick favorites. But then again I suppose their rationale under such a blatant overreach could just as legitimately be extended to the polyamory exclusion by their just saying “because we said so”.

I see. The 14th Amendment has to be all inclusive, but religious liberties in the 1st Amendment doesn’t. How deliciously self-serving and convenient. Apparently in your world some religious liberties are more equal than others. I’ll ask again since you avoided it: Why do you support the Brown Family?

Who said religious liberty doesn't have to be inclusive?

 

[Silhouette]

I see. The 14th Amendment has to be all inclusive, but religious liberties in the 1st Amendment doesn’t. How deliciously self-serving and convenient. Apparently in your world some religious liberties are more equal than others. I’ll ask again since you avoided it: Why do you support the Brown Family?

Who said religious liberty doesn't have to be inclusive?

Nobody. He was just putting words in my mouth he knows don’t exist. He was doing it to get pity points in a debate he has been losing to me for some time now.

He knows that for years I’ve been saying that the cult of “chop your dick off & you can be a girl” should apply for tax exempt status.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ironicaly they've the most gay following
Log Cabin Republicans | About Us

CNN.com - GOP gay group booted from N.C. convention - May 20, 2004

The Unhappy Lot of the Log Cabin Republicans

There was a collective Log Cabin Republican (LCR) clutching of pearls heard round the nation last week. The occasion was the release of the 2016 Republican Party Platform. The conservative manifesto enshrines a litany of American exceptionalist bigotry, especially towards LGBT people. It includes a definition of marriage as solely between a man and a woman, endorses the debunked practice of gay conversion therapy and, of course, demands bathroom visitation based on birth gender.

----------------

At this point, the only gays supporting the GOP are bottom masochists. They love being spat upon.

I disagree entirely. I don't see where a man's desire or repulsion at taking it in the ass should have any bearing on who he casts his ballot for. J. Edgar Hoover was a very conservative Republican, and also very flaming. Outstanding NY attorney who used to work for The Donald, Roy Cohn was also a Republican and as queer as a $3 Bill.

The truth of the matter is that if a man desire butt sex with other fellows, if he is discrete telling people on a Need to Know basis only, he need never fear discrimination.

If a homosexual tells a prospective employer that his sexual practices, he should expect not to be hired because he's giving too much information. Not because of "bigotry"

Who tells their boss about their sex life?

Makes one wonder if you even have a job.

Are you on disability?

And your argument? Bizarre.

And the argument? Also bizarre.

The creepies on the right always say things like "butt sex". I'll tell you why that's wrong on so many level.

First, many women like "butt sex". And a woman who does and is married to a right winger who doesn't is usually called one of two things, one is divorced and the other is a "cheater".

And the fact that right wingers reduce every comment about gays to sex proves that sex is the only thing that keeps them in a relationship. One wonders if right wingers have relationships beyond fuking because they can't imagine a relationship that consists of more than fuking. They simply don't know what "being in love" means. Clearly, they don't have a clue.
Pitiful,
just pitiful.

Um... we are talking about a group of people who define their identities based on who they want to have sex with. How exactly do we avoid talking about sex in that scenario?

Um We are talking about a group of people who define their identities on who they love, want to make a commitment to and establish a family with. How exactly do we avoid talking about love, commitment and family in that scenario?

Maybe by recognizing a BS appeal to emotion when we hear it?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Meh, what if he is a smart dude with his shit together? I don’t care who they screw, as long as it’s not children then fine. Sexual proclivities should be no ones business but theirs. I’ll listen to what he has to say.

Fair enough. But mdk thinks because he is gay, he won’t have a shot at the nomination.

Pretty interesting, since it's Democrats who vote on the Democrat nomination.

 

[mdk]

I have several gay friends and four of them are married, two men and two women. And a couple are single. In fact, several times when we go out to eat, I'm the only straight person in the group. But, these people are the kindest, most giving, and loving people I know. I consider it a privilege to call them my friends.

And, I think those here who are the most vocal about their hatred for gays just need to come out of the closet. It's always the loudest who end up being outed.

I hear the Browns of Sister Wives are really nice too. Does that mean polygamy should be legal?

The Brown Family sued to have their polygamous unions recognized as legal b/c they claimed not doing so was a violation of their religious liberties. Why don’t you support their religious liberties? I thought you were strong supporter of such things? We both know you don’t give a wet donkey shit about these liberties the second they can’t further your rabidly anti-gay crusade. You’re a phony.

I support the 14th Amendment which the Court said supports any sexual orientation between consenting adults that is legal behind closed doors (like polyamory) the right to marry. Of course the 14th & Windsor say nothing about this in reality, but the Court has legislated citing the 14th. And when they did that, they didn’t get to pick favorites. But then again I suppose their rationale under such a blatant overreach could just as legitimately be extended to the polyamory exclusion by their just saying “because we said so”.

I see. The 14th Amendment has to be all inclusive, but religious liberties in the 1st Amendment doesn’t. How deliciously self-serving and convenient. Apparently in your world some religious liberties are more equal than others. I’ll ask again since you avoided it: Why do you support the Brown Family?

Who said religious liberty doesn't have to be inclusive?

The person I am addressing.