LGBT & ? vs Utah: Legal Arguments at 10th Circuit Begin April 10, 2014

[JakeStarkey]

They want the right to do something the rest of us don't have.
If marriage can mean anything, then it means nothing. People will marry their dogs. People will marry their brothers.

Consenting adults.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "consenting adults". I want you to google the phrase "consenting adults". Then I want you to read about the phrase "consenting adults" as it relates to contract law. Then you can come back and tell us why your post was wrong thanks to the phrase "consenting adults" as it relates to contract law.

Now, can we finally stop suggesting that gay marriage will lead to people marrying their dog?

How would a guy marrying his dog be any less biological incompatible than him marrying another guy? So if you're good with one why not both?

Where is biological compatibility or being able to have children the standard for marriage?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bigotry is not an overriding interest, correct, biology on the other hand is a different story. The government would have no interest in blessing unnatural biologic unions.

Government has no compelling interest to not recognize marriage equality, none.

You folks still ignoring the science of it all, why is that?

You folks ignore that there is no science to it at all.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Homofascists are mentally diseased as is homofascism and homophobia diseased mental concepts.

 

[KNB]

Religion is psychological. You "believe" that the Bible is correct and that you are therefore justified in your ancient superstitions that an invisible man in the sky hates gay people.

 

[OKTexas]

Consenting adults.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "consenting adults". I want you to google the phrase "consenting adults". Then I want you to read about the phrase "consenting adults" as it relates to contract law. Then you can come back and tell us why your post was wrong thanks to the phrase "consenting adults" as it relates to contract law.

Now, can we finally stop suggesting that gay marriage will lead to people marrying their dog?

How would a guy marrying his dog be any less biological incompatible than him marrying another guy? So if you're good with one why not both?

Where is biological compatibility or being able to have children the standard for marriage?

I don't know, most everywhere in the world. Why do you think the faghadist continue to ignore it? It's a loser, they prefer the courts or political venues where deviants sell.

 

[OKTexas]

Homofascists are mentally diseased as is homofascism and homophobia diseased mental concepts.

Both leftist inventions just like gay, their mental disorders alright, in the leftist mind.

 

[JakeStarkey]

How would a guy marrying his dog be any less biological incompatible than him marrying another guy? So if you're good with one why not both?

Where is biological compatibility or being able to have children the standard for marriage?

I don't know, most everywhere in the world. Why do you think the faghadist continue to ignore it? It's a loser, they prefer the courts or political venues where deviants sell.

(1) Show me in the law. Doesn't exist, you fruitcake.

(2) Show us how LGBT can never have kids through alternate methods or adoption.

(3) Why is that far right social conservatives are so interested in animal sex when it has nothing to do with this issue?

#3 reflects poorly on folks like OKTexas.

Hint, OK: it has to do with consent. Are you turned on by four hair legs?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Homofascists are mentally diseased as is homofascism and homophobia diseased mental concepts.

Both leftist inventions just like gay, their mental disorders alright, in the leftist mind.

Not at all. Homophobia is a far right wing social conservative invention: absolutely ill.

 

[bendog]

Your arguments are weak, and very weak at that.

It's not a right. Who says so? You?

No, most of the states say that. For sure the ones petitioning with Utah in this case say it. Would they amount to 10s of millions of people? I think that's about how many are saying it, give or take.

If marriage wasn't a privelege then polygamists, incest, minors, anyone could get legally married. But that's not the case, is it? And your basis for only including LGBTs as people who want a special "right" to marry is? What again? Belligerence? The ability to be shrill, nagging or forceful?

Marriage is a right, under Griswold, as was asserted. All rights may be restricted if there's a valid reason. the problem you're having is there's no good reason to not allow gays to marry like the rest of us.

 

[KNB]

Here's one for the Christians:

Two women may be able to have a child without a man.
BBC News | SCI/TECH | Lesbian couples 'could have own baby'

 

[OKTexas]

Religion is psychological. You "believe" that the Bible is correct and that you are therefore justified in your ancient superstitions that an invisible man in the sky hates gay people.

Hey dick head don't presume to know what I believe. Where you on the other hand have bought into this phantom gay disease hook, line and sinker. Now when you consider more than 80% of the human population believes in religions of some type and only about 3% are gay, who's buying into a fringe superstition more? BTW, show me where I ever said God hates gays, you said it you total pile of shit, now back it up, or apologize.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Step off, OKTexas, until you can stop whining about being demonized while you are doing it to others. Step off to then.

 

[Seawytch]

What science are you referring to, Christian? Please indulge us.

Kids better off in two-parent families



Oops.

Yes, two parents are the ideal...and?

 

[OKTexas]

Where is biological compatibility or being able to have children the standard for marriage?

I don't know, most everywhere in the world. Why do you think the faghadist continue to ignore it? It's a loser, they prefer the courts or political venues where deviants sell.

(1) Show me in the law. Doesn't exist, you fruitcake.

See any law that restricts marriage to one man one woman. The only countries that allow fag marriage are leftist shit holes like this country is becoming.

(2) Show us how LGBT can never have kids through alternate methods or adoption.

Can't do it naturally, nuff said.

(3) Why is that far right social conservatives are so interested in animal sex when it has nothing to do with this issue?

You might want to chastise the leftist that actually brought it up.

#3 reflects poorly on folks like OKTexas.

Hint, OK: it has to do with consent. Are you turned on by four hair legs?

See #3. Dumb ass.

 

[OKTexas]

Your arguments are weak, and very weak at that.

It's not a right. Who says so? You?

No, most of the states say that. For sure the ones petitioning with Utah in this case say it. Would they amount to 10s of millions of people? I think that's about how many are saying it, give or take.

If marriage wasn't a privelege then polygamists, incest, minors, anyone could get legally married. But that's not the case, is it? And your basis for only including LGBTs as people who want a special "right" to marry is? What again? Belligerence? The ability to be shrill, nagging or forceful?

Marriage is a right, under Griswold, as was asserted. All rights may be restricted if there's a valid reason. the problem you're having is there's no good reason to not allow gays to marry like the rest of us.

Other than it is biologically impossible for them to be like the rest of us. No amount of talk will change that.

 

[bendog]

No, most of the states say that. For sure the ones petitioning with Utah in this case say it. Would they amount to 10s of millions of people? I think that's about how many are saying it, give or take.

If marriage wasn't a privelege then polygamists, incest, minors, anyone could get legally married. But that's not the case, is it? And your basis for only including LGBTs as people who want a special "right" to marry is? What again? Belligerence? The ability to be shrill, nagging or forceful?

Marriage is a right, under Griswold, as was asserted. All rights may be restricted if there's a valid reason. the problem you're having is there's no good reason to not allow gays to marry like the rest of us.

Other than it is biologically impossible for them to be like the rest of us. No amount of talk will change that.

Actually, that's not true. People are married despite various medical / psych conditions that make "traditional" intercourse impossible.

I realize the legitimacy of your position requires you assert illegitimate (-: "facts," but nonetheless, your views have been scientifically repudiated time and again. Try for something new. Like, actually supporting your prejudices with facts.

 

[Seawytch]

No, most of the states say that. For sure the ones petitioning with Utah in this case say it. Would they amount to 10s of millions of people? I think that's about how many are saying it, give or take.



If marriage wasn't a privelege then polygamists, incest, minors, anyone could get legally married. But that's not the case, is it? And your basis for only including LGBTs as people who want a special "right" to marry is? What again? Belligerence? The ability to be shrill, nagging or forceful?

Marriage is a right, under Griswold, as was asserted. All rights may be restricted if there's a valid reason. the problem you're having is there's no good reason to not allow gays to marry like the rest of us.

Other than it is biologically impossible for them to be like the rest of us. No amount of talk will change that.

Oh? And how is a gay man different biologically than a straight man?

 

[OKTexas]

Step off, OKTexas, until you can stop whining about being demonized while you are doing it to others. Step off to then.

Step off yourself ya senile old bastard, all you do on this board is attempt to demonize people, too bad for you you're not very good at it.

I am voicing actual scientific fact, that most every one is so willing to ignore because it doesn't support their political agenda. Fuck you

 

[Seawytch]

OKTexas, name the state, county, city or municipality that requires procreation as a prerequisite for civil marriage.

 

[OKTexas]

Marriage is a right, under Griswold, as was asserted. All rights may be restricted if there's a valid reason. the problem you're having is there's no good reason to not allow gays to marry like the rest of us.

Other than it is biologically impossible for them to be like the rest of us. No amount of talk will change that.

Oh? And how is a gay man different biologically than a straight man?

The point was, two gay men or women are incapable, biologically, of functioning like a normal married couple.