FOr the ignorant - gays vs pedos vs polygamists

[g5000]

You learn something new every day. I have learned that gays have a national charter. The convention that came out of must have been when they wrote their Agenda.

"We hereby choose to be gay and we want we to smoke little pee-pees, hump our moms, and have our way with dogs. Plus, also, hairy Muslims are starting to look good, and we don't like guns and we want FEMA camps for the straights. Lots of FEMA camps..."

 

[martybegan]

I support laws which ban incest. In the aggregate, incest is a provable social harm.

So what would you support if, say in 20-30 years, it turns out that allowing same sex couples to raise children results in a provable social harm? If all the kids turn out to be fucking mental?

Is that the case with all the children raised by gay parents now?

Who knows? we don't have enough aggregate data. G5000 uses the "provable social harm" limit to incest restrictions, so if we find a provable social harm sometime in the future from gay marriage and gay child rearing, will G5000 remove his support of it?

 

[martybegan]

You learn something new every day. I have learned that gays have a national charter. The convention that came out of must have been when they wrote their Agenda.

And yet when a single tea party group says something stupid, ALL Tea Partiers are now associated with said stupid.

Harry Hay was a supporter of NAMBLA, and remember NAMBLA is an association of pederasts, not pedophiles, there is a difference.

 

[mal]

You learn something new every day. I have learned that gays have a national charter. The convention that came out of must have been when they wrote their Agenda.

"We hereby choose to be gay and we want we to smoke little pee-pees, hump our moms, and have our way with dogs. Plus, also, hairy Muslims are starting to look good..."

It's been posted on this Site... It's from the same the APA lifted he "Mental Disorder" Classification in the 70's... Back when NAMBLA regularly Marched in Gay Pride Parades.



peace...

 

[bodecea]

I have posted academic studies on the issue, gay men are no more, or less, likely to be pedophiles:

Are Children at Risk for Sexual Abuse by Homosexuals?

The problem seems to be men...sad to say, often close family members or friends...and girls are more often targets than boys.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I've seen the argument that if gays simply have a different sexual orientation - so do pedophiles, so we should accept them all.

That argument is completely ignorant of the concept of "consent". Minors cannot consent to sex.

I've seen the argument that if we let the gays marry we have to allow polygamy, too.

Straight men who have multiple partners are still straight men - its the same sexual orientation. Disallowing polygamy doesn't discriminate based on sexual orientation or sex - its a restriction on the number of people you may marry at once, without regard to sex or sexual orientation - so the argument is void.

EDIT - laws which restrict you from marrying siblings and cousins - again - that has nothing to do with orientation or gender.

Now shut up you gay haters.

You made two completely separate and disconnected points. One was about sexual orientation and the other was about criteria by which gov mandated coerced concessions are allowed.
You logic hater.

 

[bodecea]

So what would you support if, say in 20-30 years, it turns out that allowing same sex couples to raise children results in a provable social harm? If all the kids turn out to be fucking mental?

Is that the case with all the children raised by gay parents now?

Who knows? we don't have enough aggregate data. G5000 uses the "provable social harm" limit to incest restrictions, so if we find a provable social harm sometime in the future from gay marriage and gay child rearing, will G5000 remove his support of it?

That's it? That's all you got? Who knows if we will all be hit by a meteor tomorrow......so, let's judicate accordingly based on "who knows". Riiiiiiiight....

 

[g5000]

That is based on the assumption that who you like to bugger somehow makes you a protected class.

It's a belief that the state's issuance of privileges to marriage should not discriminate based on gender. Why are you obsessing over what adult married people do in their bedroom?

Read "he who must (recently) not be named " original post, that's what I am responding to.

And i always thought what happens in a bedroom isn't at issue here. Its the state and thus the people being forced by judges to accept same sex marriage via fiat, and not via the legislative process. That at least, is my problem with it.

A right is not decided by popular vote. Did you not know that?

Marriage is a right.

To deny someone a right, you have to provide a rational basis for doing so. You know, like if you are a bank robber you lose your right to bear arms. "He's a bank robber" is a pretty rational reason for not letting a guy have a gun.

You can't vote away a marriage right any more than the people can vote away your right to midget porn or your right to bear arms.

Under the protection of law, the state extends all kinds of cash and prizes to marriage. You can't withhold those protections from someone without a rational basis. Simple as that.

"We've always oppressed these people" is not a rational basis for continuing that oppression. Otherwise, blacks would still not have any freedoms. People would still only be allowed to marry someone of the same race if that was how the people voted.

If you don't want gays filing joint federal tax returns, you will have to take that away from everyone. Obsessing over their bedroom sex makes the bigots look really stupid.

 

[Peach]

You learn something new every day. I have learned that gays have a national charter. The convention that came out of must have been when they wrote their Agenda.

"We hereby choose to be gay and we want we to smoke little pee-pees, hump our moms, and have our way with dogs. Plus, also, hairy Muslims are starting to look good..."

It's been posted on this Site... It's from the same the APA lifted he "Mental Disorder" Classification in the 70's... Back when NAMBLA regularly Marched in Gay Pride Parades.



peace...

And Ted Bundy was a Republican activist, yes, decades ago. More statistics, not conjecture:

Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation

 

[hipeter924]

 

[Peach]

Is that the case with all the children raised by gay parents now?

Who knows? we don't have enough aggregate data. G5000 uses the "provable social harm" limit to incest restrictions, so if we find a provable social harm sometime in the future from gay marriage and gay child rearing, will G5000 remove his support of it?

That's it? That's all you got? Who knows if we will all be hit by a meteor tomorrow......so, let's judicate accordingly based on "who knows". Riiiiiiiight....

I can prove social harm in grocery shelves being too high also.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I have posted academic studies on the issue, gay men are no more, or less, likely to be pedophiles:

The culprits caught on NBC's To Catch a Predator were way more often homo than the percentages should warrant. That's mighty empirical.

 

[g5000]

So what would you support if, say in 20-30 years, it turns out that allowing same sex couples to raise children results in a provable social harm? If all the kids turn out to be fucking mental?

Is that the case with all the children raised by gay parents now?

Who knows? we don't have enough aggregate data. G5000 uses the "provable social harm" limit to incest restrictions, so if we find a provable social harm sometime in the future from gay marriage and gay child rearing, will G5000 remove his support of it?

You have not defined "fucking mental".

I suspect you think the belief that being gay is okay is "fucking mental".

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

It's a belief that the state's issuance of privileges to marriage should not discriminate based on gender. Why are you obsessing over what adult married people do in their bedroom?

Read "he who must (recently) not be named " original post, that's what I am responding to.

And i always thought what happens in a bedroom isn't at issue here. Its the state and thus the people being forced by judges to accept same sex marriage via fiat, and not via the legislative process. That at least, is my problem with it.

A right is not decided by popular vote. Did you not know that?

Marriage is a right.

Legal marriage is not a right. You're a sucker to propaganda. No one has a right to make someone else concede to something. That is why criteria must be considered before the privilege is granted. That is why a license is issued.

 

[mal]

You learn something new every day. I have learned that gays have a national charter. The convention that came out of must have been when they wrote their Agenda.

"We hereby choose to be gay and we want we to smoke little pee-pees, hump our moms, and have our way with dogs. Plus, also, hairy Muslims are starting to look good..."

It's been posted on this Site... It's from the same the APA lifted he "Mental Disorder" Classification in the 70's... Back when NAMBLA regularly Marched in Gay Pride Parades.



peace...

And Ted Bundy was a Republican activist, yes, decades ago. More statistics, not conjecture:

Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation

The Age of Consent Debate is Current... Modern... Going on in the Colleges right now...

Liberals don't see Adult/Child Sex all that "Harmful".

I've posted more recent and less aggressive sounding Pedophiles on the Left who have Tenure in our "Respected" Institutions of Higher Learning.

Try dealing with that.



peace...

 

[mal]

The best part about it is they Write a LOT of this Pro-Pedo Shit in Homosexual Publications Comparing the "Struggle" to that of the Homosexuals...

Why would Homosexual Publications Entertain that unless they were Sympathetic?...



peace...

 

[bodecea]

Read "he who must (recently) not be named " original post, that's what I am responding to.

And i always thought what happens in a bedroom isn't at issue here. Its the state and thus the people being forced by judges to accept same sex marriage via fiat, and not via the legislative process. That at least, is my problem with it.

A right is not decided by popular vote. Did you not know that?

Marriage is a right.

Legal marriage is not a right. You're a sucker to propaganda. No one has a right to make someone else concede to something. That is why criteria must be considered before the privilege is granted. That is why a license is issued.

According to the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia it is:

Chief Justice Earl Warren's opinion for the unanimous court held that:
“ Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

 

[Peach]

I have posted academic studies on the issue, gay men are no more, or less, likely to be pedophiles:

The culprits caught on NBC's To Catch a Predator were way more often homo than the percentages should warrant. That's mighty empirical.

A TV show reflects empirical data? MORE actual research:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/10-myths

 

[g5000]

Read "he who must (recently) not be named " original post, that's what I am responding to.

And i always thought what happens in a bedroom isn't at issue here. Its the state and thus the people being forced by judges to accept same sex marriage via fiat, and not via the legislative process. That at least, is my problem with it.

A right is not decided by popular vote. Did you not know that?

Marriage is a right.

Legal marriage is not a right. You're a sucker to propaganda.

Uh...nooo. I read the court decisions which have said it is.

 

[mal]

A right is not decided by popular vote. Did you not know that?

Marriage is a right.

Legal marriage is not a right. You're a sucker to propaganda. No one has a right to make someone else concede to something. That is why criteria must be considered before the privilege is granted. That is why a license is issued.

According to the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia it is:

Chief Justice Earl Warren's opinion for the unanimous court held that:
“ Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

"Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival" and the Court was VERY MUCH so talking about ProCreation which you are NOT Capable of with another Female.

Liberals are being REALLY Dishonest recently.



peace...