God bless Texas

[LuvRPgrl]

I just did a quick search and the number is 70%...still a staggering figure.

The stat varies. If a kid had a father for the first four years, then he is gone, was that a fatherless household?

Its not so black and white,,,,but yes, as you say, its quite staggering. Boys need discipline, women are not natural disciplinarians, men are. Without the man in the house, boys very often dont receive the discipline they need to rein in their energy. Ever wonder why so many boys are diagnose with ADHD? And why its a fairly recent phenomenon? It also coincides with the rise in fatherless households.

These are questions and comments in general, not directed specifically to you MM.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Do you think 50 years ago that there was less infidelity, or that people just didn't divorce as quickly over it?

BOTH

 

[LuvRPgrl]

My point was that he seems to just be pulling shit out of his ass. But he very well may have a source, so I could very well be wrong. If so, I'll apologize for my shit out the ass comment.

apology accepted.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

the only point you have proven is that you are a narcist...you prefer "Ultimate Masturbation" good for you professor...gay sex is nothing more than masturbation in the ultimate form...a fetish to be polite...now would you please move on to actual and important issues of the day...and get your head out of your proverbial ass!

Ya know, I dont hate homosexuals, nor do I wish any harm to any for their sexuality, and I certainly am not homophobic, but one thing is for certain. SOMETHING SERIOUSLY went wrong in the wiring with homos. Anyone who cant see that is seriously self deluding. As stated by a Texan once, "it just aint right"

I mean, its so damn obvious its deviant behavior, and not how we were intended, either by God or evolution or both, to be. Its just flat out weird. Personally, I actually have pity for anyone who is homo.

While we dont need to punish people for being homo, we certainly also should not be glorifying it or promoting it in any way shape or form, like "gay pride" month in LAUSD. Yea, tens of thousands of kids graduate every year from LAUSD, high schoolers getting their diploma, yet they cant even read the freaking words on the diploma, nor can they write. But hey, they got sensitivity training to make sure they understand and respect homos. !

Ya think the educators have their priorities a LITTLE SCREWED UP? Bunch o fucking idiots.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

apology accepted.

You didn't provide a source, so there's no apology for you to accept.

 

[007]

You've proved my point and made an ass of yourself in the process. Dismissed.

As for not putting you on my ignore list, you continue to amuse me.

Shit pulit... I reduce you to a sniveling pile of dog shit every time we get into it. All I have to do is say what have to say, and you, right on que, puke out your liberal line of vitriol.

Your hatred of conservatives and Christians is sooooo deep, I've come to believe that when I talk to you, I'm talking to one of the devil's deciples. You are against all that is GOOD in this country, you are against all that is GOOD for man, you are against MORALS, you are against the MAJORITY.

What I can't for the life of me figure out, is what makes a confused soul like you tick. Where did you get so far out? What DRUGS did you do to make your brain so disconnected with reality? I don't know. All I do know is, you're about as big of a whack job this board has seen.

But, I guess you're still here and haven't been banned yet because you amuse us. We can't all agree with each other all of the time and have fun. We need a nut job like you around to make us laugh. You make me laugh, but at the same time, I realize just how fucked up you are. I think most others here know too, but they choose not to respond to you because they either think it's not worth it and you're just crazy, or they know that whatever they might say to you, it will NEVER phase that stagnant liberal mind of yours. I respond to you because I just take pleasure in pissing liberals off, and you're so predictable and easy.

Now, you've been exposed. Everybody here knows what and who you are. The slimey liberal in favor of anything immoral or bad for America. So go ahead, show everybody so more. Like they need it...

 

[Bullypulpit]

Shit pulit... I reduce you to a sniveling pile of dog shit every time we get into it. All I have to do is say what have to say, and you, right on que, puke out your liberal line of vitriol.

Your hatred of conservatives and Christians is sooooo deep, I've come to believe that when I talk to you, I'm talking to one of the devil's deciples. You are against all that is GOOD in this country, you are against all that is GOOD for man, you are against MORALS, you are against the MAJORITY.

What I can't for the life of me figure out, is what makes a confused soul like you tick. Where did you get so far out? What DRUGS did you do to make your brain so disconnected with reality? I don't know. All I do know is, you're about as big of a whack job this board has seen.

But, I guess you're still here and haven't been banned yet because you amuse us. We can't all agree with each other all of the time and have fun. We need a nut job like you around to make us laugh. You make me laugh, but at the same time, I realize just how fucked up you are. I think most others here know too, but they choose not to respond to you because they either think it's not worth it and you're just crazy, or they know that whatever they might say to you, it will NEVER phase that stagnant liberal mind of yours. I respond to you because I just take pleasure in pissing liberals off, and you're so predictable and easy.

Now, you've been exposed. Everybody here knows what and who you are. The slimey liberal in favor of anything immoral or bad for America. So go ahead, show everybody so more. Like they need it...

Och!...Ye puir lad, ye've ne'er recoverd from tha' knock on th' head ye got as a child noo, 'ave ye?

You keep on dishing out unfounded vitriol, and incoherent rubbish and expecting it to be unquestioningly accepted. No matter how hard you try though, you just can't put any polish on those turds. But that's just typical of the right wing in general...anything short of uncritical, unquestioned acceptance of their dictums results in invective such as you've dished out here, repeatedly.

True conservatives will have nothing to do with the spew that you, and other so called conservatives, dish out . Real Christians reject the hatred you and others of your ilk vomit forth on a daily basis. Them I respect...Them I make common cause with.

The unquestioning acceptance you, and other right wing-nuts, expect is inherently un-American, it is craven, it is cowardly, and a disservice to the principles this nation was founded upon. So, you keep on spewing your excrement, and I'll keep on shaking my head sadly every time I read it, pitying you, your willful ignorance, and tiny, narrow, angry life. Have a nice day.

 

[007]

Och!...Ye puir lad, ye've ne'er recoverd from tha' knock on th' head ye got as a child noo, 'ave ye?

You keep on dishing out unfounded vitriol, and incoherent rubbish and expecting it to be unquestioningly accepted. No matter how hard you try though, you just can't put any polish on those turds. But that's just typical of the right wing in general...anything short of uncritical, unquestioned acceptance of their dictums results in invective such as you've dished out here, repeatedly.

True conservatives will have nothing to do with the spew that you, and other so called conservatives, dish out . Real Christians reject the hatred you and others of your ilk vomit forth on a daily basis. Them I respect...Them I make common cause with.

The unquestioning acceptance you, and other right wing-nuts, expect is inherently un-American, it is craven, it is cowardly, and a disservice to the principles this nation was founded upon. So, you keep on spewing your excrement, and I'll keep on shaking my head sadly every time I read it, pitying you, your willful ignorance, and tiny, narrow, angry life. Have a nice day.

Well, you got through that whole load of crap without calling me a name. I guess that means you're running down. You still had enough steam to lie your ass off though. Maybe you read some of your "liberal response guide" before to get some general responses.

So you can go on and on until you're blue in the face pulit, but at the end of the day, the fact will still remain, YOU are the MIMORITY, and I am the MAJORITY. And I know that fact has you liberals so full of HATE, that you people can't hardly think straight. You demonstrate that with almost every post you make. All I ever hear from you people is doom and gloom. You're not happy unless there's something wrong with America. Good news to me is bad news to you. Why is that? Why do you liberal SYMPATHIZE with TERRORISTS? Why do you liberals want to take ALL my money in taxes? Why do you liberals want to TEAR DOWN CENTURIES OLD INSTITUTIONS such as MARRIAGE? You fucking people AREN'T HAPPY unless you're TEARING SOMETHING DOWN and LAYING RUIN TO IT.

I wish we could set apart a tiny part of America to put all you shit hole liberals in and let you fucking RUIN IT. Because MY America surely doesn't need the likes of YOU and your rotten liberal brethren CONSTANTLY tearing it apart.

Why don't you move to france pulit. They all think like you over there, and that's such a lovely country. Everything is just honky doory over there.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Well, you got through that whole load of crap without calling me a name. I guess that means you're running down. You still had enough steam to lie your ass off though. Maybe you read some of your "liberal response guide" before to get some general responses.

So you can go on and on until you're blue in the face pulit, but at the end of the day, the fact will still remain, YOU are the MIMORITY, and I am the MAJORITY. And I know that fact has you liberals so full of HATE, that you people can't hardly think straight. You demonstrate that with almost every post you make. All I ever hear from you people is doom and gloom. You're not happy unless there's something wrong with America. Good news to me is bad news to you. Why is that? Why do you liberal SYMPATHIZE with TERRORISTS? Why do you liberals want to take ALL my money in taxes? Why do you liberals want to TEAR DOWN CENTURIES OLD INSTITUTIONS such as MARRIAGE? You fucking people AREN'T HAPPY unless you're TEARING SOMETHING DOWN and LAYING RUIN TO IT.

I wish we could set apart a tiny part of America to put all you shit hole liberals in and let you fucking RUIN IT. Because MY America surely doesn't need the likes of YOU and your rotten liberal brethren CONSTANTLY tearing it apart.

Why don't you move to france pulit. They all think like you over there, and that's such a lovely country. Everything is just honky doory over there.

A majority of one, how droll. And you still haven't managed to string together a coherent, or original, thought or produce a screed not laced through with obscenities and spelling errors. Tch...Tch...Tch...Dismissed.

As for your wishes, wish in one hand and perform one's daily ablutions in the other and see which fills up first.

 

[Abbey Normal]

...I wish we could set apart a tiny part of America to put all you shit hole liberals in and let you fucking RUIN IT...

Now Pale, you know that whatever part of America we give to Libs will be attacked and taken over by some outside force in a matter of weeks. What with their anti-war, cut defense spending to shreds, commiserate with terrorists, economy devastated by unions, out-of-control social programs and welfare state, and open the borders defective mindset, how could there be any other coutcome? Heck, even Lichtenstein could probably take them over.

And, gasp, who would be left for their class-action lawyers to sue?

I can just see them be peeing their pants and crying for the aid of our military, and our tax base to fund some sort of defense.

 

[Gunny]

We just want consenting adults to be able to do whatever they want without intolerant people like you forcing them to do what you want them to do. Nobody's trying to force you to be gay or to marry another man. You don't even have to consider it as normal behavior. But let the people who do, do so. What you righties need is to stop trying to control everybody's lives by forcing them to conform to your Christian viewpoints. Practice your religion but let the rest of society do whatever it is that they want to do. Just because you believe something doesn't automatically mean that everyone else should believe it too. When you ban things like this you're forcing other people to conform to your values and you're restricting them from living by theirs. That's unconstitutional man.

The irony here is that you accuse libs of being the intolerant, narrow-minded fascists, but it's your kind who are banning things because you don't tolerate them. It's ridiculous hypocrisy.

Let's see if we can't introduce a little gray area into your black-or-white-only little world.

What gays do in the privacy of their own home is their business; which, ALSO is law here, so no one is trying to control anyone's lifestyle. That's just leftist spin.

That's a far cry from legitimizing abnormal behavior by law. And it is not my "belief" that gays are abnormal, it is fact. Please brush up on your science classes and the natural order of things.

What I am intolerant to is the majority being forced to cater to the whims of the minority, and I don't particularly care WHO doesn't like it. People like you have turned common sense and logic completely upside down pushing the agendas of the weak/abnormal down everyone's throats.


Screw them. Society dictates which behavior is acceptable and not acceptable. If you choose to live outside the parameters of what is acceptable, provided it is not illegal, then that is your right.

But don't come whining to me when society rejects/shuns such behavior. This is a classic case of you left-wingnutjobs wanting to be exempted from the consequences of your actions. You want to act like idiots, but not be treated like idiots.

Be a fag. Knock yourself out if that's what trips your trigger, but don't expect me to treat you like there's nothing wrong with you.

 

[Gunny]

Wouldn't you agree that an adopted baby would be better off growing up in a loving "gay" household than an abusive, foster household?

Why is the lefty argument always tailored to extremes? "Abusive, foster household." GMAFB.

What the hell would fags know about raising a child to be normal? The peer pressure alone from the other kids because little Johnny has a Dad and a Dad would be enough to turn a child into a stark raving lunatic.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Now Pale, you know that whatever part of America we give to Libs will be attacked and taken over by some outside force in a matter of weeks. What with their anti-war, cut defense spending to shreds, commiserate with terrorists, economy devastated by unions, out-of-control social programs and welfare state, and open the borders defective mindset, how could there be any other coutcome? Heck, even Lichtenstein could probably take them over.

And, gasp, who would be left for their class-action lawyers to sue?

I can just see them be peeing their pants and crying for the aid of our military, and our tax base to fund some sort of defense.

AHhh, I was gonna rep you for such a perfect post, but you left out that they would attract all the lazies of the world with their givaway social programs (plus I still dont know how to rep people )

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Why is the lefty argument always tailored to extremes? "Abusive, foster household." GMAFB.

What the hell would fags know about raising a child to be normal? The peer pressure alone from the other kids because little Johnny has a Dad and a Dad would be enough to turn a child into a stark raving lunatic.

Precisely why I responded with a question about pastries or something, but it flew right over his head.....leave it to a right wing reasoned thinker to figure it out.........

 

[007]

A majority of one, how droll. And you still haven't managed to string together a coherent, or original, thought or produce a screed not laced through with obscenities and spelling errors. Tch...Tch...Tch...Dismissed.

As for your wishes, wish in one hand and perform one's daily ablutions in the other and see which fills up first.

I simply possess a little more flair than you do pulit. Your envy is obvious.

But once I again I emerged the victor in this battle with the evil liberal. The truth always prevails. Marriage always has been, is, and should remain, a holy union of a man and a woman. "Holy" being the operative word, which means nothing to you godless heathens, which is also part of the problem why you have such hard time understanding why a marriage is a marriage. A true marriage between a woman and a man is sanctioned by GOD. If allowed, a marriage between two men, or two women, would be sanctioned by none other than the devil himself. Of whom YOU are a servant, who labors to advance his corrupt and deviant agenda.

Take your leave now lefty. There is nothing more anybody wants or needs to hear from you.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I simply possess a little more flair than you do pulit. Your envy is obvious.

But once I again I emerged the victor in this battle with the evil liberal. The truth always prevails. Marriage always has been, is, and should remain, a holy union of a man and a woman. "Holy" being the operative word, which means nothing to you godless heathens, which is also part of the problem why you have such hard time understanding why a marriage is a marriage. A true marriage between a woman and a man is sanctioned by GOD. If allowed, a marriage between two men, or two women, would be sanctioned by none other than the devil himself. Of whom YOU are a servant, who labors to advance his corrupt and deviant agenda.

Take your leave now lefty. There is nothing more anybody wants or needs to hear from you.

Hmmm...And which god might that be? There have been many throughout history. And you're simply going to have to do better than "godless heathens" and "evil liberals". I do congratulate you, however, on cleaning up your language.

Now, since marriage is out of the question for you, how about civil unions outside a church or synagogue which grant same gender couples the same rights, priviledges and responsibilities as traditional married couples? Such arrangements are the purview of government, without the expectation of those arrangements being recognized by any religious denomination. And if the separation of church and state is to be maintained, they really don't have any say in the matter anyways. My wife and I were wedded by a judge in a civil ceremony, unencumbered and uncluttered by religious dogma.

Since neither of us desire to have children, our union would be frowned upon by those purists who believe that the union of a man and woman is solely for the purpose of procreation. We are married in the eyes of the state. What difference, therefore, is there between people who choose not to have, throught the fault of nature or accident cannot have, children and same gender couples who cannot and could not procreate at all? None...save the fact that the members of the couple share the same gender. There is absolutely no danger ot all of the human species becomeing extinct due to same-gender couples being recognized under the law as having the smae rights, priviledges and responsibilities as traditional couples.

Your arguments are rooted in dogma, mine in objective fact. There is no demonstrable harm either to the individuals involved, nor to society at large in granting same-gender couples the same legal status as traditional couples throught the use of civil unions, or if a church so chooses, marriage. You emerge the victor only in your own feverish imagination.

Q.E.D.

 

[007]

Hmmm...And which god might that be? There have been many throughout history. And you're simply going to have to do better than "godless heathens" and "evil liberals". I do congratulate you, however, on cleaning up your language.

There is only one God. The creator of man, and father of Jesus.

Now, since marriage is out of the question for you, how about civil unions outside a church or synagogue which grant same gender couples the same rights, priviledges and responsibilities as traditional married couples? Such arrangements are the purview of government, without the expectation of those arrangements being recognized by any religious denomination. And if the separation of church and state is to be maintained, they really don't have any say in the matter anyways. My wife and I were wedded by a judge in a civil ceremony, unencumbered and uncluttered by religious dogma.

I have unequivically stated on different ocassions on this board, that I have no problem with civil unions to queers, that would grant them all the same legal benefits of marriage.

Since neither of us desire to have children, our union would be frowned upon by those purists who believe that the union of a man and woman is solely for the purpose of procreation. We are married in the eyes of the state. What difference, therefore, is there between people who choose not to have, throught the fault of nature or accident cannot have, children and same gender couples who cannot and could not procreate at all? None...save the fact that the members of the couple share the same gender. There is absolutely no danger ot all of the human species becomeing extinct due to same-gender couples being recognized under the law as having the smae rights, priviledges and responsibilities as traditional couples.

I've never stated that marriage between a man and a woman was for the sole purpose of procreation. However, this is something you need to read...

Dangers of Same-Sex Couples Adopting Children (Part 1)
11/6/2004 - 5:00 AM PST

Dale O'Leary on the Risks

PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island, NOV. 6, 2004 (Zenit) - Despite the large number of securely married people waiting to adopt children, same-sex couples are often regarded as desirable adoptive parents with equal qualifications.

So says Dale O'Leary, a writer and researcher for the Catholic Medical Association.

She shared with Catholic Online how adoption agencies have disregarded evidence that persons with same-sex attractions are far more likely to suffer from psychological disorders than the general public, and how those risk factors can negatively affect children.

Part 2 of this interview will appear Monday.

Q: What is the growth trend of children being adopted by same-sex couples or individuals with same-sex attractions?

O'Leary: I do not have any research showing this, but the anecdotal evidence suggests a dramatic increase in such adoptions.

Recently, I spoke with a woman who has adopted a number of special needs children and is extremely active in the adoption movement. She said that she has observed a dramatic increase in adoptions by same-sex couples.

She believes that the social workers in the adoption field are disproportionately homosexual themselves or are extremely sympathetic to homosexual adoptions and are directing children to same-sex couples, when there are married heterosexual couples available. She is extremely concerned about this trend.

I asked how could so many same-sex couples qualify, given the evidence that persons with same-sex attractions are far more likely to suffer from psychological and other problems than married heterosexual couples. She replied that it appeared to her that many of the same-sex couples who adopted had psychological and other problems that would have disqualified a married man and woman from adoption.

This, of course, is only anecdotal evidence, but well-designed studies that compare persons with same-sex attractions with the general public have found that persons with same-sex attractions are far more likely to suffer from psychological disorders.

A same-sex couple has, by definition, two persons at high risk for psychological disorders. The studies published in the Archives of General Psychiatry found that persons self-identified as homosexual in comparison to the general public had almost double the rate of suicidal ideation or attempts, substance abuse problems and psychological disorders. One of the studies found that 78.6% of the gay, lesbian or bisexual group suffered from multiple disorders.

And there are other problems: Domestic violence is more common among same-sex couples. Men with same-sex attractions are more likely to become infected with a STD, including HIV, hepatitis or HPV, which can lead to cancer. Thus, several studies suggest that 50% of men who have sex with men will become HIV positive before age 50.

Any of these problems would negatively affect an adopted child. When dealing with married heterosexual couples, agencies have been extremely strict in ruling out couples with risk factors, yet seem to be ignoring real risk when evaluating same-sex couples who want to adopt.

Consider the consequences of giving a special needs child or a child with an attachment disorder -- something that is very common among children adopted from orphanages overseas -- to a couple where one or both suffer from a psychological disorder or substance abuse problem.

There should be an investigation into whether social workers are giving vulnerable children to same-sex couples who would not otherwise be qualified and the long-term consequences of these adoptions.

Q: Would children linger unloved in foster care if not placed with a same-sex couple?

O'Leary: Given the increase in infertility due to late marriage and the consequences of the pandemic of STDs, the number of securely married couples who want to adopt is very high. Due to abortion and the acceptance of single motherhood, the number of healthy babies being released for adoption is very low.

Therefore, since the demand overwhelming exceeds the supply, agencies should have no problems finding a virtually perfect placement for every healthy baby released at birth by the mother.

There is no reason for choosing a second-best placement, and adoption by a same-sex couple is by definition second-best, since it deprives the child of a parent of one sex and all the experiences that having a father and a mother provides.

Because there are so few healthy newborns available for adoption, the number of securely married couples who will consider a baby with some health problems or an older child has also increased dramatically.

Most children in foster care have not been adopted because their biological parents have refused to release them for adoption or because the courts have not terminated parental custody. These parents and their children cling to hope that the situations that lead to them being placed in foster care will change and the family reunited.

Reform in the foster care system is certainly called for, but placing already deeply wounded children with same-sex couples is not the solution.

Because of the shortage of babies and available older children, many couples choose foreign adoption. Persons with same-sex attractions often do not inform the country from which the child comes that they are homosexual.

Recently an article in the Boston Globe reported on a lesbian couple that wasn't going to get "married" because then they would have to disclose this to the adoption agency and would not be able to obtain a second child from overseas.

They had already deceived the overseas agency in order to obtain their first child. Such deceptions will negatively affect married heterosexual couples seeking to adopt abroad.

Q: What does a child typically experience when adopted by a heterosexual couple?

O'Leary: While the public likes to romanticize adoption, the fact is that being surrendered for adoption by one's biological parents is a wounding experience.

Pretending that adoption is just like having your own biological child and that there are no additional problems to overcome does a disservice to the adoptive child's struggle to understand and to the adoptive parents' heroic love.

Adoptive parents tell their children how their brave mothers made the courageous decision to give their babies good homes with a mommy and daddy and all the advantages that brings.

However, in spite of the reassurances from the adoptive parents and all their love and care, an adopted child almost always asks: "Why? Why did my mother give me up? Where was my father?"

These questions often persist well into adulthood. It takes emotional and psychological stability in the part of the adoptive parents to allow children to ask these questions.

Adoption by a happily, faithfully married husband and wife provides a healing environment for the child who has been surrendered by his or her biological parents. The faithful committed love of the father for his wife and children teaches the adoptive child that all men do not walk away from their responsibilities to their children.

The strength under pressure of the adoptive mother teaches the child that even though his or her biological mother may not have thought she had the resources to bring up a child, the adoptive mother is strong enough to face any crisis and never stop loving or surrender a beloved child.

The day-to-day experience of seeing a loving married father and mother sacrifice and persevere gives the adopted child an image of true marital and parental love that can serve as a model for his or her own life.

This is undoubtedly why, in spite of the initial wound, the majority of adopted children grow into healthy and happy adults who marry wisely and become good parents.

[Monday: The burden of being raised by same-sex parents]


Contact: Catholic Online
http://www.catholic.org CA, US
Catholic Online - Publisher, 661-869-1000
Email: [email protected]

http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=1504

Your arguments are rooted in dogma, mine in objective fact. There is no demonstrable harm either to the individuals involved, nor to society at large in granting same-gender couples the same legal status as traditional couples throught the use of civil unions, or if a church so chooses, marriage. You emerge the victor only in your own feverish imagination.

There ya go. An almost rational post that I could rationally respond to... up until there. The "me-dogma", "you fact" sentence is bull crap.

But to add, the discussion is not about an attack on society. The discussion is about an attack on MARRIAGE.

 

[Gunny]

Hmmm...And which god might that be? There have been many throughout history. And you're simply going to have to do better than "godless heathens" and "evil liberals". I do congratulate you, however, on cleaning up your language.

Now, since marriage is out of the question for you, how about civil unions outside a church or synagogue which grant same gender couples the same rights, priviledges and responsibilities as traditional married couples? Such arrangements are the purview of government, without the expectation of those arrangements being recognized by any religious denomination. And if the separation of church and state is to be maintained, they really don't have any say in the matter anyways. My wife and I were wedded by a judge in a civil ceremony, unencumbered and uncluttered by religious dogma.

Since neither of us desire to have children, our union would be frowned upon by those purists who believe that the union of a man and woman is solely for the purpose of procreation. We are married in the eyes of the state. What difference, therefore, is there between people who choose not to have, throught the fault of nature or accident cannot have, children and same gender couples who cannot and could not procreate at all? None...save the fact that the members of the couple share the same gender. There is absolutely no danger ot all of the human species becomeing extinct due to same-gender couples being recognized under the law as having the smae rights, priviledges and responsibilities as traditional couples.

Your arguments are rooted in dogma, mine in objective fact. There is no demonstrable harm either to the individuals involved, nor to society at large in granting same-gender couples the same legal status as traditional couples throught the use of civil unions, or if a church so chooses, marriage. You emerge the victor only in your own feverish imagination.

Q.E.D.

Rooted in fact, huh? Fact .... queers currently have EVERY right granted by the Constitution that normal people do. Any law that caters to the whims of the aberrant minority is discriminatory against the majority.

Fact .... very few conservatives argue against a legal, civil union. But, since you Godless folk don't want my religion in your state, keep your state the F- out of my religion.

Fact .... the current sensationalizing of the issue began over fags not being able to claim each other as benficiaries. This would be a legal issue of discrimination, not a moral issue of whether or not Bobby should have porking Jimmy up the butt legitimized by law.

Fact .... a majority of citizens were willing to go for the civil union. Left-wing extremism and gay extremism shot that in the foot by DEMANDING more that what anyone is willing to concede. Tough. Do without.

Fact .... you got some nerve talking about ANYONE's language when you can't get through a single thread without questioning the intellect of anyone who disagrees with your stance.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Rooted in fact, huh? Fact .... queers currently have EVERY right granted by the Constitution that normal people do. Any law that caters to the whims of the aberrant minority is discriminatory against the majority.

Fact .... very few conservatives argue against a legal, civil union. But, since you Godless folk don't want my religion in your state, keep your state the F- out of my religion.

Fact .... the current sensationalizing of the issue began over fags not being able to claim each other as benficiaries. This would be a legal issue of discrimination, not a moral issue of whether or not Bobby should have porking Jimmy up the butt legitimized by law.

Fact .... a majority of citizens were willing to go for the civil union. Left-wing extremism and gay extremism shot that in the foot by DEMANDING more that what anyone is willing to concede. Tough. Do without.

Fact .... you got some nerve talking about ANYONE's language when you can't get through a single thread without questioning the intellect of anyone who disagrees with your stance.

JUst to tack on

The job of govt is not to grant rights, but to insure rights given to us by our creator (sorry, but thats what the writers of the Constitution believed and stated) i.e. God.

It is govt's purview to facilitate a healthy society. By encouraging marriage between a man and a woman, the govt encourages creating enviorments that are healthier for kids, and the "healthiest possible enviorment" for kids.

ANYTHING, in my opinion, including legal unions, that encourages any homosexual behavior, ought not be sanctioned by the Govt. It encourages unhealthy enviorments for people and kids, and is detrimental to a healthy society.

The US, if and when it staggers from its perch as the superpower it is, wont fall from an invading army, but from a disintigration of the family unit, the powerhouse of our nation. Liberals have attacked the family union from evey angle possible. Feminists, homosexuals, enviormentalists, educators, abortion right supporters. If and when the US falls from its perch, it will be due to groups as these, self serving, narcisstic, incredably selfish, and whether they know it or not, satanically led. Satan is the father of lies, and that is why those groups use out and out lies to distort the truth to further their agendas.

Nations are born in stoicism, and die in liberalism.

 

[007]

JUst to tack on The US, if and when it staggers from its perch as the superpower it is, wont fall from an invading army, but from a disintigration of the family unit, the powerhouse of our nation. Liberals have attacked the family union from evey angle possible. Feminists, homosexuals, enviormentalists, educators, abortion right supporters. If and when the US falls from its perch, it will be due to groups as these, self serving, narcisstic, incredably selfish, and whether they know it or not, satanically led. Satan is the father of lies, and that is why those groups use out and out lies to distort the truth to further their agendas.

Nations are born in stoicism, and die in liberalism.

Fucking excelent. I couldn't have said it better myself.