Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
In some cases, it is devolution. I am certain that in the regimes of Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Khomeni, Hitler and the half dozen others I have forgotten, they all told themselves that they were on the 'right side of' history as well.When you have to redefine something to get your way, your not on the right side of history. You're just a petulant 3 year old throwing a tantrum.
All of a civilized society is ruled by it's agreed upon social constructions.
Changes in attitudes on topics once thought deviant is social evolution.
I personally have no dog in this fight except that it would be the death of America if the people are forbidden from amending their own Constitution.
The rest of it is just two sides throwing intolerance and hatred at each other.
The same ol, same ol.
And another thing, the current generation has NO IDEA what it was like in the relatively recent past when artificial birth control did not exist. The idea of getting married without expecting or "planning to have" kids was non-existent. If you intended to have sexual intercourse on your wedding night and beyond, then you MUST HAVE ASSUMED that kids were part of the picture.
People who politically support "gay marriage" always bring up the cases when heterosexuals get married with no ability (seniors) or intention of having kids, then say that if marriage laws accommodate them, then they should accommodate homosexuals who, without extraordinary intervention, cannot have children.
Marriage laws were never intended to benefit such couples, and only did so on the margins.
Or maybe your point isn't that such birth control didn't exist as that it wasn't as common or easily obtained?
It Never Exists with Homosexuals yet they are Designed to Couple with the Opposite Sex and Equipped to do so.
The Couplings are Documentably Unequal.
peace...
So if a male soldier lost his genitals in an explosion in Iraq, in your world would he be allowed to 'marry', or enter a 'civil union'?
One Man and One Woman is the Standard... And how we are Designed and Equipped by Nature.
Defect or Accident is Irrelevant.
Stop trying to Deny those who don't Defy their Natural Design their Fundamental Right to Marriage simply because Homosexual Coupling is Inherently Unequal to Heterosexual Coupling.
It's REALLY Childish.
peace...
It Never Exists with Homosexuals yet they are Designed to Couple with the Opposite Sex and Equipped to do so.
The Couplings are Documentably Unequal.
peace...
And "couplings" between older heterosexual couples and younger heterosexual couples are also documentably unequal. Yet we don't deny marriage to older heterosexual couples.
Of course not... There's not Justification to Punish them because your Choice lacks it's own Validation.
They are not Defying their Natural Design and Equipment and aside from Defect they were Capable of ProCreation at some point.
Marriage is a Reflection of that.
No Homosexual Couple has ever or will ever.
The Coupling is Inherently Unequal.
Have a Civil Union and a Smile.
peace...
So if a male soldier lost his genitals in an explosion in Iraq, in your world would he be allowed to 'marry', or enter a 'civil union'?
One Man and One Woman is the Standard... And how we are Designed and Equipped by Nature.
Defect or Accident is Irrelevant.
Stop trying to Deny those who don't Defy their Natural Design their Fundamental Right to Marriage simply because Homosexual Coupling is Inherently Unequal to Heterosexual Coupling.
It's REALLY Childish.
peace...
Gee, I thought you said that the couple had to possess the possibility of procreating in order to be eligible for marriage.
Didn't you say that?
And "couplings" between older heterosexual couples and younger heterosexual couples are also documentably unequal. Yet we don't deny marriage to older heterosexual couples.
Of course not... There's not Justification to Punish them because your Choice lacks it's own Validation.
They are not Defying their Natural Design and Equipment and aside from Defect they were Capable of ProCreation at some point.
Marriage is a Reflection of that.
No Homosexual Couple has ever or will ever.
The Coupling is Inherently Unequal.
Have a Civil Union and a Smile.
peace...
I'm glad we now agree that procreation isn't the basis of marriage because, as you said, people who are genetically incapable of reproducing shouldn't be denied the right to marry. (And no, some heterosexuals have never been able to procreate.)
Instead, you have now switched to natural "equipment," which means sex. Marriage is now being defined by you as the physical act of sex. Because a man and a woman have the "natural equipment," they can marry. Or, the basis of a legal contract of marriage is that a man can put his penis into a woman's vagina, whether or not they want to or if the act leads to pregnancy.
That's your argument.
Of course not... There's not Justification to Punish them because your Choice lacks it's own Validation.
They are not Defying their Natural Design and Equipment and aside from Defect they were Capable of ProCreation at some point.
Marriage is a Reflection of that.
No Homosexual Couple has ever or will ever.
The Coupling is Inherently Unequal.
Have a Civil Union and a Smile.
peace...
I'm glad we now agree that procreation isn't the basis of marriage because, as you said, people who are genetically incapable of reproducing shouldn't be denied the right to marry. (And no, some heterosexuals have never been able to procreate.)
Instead, you have now switched to natural "equipment," which means sex. Marriage is now being defined by you as the physical act of sex. Because a man and a woman have the "natural equipment," they can marry. Or, the basis of a legal contract of marriage is that a man can put his penis into a woman's vagina, whether or not they want to or if the act leads to pregnancy.
That's your argument.
I have switched nothing in this Debate Toro.
Marriage is a Reflection of what Creates us... It Exists in Human History because of it.
The word would not Exist without Man and Woman Marrying the Flesh.
The Possibilty that some might not be Capable or have gotten too old doesn't change the FACT that it only Exists with Heterosexual Couples.
Try again.
peace...
I'm glad we now agree that procreation isn't the basis of marriage because, as you said, people who are genetically incapable of reproducing shouldn't be denied the right to marry. (And no, some heterosexuals have never been able to procreate.)
Instead, you have now switched to natural "equipment," which means sex. Marriage is now being defined by you as the physical act of sex. Because a man and a woman have the "natural equipment," they can marry. Or, the basis of a legal contract of marriage is that a man can put his penis into a woman's vagina, whether or not they want to or if the act leads to pregnancy.
That's your argument.
I have switched nothing in this Debate Toro.
Marriage is a Reflection of what Creates us... It Exists in Human History because of it.
The word would not Exist without Man and Woman Marrying the Flesh.
The Possibilty that some might not be Capable or have gotten too old doesn't change the FACT that it only Exists with Heterosexual Couples.
Try again.
peace...
IOW heterosexual sex is the basis of marriage because its "natural."
Right?
I have switched nothing in this Debate Toro.
Marriage is a Reflection of what Creates us... It Exists in Human History because of it.
The word would not Exist without Man and Woman Marrying the Flesh.
The Possibilty that some might not be Capable or have gotten too old doesn't change the FACT that it only Exists with Heterosexual Couples.
Try again.
peace...
IOW heterosexual sex is the basis of marriage because its "natural."
Right?
It is why we are all here 100% of the time.
Regardless of whether or not two Lesbians have some guy Donate Sperm.
Only Man and Woman Create Life... End of Fucking List.
What Humans can do doesn't Dictate what we are Naturally.
Humans and Animals have been Fucking since the Biblical times...
so what?
peace...
IOW heterosexual sex is the basis of marriage because its "natural."
Right?
It is why we are all here 100% of the time.
Regardless of whether or not two Lesbians have some guy Donate Sperm.
Only Man and Woman Create Life... End of Fucking List.
What Humans can do doesn't Dictate what we are Naturally.
Humans and Animals have been Fucking since the Biblical times...
so what?
peace...
Because you don't like gay sex, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.
Got it.
It's certainly not about procreation. If it were about procreation, then we would not allow all people who can't procreate to marry.
It's about sex.
Because a wide swath of people are hung up about what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, Big Government is going to impose morality because gay sex is "unnatural."
I'll give you credit, mal, at least you're honest. Because in the end, that's what this is mainly about.
People articulate their opposition to gay marriage through religion or concern for children - and no doubt some are genuine. But most oppose it because they project their own revulsion of themselves having gay sex.
IOW heterosexual sex is the basis of marriage because its "natural."
Right?
It is why we are all here 100% of the time.
Regardless of whether or not two Lesbians have some guy Donate Sperm.
Only Man and Woman Create Life... End of Fucking List.
What Humans can do doesn't Dictate what we are Naturally.
Humans and Animals have been Fucking since the Biblical times...
so what?
peace...
Because you don't like gay sex, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.
Got it.
It's certainly not about procreation. If it were about procreation, then we would not allow all people who can't procreate to marry.
It's about sex.
Because a wide swath of people are hung up about what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, Big Government is going to impose morality because gay sex is "unnatural."
I'll give you credit, mal, at least you're honest. Because in the end, that's what this is mainly about.
People articulate their opposition to gay marriage through religion or concern for children - and no doubt some are genuine. But most oppose it because they project their own revulsion of themselves having gay sex.
It is why we are all here 100% of the time.
Regardless of whether or not two Lesbians have some guy Donate Sperm.
Only Man and Woman Create Life... End of Fucking List.
What Humans can do doesn't Dictate what we are Naturally.
Humans and Animals have been Fucking since the Biblical times...
so what?
peace...
Because you don't like gay sex, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.
Got it.
It's certainly not about procreation. If it were about procreation, then we would not allow all people who can't procreate to marry.
It's about sex.
Because a wide swath of people are hung up about what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, Big Government is going to impose morality because gay sex is "unnatural."
I'll give you credit, mal, at least you're honest. Because in the end, that's what this is mainly about.
People articulate their opposition to gay marriage through religion or concern for children - and no doubt some are genuine. But most oppose it because they project their own revulsion of themselves having gay sex.
You are correct, it is just about sex.
So tell us, why should the government care? Why should government recognize any sexual union in any way?
It is why we are all here 100% of the time.
Regardless of whether or not two Lesbians have some guy Donate Sperm.
Only Man and Woman Create Life... End of Fucking List.
What Humans can do doesn't Dictate what we are Naturally.
Humans and Animals have been Fucking since the Biblical times...
so what?
peace...
Because you don't like gay sex, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.
Got it.
It's certainly not about procreation. If it were about procreation, then we would not allow all people who can't procreate to marry.
It's about sex.
Because a wide swath of people are hung up about what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, Big Government is going to impose morality because gay sex is "unnatural."
I'll give you credit, mal, at least you're honest. Because in the end, that's what this is mainly about.
People articulate their opposition to gay marriage through religion or concern for children - and no doubt some are genuine. But most oppose it because they project their own revulsion of themselves having gay sex.
You're just Retarded with Dishonest Emotion at this point Toro...
Get some rest.
peace...
Because you don't like gay sex, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.
Got it.
It's certainly not about procreation. If it were about procreation, then we would not allow all people who can't procreate to marry.
It's about sex.
Because a wide swath of people are hung up about what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, Big Government is going to impose morality because gay sex is "unnatural."
I'll give you credit, mal, at least you're honest. Because in the end, that's what this is mainly about.
People articulate their opposition to gay marriage through religion or concern for children - and no doubt some are genuine. But most oppose it because they project their own revulsion of themselves having gay sex.
You're just Retarded with Dishonest Emotion at this point Toro...
Get some rest.
peace...
Not emotional at all, mal. Won't effect my life one way or the other. Just like it won't effect yours. But unlike you, I'm not hiding behind Big Gubmint because I can't deal with my insecurities and sexual hang ups.
Because you don't like gay sex, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.
Got it.
It's certainly not about procreation. If it were about procreation, then we would not allow all people who can't procreate to marry.
It's about sex.
Because a wide swath of people are hung up about what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, Big Government is going to impose morality because gay sex is "unnatural."
I'll give you credit, mal, at least you're honest. Because in the end, that's what this is mainly about.
People articulate their opposition to gay marriage through religion or concern for children - and no doubt some are genuine. But most oppose it because they project their own revulsion of themselves having gay sex.
You are correct, it is just about sex.
So tell us, why should the government care? Why should government recognize any sexual union in any way?
Really? Marriage is just about sex, eh? Have you ever been married?
You're just Retarded with Dishonest Emotion at this point Toro...
Get some rest.
peace...
Not emotional at all, mal. Won't effect my life one way or the other. Just like it won't effect yours. But unlike you, I'm not hiding behind Big Gubmint because I can't deal with my insecurities and sexual hang ups.
Awe... I'm insecure and have sexual hang ups because I Observe what Factually is?...
When do you Think the Personal Attacks are going to be Effective Toro?... The 1,000th time?...
peace...
