Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[PaintMyHouse]

Gay marriage isn't in the Constitution, the courts have no say

Gay marriage isn't in the Constitution, marriage isn't either as a matter of fact, but Equality before the Law is, which isn't up for a vote of the people and why you're fucked.

Yes, and gays are treated equally, so you're fucked to a critical mind

You can go on, and on, and on but your dog doesn't hunt

You learn that from your neighbors in Green Acres, Eddie?

Guns, religion, equality, the courts step in on laws passed about all three. That's how it works here, which screws you completely and I'm very happy about that.

Yes, being black changed who you could marry for every black, being gay changed who you could marry for no gay, they are equal. Got it, Daniel Webster

What a shame it is that you can't figure out what equal is in this case? Oh well, the court already has.

Oh there's shame to be assessed here. And it's on the sexual deviant demanding a right to assert itself into an institution for which is diametrically unsuited

There's no shame in being gay. It's a shame you don't know that.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

1) I said marriage is not equal to government marriage, they have nothing to do with each other. One is a union of a man and a woman, at least with the intent being for life. Government marriage is a faux legal contract which gives some citizens perks over others. I say a faux contract because a real contract is negotiated between citizens

2) I did not say to deny gays government marriage, I said you should get it through the Constitutional legislative process instead of the criminals courts.

They can't get it through Legislation. Because, at their core, reasonable people sense the danger that is normalizing DEVIANCY; which is to say the perverse reasoning that justifies unhealthy sexual behavior as something other than what it is... a disembodied obsession with sex, acquired through the obsessive desensitization to normal sexual behavior. A 'trained' response, which separates the being from a healthy sexual apatite... a twist on sexual gluttony.

Take any deviancy and you'll find an obsession....

What part of the people don't get a vote on the rights of others are you still not getting?

Just to be clear, so the rich and corporations not paying their "fair share" of taxes doesn't infringe on anyone's rights?

No, it infringes on their finances, unfairly.

No.. It doesn't.

I'm afraid that is does, like when we don't bring in enough to pay our bills because taxes aren't raised on the wealth but fees and such are on the little people.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Demanding anything from others has only been done in the context of public free speeches. You don't like what the gays are demanding in public, you don't have to listen to them. Thus what you said is the equivalent of "Liberty is not the right to" make public demands. Making public demands is the cornerstone of free speech. Thus, what you said is the equivalent of the right to free speech is not liberty. You are arguing that free speech, if done by gays, should be prohibited

Demanding things from others is "the equivalent of" making public demands? That's just stupid. You are as mentally retarded as any leftist

ROFL Which part do you think is stupid the part about others being the public or the part about demanding things being the equivalent of making demands? ROFL If it wasn't for dumb ass statement's you'd have nothing at all it seems.

You know when Kaz starts talking about 'sucking cock' and 'butt fuck' he knows he has lost the argument and is just flailing.

I start saying that when you airheads make the conversation dull by continually not processing what you read

We're pretty clear on your butt sex argument...

 

[RKMBrown]

Demanding anything from others has only been done in the context of public free speeches. You don't like what the gays are demanding in public, you don't have to listen to them. Thus what you said is the equivalent of "Liberty is not the right to" make public demands. Making public demands is the cornerstone of free speech. Thus, what you said is the equivalent of the right to free speech is not liberty. You are arguing that free speech, if done by gays, should be prohibited

Demanding things from others is "the equivalent of" making public demands? That's just stupid. You are as mentally retarded as any leftist

ROFL Which part do you think is stupid the part about others being the public or the part about demanding things being the equivalent of making demands? ROFL If it wasn't for dumb ass statement's you'd have nothing at all it seems.

You know when Kaz starts talking about 'sucking cock' and 'butt fuck' he knows he has lost the argument and is just flailing.

I start saying that when you airheads make the conversation dull by continually not processing what you read

So you make up all sorts of lies, and it's our fault for not understanding what you really meant to say. Oh... Rolls Eyes.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Gay marriage isn't in the Constitution, the courts have no say

Gay marriage isn't in the Constitution, marriage isn't either as a matter of fact, but Equality before the Law is, which isn't up for a vote of the people and why you're fucked.

Yes, and gays are treated equally, so you're fucked to a critical mind

You can go on, and on, and on but your dog doesn't hunt

You learn that from your neighbors in Green Acres, Eddie?

Guns, religion, equality, the courts step in on laws passed about all three. That's how it works here, which screws you completely and I'm very happy about that.

Yes, being black changed who you could marry for every black, being gay changed who you could marry for no gay, they are equal. Got it, Daniel Webster

What a shame it is that you can't figure out what equal is in this case? Oh well, the court already has.

Oh there's shame to be assessed here. And it's on the sexual deviant demanding a right to assert itself into an institution for which is diametrically unsuited

There's no shame in being gay. It's a shame you don't know that.

Not for the sociopath... that's true.

But for those with healthy minds, sexual deviancy is shameful, and whats more, every sexual deviant KNOWS the shame and they KNOW it instinctively.

'Now from where does the shame stem?', you ask. It stems from the deceit that is axiomatic to such.

Every human being is designed so join sexually with the gender distinct from their own. Desires for these of the same gender, are a manifestation of mind which has succumbed to severe disorder. Now... are we responsible for that disordered processor? Probably... but let's not get bogged down into that mess.

The fact is that the shame only comes from action taken, in pursuit of gratification as a result of those deviant cravings which one has NOURISHED.

The shame is stark, it is palpable and it is programmed into the human psyche. The same is true for all breaches of character. Be it adultery, theft, vandalism, libel... again, except in the case of the sociopath, which is merely a deeper, more egregious manifestation of the aforementioned mental disorder.

What you're asking the SCOTUS to do, is to normalize those mental disorders and the idiocy which they spawn.

Which as has been noted MANY times, provides for absolutely NO potential viability for this culture and any other culture over which this culture has influence.

(That means it is a really bad idea, scamp... .)

I hope that helps.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So you make up all sorts of lies, and it's our fault for not understanding what you really meant to say. Oh... Rolls Eyes.

Now HOW COOL IS THAT?

ROFL!

Did anyone else notice that the above douche, just came to lament the 'making up of all sorts of lies, BY MAKING UP ALL SORTS OF LIES.... BUILT INSIDE THE IMPLICATION THAT ITS OPPOSITION MADE UP ALL SORTS OF LIES?

Folks, you can't GET any more pitiful than THAT and still possess the cognitive acuity sufficient to TYPE!

Sweet MOTHER... What a dumbass~

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm afraid that is does, like when we don't bring in enough to pay our bills because taxes aren't raised on the wealth but fees and such are on the little people.

Friends, there is not enough room in the United States, for this sort of idiocy and Americans.

Let's just face it... there is no bottom to "NEED". It's a subjective swamp which exists ONLY in the minds of the mentally disordered.

There is however a LIMIT on what a reasonable person should allow their government to confiscate from the product of their labor.

It's time we simply state in no uncertain terms that if they can't come to grips with their 'NEED', we're just going to have to remove them from existence.

They're not capable of reason, therefore they cannot be reasoned with... .

It's going to come down to it sooner or later and the longer we wait, the worse its going to be for everyone.

Who would like to offer a reason not to do so?

We'll accept:

1- They're human beings thus they have a right to their life.

The answer to which is, yes. They're are human beings. And they DO have a right to their lives. A right which is BOUND to the RESPONSIBILITY to not make the exercise of THEIR LIFE, an infringement of the means of others to exercise THEIR LIVES.

Now we know that the would-be 'contributor' PHM has stated in certain terms that it recognizes NO RESPONSIBILITY on its part, for ANY right that it claims.

SO... that position ALONE is a demonstration that THAT individual is a threat to the means of everyone else to exercise THEIR RIGHTS, by nothing more than its very existence.

Now, regular contributors to this board and any other board of its kind, dam' well know that NO LEFTIST recognizes ANY responsibility, of ANY KIND. And we know this because Left-think rests in Relativism, Relativism axiomatically rejects objectivity and INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY CAN ONLY EXIST THROUGH OBJECTIVITY.

Now... does any of THAT clear any of this up for ANY ONE?

Let me state it this way: Knowing that premise exists... (You don't have to accept it, just as you don't have ot accept any element of reality.. ) but knowing the premise, who still feels that there is ANY WAY the US is not heading directly toward civil war?

Anyone?

.

.

.

Anyone at all?

 

[kaz]

Demanding anything from others has only been done in the context of public free speeches. You don't like what the gays are demanding in public, you don't have to listen to them. Thus what you said is the equivalent of "Liberty is not the right to" make public demands. Making public demands is the cornerstone of free speech. Thus, what you said is the equivalent of the right to free speech is not liberty. You are arguing that free speech, if done by gays, should be prohibited

Demanding things from others is "the equivalent of" making public demands? That's just stupid. You are as mentally retarded as any leftist

ROFL Which part do you think is stupid the part about others being the public or the part about demanding things being the equivalent of making demands? ROFL If it wasn't for dumb ass statement's you'd have nothing at all it seems.

You know when Kaz starts talking about 'sucking cock' and 'butt fuck' he knows he has lost the argument and is just flailing.

I start saying that when you airheads make the conversation dull by continually not processing what you read

So you make up all sorts of lies, and it's our fault for not understanding what you really meant to say. Oh... Rolls Eyes.

What I said was pretty straight forward, not understanding it was on you. And you also failed the reality check that you thought I was saying something clearly a libertarian wouldn't say, a liberal would

 

[RKMBrown]

Demanding things from others is "the equivalent of" making public demands? That's just stupid. You are as mentally retarded as any leftist

ROFL Which part do you think is stupid the part about others being the public or the part about demanding things being the equivalent of making demands? ROFL If it wasn't for dumb ass statement's you'd have nothing at all it seems.

You know when Kaz starts talking about 'sucking cock' and 'butt fuck' he knows he has lost the argument and is just flailing.

I start saying that when you airheads make the conversation dull by continually not processing what you read

So you make up all sorts of lies, and it's our fault for not understanding what you really meant to say. Oh... Rolls Eyes.

What I said was pretty straight forward, not understanding it was on you. And you also failed the reality check that you thought I was saying something clearly a libertarian wouldn't say, a liberal would

Just because I replied to your question to the liberal, does not mean that I did not understand that your question was to the liberal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Keys wants civil war if Marriage Equality becomes the law of the land.

What a numbskull.

 

[Syriusly]

I'm afraid that is does, like when we don't bring in enough to pay our bills because taxes aren't raised on the wealth but fees and such are on the little people.

) but knowing the premise, who still feels that there is ANY WAY the US is not heading directly toward civil war?

Poor poor Keys.....he so much wants a Civil war in the United States.

And like everything in his life- he is doomed to be disappointed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No civil war will happen, as Keys suggests.

Those who act on his premise will receive the LEO treatment all criminals do, up to and including the ultimate punishment if they engage in torture and killing of their enemies.

Their will be no middle ground whatsoever. Submit to the law, or become criminals, and earn the criminal's end.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

242 pages guys?

Good grief

 

[Syriusly]

242 pages guys?

Good grief

Redfish needs a few hundred pages more of posting how he is not going to be posting about gay marriage ever, ever again.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

Gays don't deserve to marry men.

 

[Seawytch]

Getting tax breaks and validation for diseased fags butt fucking is a natural right? Based on what?

Tell us that story again how you're really not an anti gay bigot?

Civil marriage has been declared a fundamental right...but you knew that.

You also know that in order to deny a fundamental right, you've got to be able to demonstrate a societal harm in allowing it. It's not judicial tyranny because the bigots can't come up with one.

 

[thanatos144]

Getting tax breaks and validation for diseased fags butt fucking is a natural right? Based on what?

Tell us that story again how you're really not an anti gay bigot?

Civil marriage has been declared a fundamental right...but you knew that.

You also know that in order to deny a fundamental right, you've got to be able to demonstrate a societal harm in allowing it. It's not judicial tyranny because the bigots can't come up with one.

No one is denying you rights you angry pervert

 

[kaz]

Getting tax breaks and validation for diseased fags butt fucking is a natural right? Based on what?

Tell us that story again how you're really not an anti gay bigot?

Find Jesus, sinner. You are commuting the worst sin of all, worse than murder. You can still be saved, but you have to start now, you have a lot of work to do.

Civil marriage has been declared a fundamental right...but you knew that.

These statements are what blow the crap out of your credibility. I "knew" that the courts declared is that. So of course now I'm supposed to give a shit what the courts did. I'm just laughing at you right now, you're a vacuous idiot that I am supposed to care what they said as if you believe I would. And we both know, sweet heart, that doesn't work in reverse. The courts are a sledge hammer when they agree with you and toilet paper when they don't. If you want to debate intelligent people, you need to cut crap like this

You also know that in order to deny a fundamental right, you've got to be able to demonstrate a societal harm in allowing it. It's not judicial tyranny because the bigots can't come up with one.

Begging the question

 

[Pop23]

Getting tax breaks and validation for diseased fags butt fucking is a natural right? Based on what?

Tell us that story again how you're really not an anti gay bigot?

Civil marriage has been declared a fundamental right...but you knew that.

You also know that in order to deny a fundamental right, you've got to be able to demonstrate a societal harm in allowing it. It's not judicial tyranny because the bigots can't come up with one.

Absolutely correct

Soon straight same sex couples will also be allowed spousal benefits they have been so long denied.

With people now forced to buy health insurance, same sex straights will be able to get better deals, more affordable rates by simply signing a piece of paper.

The best part is, they don't have to live together, love each other and can keep dating opposite sex partners the entire time.

What's not to love?

 

[Seawytch]

Getting tax breaks and validation for diseased fags butt fucking is a natural right? Based on what?

Tell us that story again how you're really not an anti gay bigot?

Find Jesus, sinner. You are commuting the worst sin of all, worse than murder. You can still be saved, but you have to start now, you have a lot of work to do.

Civil marriage has been declared a fundamental right...but you knew that.

These statements are what blow the crap out of your credibility. I "knew" that the courts declared is that. So of course now I'm supposed to give a shit what the courts did. I'm just laughing at you right now, you're a vacuous idiot that I am supposed to care what they said as if you believe I would. And we both know, sweet heart, that doesn't work in reverse. The courts are a sledge hammer when they agree with you and toilet paper when they don't. If you want to debate intelligent people, you need to cut crap like this

You also know that in order to deny a fundamental right, you've got to be able to demonstrate a societal harm in allowing it. It's not judicial tyranny because the bigots can't come up with one.

Begging the question

Let's see...I stated fact and you want to address the fantasy world Kaz lives in. Okay, laugh away.

The courts are there for the people to redress their grievances. The precedent is there, you can't deny it. It's not suddenly "judicial tyranny" because the gays are using the system the way it was intended.