NY activist judges allow same sex marriage

[Johnney]

<blockquote><h1>AG backs legalizing same-sex marriage</h1>
<h2>Reilly says he'll oppose any constitutional ban</h2>

<b>By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff | February 12, 2005</b>

After playing a key role in the efforts to fight legalization of gay marriage a year ago, Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly said yesterday that he now favors allowing legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and that he will oppose any efforts to ban them. (1.)</blockquote>

a kerry wannabe? cant decide which side his bread is buttered on. you seriously hold him legit?

 

[musicman]

Your arguments regarding pedophilia and homosexuality are nothing more than a canard.

On the contrary, they are proven fact. Have you any scientific data to dispute them? Bear in mind, I mean something other than the preposterous arguments that male-on-male sex doesn't necessarily constitute homosexuality, or that the numbers fail to take bisexuality into account, or that pedophilia is just pedophilia and we needn't take any other information into account, or that the sun got in your eyes, or any of the other pathetic tripe I've heard from the opposition thus far.

 

[Bullypulpit]

On the contrary, they are proven fact. Have you any scientific data to dispute them? Bear in mind, I mean something other than the preposterous arguments that male-on-male sex doesn't necessarily constitute homosexuality, or that the numbers fail to take bisexuality into account, or that pedophilia is just pedophilia and we needn't take any other information into account, or that the sun got in your eyes, or any of the other pathetic tripe I've heard from the opposition thus far.

The simple fact is that you are a bigot. Like all bigots, you select a group which represents the worst characteristics of humanity in general and the worst stereotypes of homosexuals. So, no matter what facts are presented to you, you will deny them vehemently because they do not fit neatly into your pitiably narrow view of the world.

As for facts, I have learned from my own experiences that there is no "homosexual agenda" beyond the desire for equal ptrotection under the law. The only threat posed lies in your own feverish imagination and your own fears and insecurities. No gay man I have ever met has expressed snything but disgust for the pedophiles you parade about as if they were the norm. That is nothing more than the projection of your own unspoken fears on others.

So you, and your fellow travelers, continue to sit in your wallows of fear and loathing...The world will continue about its business and leave you behind.

 

[Bullypulpit]

a kerry wannabe? cant decide which side his bread is buttered on. you seriously hold him legit?

Tell me, have you never changed your mind about an important issue based on new information which supplants that which you previously possessed? You don't have to answer, it's a rhetorical question. Of course you've never changed your mind.

It's time to grow up and put away childish things.

 

[musicman]

Bully:

Damn, you use a lot of words, saying nothing! I'll ask you again - do you have any scientific data to refute the conclusions of this study? That's the only thing at issue, regarding this particular conversation. You're not falling into that old crap from the liberal handbook ("if you can't present a decent argument on the basis of facts, discredit your opponent"), are you?

I truly thought better of you. And you - an Ohioan! This is a fine example you're setting, Bully!

 

[musicman]

Come on, Bully - square those shoulders and repeat after me:

"I am so proud to be from Ohio - the state that gave us four more years of George Bush!""




Bully?




BULLY??!!!



OMG, call the paramedics!!!

 

[Johnney]

Tell me, have you never changed your mind about an important issue based on new information which supplants that which you previously possessed? You don't have to answer, it's a rhetorical question. Of course you've never changed your mind.

It's time to grow up and put away childish things.

but i will answer anyway
i may change my mind, but its usually about...say... dinner? what to watch on tv when i do watch it.

tell me this. did you use this same way of thinking when kerry was trying to get into the white house?

 

[CivilLiberty]

On the contrary, they are proven fact.

No, they are UTTER FALSEHOODS that you continue to spew.

Have you any scientific data to dispute them?

I presented to you SEVERAL PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES.

You have presented nothing but the ramblings of a bigoted and intolerant hate monger, the defrocked Cameron, who NO ONE in the scientific community lends ANY credence nor credibility too.

The fact that you are only willing to view his misrepresentations and outright lies displays your contempt for the truth, and lays the foundation for your intolerance, bigotry and hatred.


Kindest Regards,

Andy

 

[OCA]

Oh boy we have seen the light at the end of the tunnel now. The pro queer side is claiming that the legitimate findings of a scientist are illegitimate just because the APA under pressure from the HLCP leadership decided he was a bigot because his findings don't jive with their agenda(yes Bully there is an agenda). What a load of shit, no facts have been offered to counter Cameron's findings(Civil's were highly suspect to say the least) and all that has been offered that anybody who doesn't agree with the HLCP is a bigot.

Typical liberalism.

Now, Nakey in particular, is arguing that because homosexuality is found in animals that it must be natural in humans, well many animals also fuck whatever female of their species crosses their path, i'd like to do that too, can I? You are all so dense that you don't even realize that you are arguing for anarchy. Society must have limits, must have parameters or else we are all just running amok. Gay marriage is outside the parameters.

Then we have the comparison of Blacks to gays, one is born their color, one makes their choice in life, my 7 year old son realizes this.

Even if homosexuality is ever proven to be genetic it still is no excuse for we have the ability to reason between right and wrong and we ALL know homosexuality is wrong.

Face it pro queer posters, you are cornered and there is no way out.

 

[CivilLiberty]

the legitimate findings of a scientist are illegitimate just because the APA under pressure from the HLCP leadership decided he was a bigot because

No, Cameron's findings are illegitimate because he is a charlatan. He was dismissed NOT ONLY by the APA, but also the NPA and the ASA.

Further, a FEDERAL COURT found him to be a liar and misrepresenter of the facts:

Court ruling regarding Cameron:<i>

"(i) his sworn statement that "homosexuals are approximately 43 times more apt to commit crimes than is the general population" is a total distortion of the Kinsey data upon which he relies – which, as is obvious to anyone who reads the report, concerns data from a non-representative sample of delinquent homosexuals (and Dr. Cameron compares this group to college and non-college heterosexuals);

(ii) his sworn statement that "homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals" is based upon the same distorted data – and, the Court notes, is directly contrary to other evidence presented at trial besides the testimony of Dr. Simon and Dr. Marmour. (553 F. Supp. 1121 at 1130 n.18.)"
[Baker v. Wade, 106 Federal Rules Decisions 526 (N.D. Texas, 1985).]</i>



You people are only willing to view the lies and distortions of Cameron, while there are AMPLE peer reviewed studies by DOZENS of other professional research teams, including the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT that debunk Cameron's "theories".


Cameron is no more a "scientist" than Pat Robertson. But since it appears that Cameron is the ONLY one out there attempting to make a "scientific" basis for your hate mongering (albeit on a fraudulent basis), he's the only one you bigots care to cite.

It makes a laughing stock of all of you.




A

 

[Johnney]

It makes a laughing stock of all of you.




A

you make a laughing stock out of your side. you by yourself do it.

 

[MJDuncan1982]

Cameron is no more a "scientist" than Pat Robertson. But since it appears that Cameron is the ONLY one out there attempting to make a "scientific" basis for your hate mongering (albeit on a fraudulent basis), he's the only one you bigots care to cite.

It makes a laughing stock of all of you.




A

Yea I gotta say that it seems that this guy is not credible. Which is more likely?: 1 - There is a VAST left wing conspiracy involving multiple organizations and parts of the judicial branch to push a homosexual agenda or 2 - This guy is not credible.

All the conservatives I know usually adhere to Ockham's Razor.

 

[musicman]

Please see post#212 forr a brief summary of Civil Liberty's "peer review studies".

I don't blame these people for trying to twist the facts - the facts are devastating.

This is the liberal M.O. - right out of the handbook: When you can't muster a decent argument on the basis of the facts, discredit your opponent.

If we cannot proceed from the assumption that male-on-male sex is homosexuality, we're not really going to get anywhere. But, then - that's the general idea, isn't it? Dilute, deflect, misdirect.

Civil Liberty thought he was going to descend upon this board and have fun, slapping around some slack-jawed, ignorant conservatives. But every time he tries to slap one of us, he draws back a bloody stump. I don't know how the man keeps going - he's running out of parts!

 

[MissileMan]

Please see post#212 forr a brief summary of Civil Liberty's "peer review studies".

I don't blame these people for trying to twist the facts - the facts are devastating.

This is the liberal M.O. - right out of the handbook: When you can't muster a decent argument on the basis of the facts, discredit your opponent.

If we cannot proceed from the assumption that male-on-male sex is homosexuality, we're not really going to get anywhere. But, then - that's the general idea, isn't it? Dilute, deflect, misdirect.

Civil Liberty thought he was going to descend upon this board and have fun, slapping around some slack-jawed, ignorant conservatives. But every time he tries to slap one of us, he draws back a bloody stump. I don't know how the man keeps going - he's running out of parts!

The trouble is that you are trying to lump adult male-on-adult male sex with adult male-on-juvenile male sex and call it all homosexuality. We call adult male-on-juvenile female sex pedophilia, not heterosexuality. You are holding homosexuals to a different standard to further your argument. The only assumption we need to proceed from is that adult-on-juvenile sex is pedophilia, no matter the sex of the offender or victim.

 

[musicman]

The trouble is that you are trying to lump adult male-on-adult male sex with adult male-on-juvenile male sex and call it all homosexuality. We call adult male-on-juvenile female sex pedophilia, not heterosexuality. You are holding homosexuals to a different standard to further your argument. The only assumption we need to proceed from is that adult-on-juvenile sex is pedophilia, no matter the sex of the offender or victim.

All I'm saying is that the sexual preference can exist simultaneously with pedophilia. It's not irrelevant to pedophilia. I realize we don't often speak of "heterosexual pedophiles" - perhaps because, in the absence of any other designation, that's a given. An ACTUAL MAJORITY of child molestations are, after all, of the heterosexual variety.

But, that doesn't make the sexual preference of the pedophile irrelevant to the discussion, MM. There are many who would LIKE it to be - it helps them skew what are, in fact, some pretty damned scary numbers. Those numbers are scary because they reveal a disturbing truth about homosexuality. Let's never try to run from the truth in the name of semantics.

 

[CivilLiberty]

Civil Liberty thought he was going to descend upon this board and have fun, slapping around some slack-jawed, ignorant conservatives. But every time he tries to slap one of us, he draws back a bloody stump. I don't know how the man keeps going - he's running out of parts!

No bloody stumps, all limbs intact, thank you very much.

Not here for fun. Information, as I've said in the past numerous times.

I have gained a great deal of knowledge being here, and debating with you folks.

For instance, I wasn't even aware of Paul Cameron till he blipped up on my radar screen in this very thread.

And I had wondered where these "stats" were coming from that the anti gay people were tossing around. Now I have found the Nexus. It's Cameron, and it is Cameron's discredited studies that you are all clinging to. And it appears that it is ONLY Cameron who you can turn to for "support" in your hatred.

I find this fascinating.

Now as it happens, I am reading the bible, NIV. I see in Leviticus the proscription against man/man sex (interesting that lesbian sex is NOT proscribed). If you want to state here that you hate homosexuality because they are against the bible, I'm fine with that. However, our secular government cannot allow these religious beliefs to become law, as there is no secular need to outlaw homosexuality.

Obviously, Paul Cameron has attempted to "create" a secular basis for such a law. And you are all parroting him as if to make it true.

But you're parroting lies.


Kindest Regards,


Andy

 

[nakedemperor]

Now, Nakey in particular, is arguing that because homosexuality is found in animals that it must be natural in humans, well many animals also fuck whatever female of their species crosses their path, i'd like to do that too, can I? You are all so dense that you don't even realize that you are arguing for anarchy. Society must have limits, must have parameters or else we are all just running amok. Gay marriage is outside the parameters.

Its like slamming my head against a brick wall talking to you OCA.

Here's what I've said twice on this thread, and many other times on others threads, in posts that I know you've read because you've quoted them. Direct quote:

Yo. What I'ma say I've said many times on different threads, but I think it definitely bears repeating.

The reason that gays point to homosexuality in nature is to point out that animals have neither the cause nor the ability to make a "choice" about sexuality. Their societies are not effected by self-awareness or any of the other external environmental factors that anti-gays believe lead to a "choice" in people to be gay. Therefore, the same could be (and is) true among homo sapiens.

This is not an argument for or against whether or not homosexuality is "right". It argues that homosexuality is "natural"-- arguments which are mutually exclusive. However, proving that homosexuality is "natural" and not a psychological manifestation in human beings that has its roots in external environment factors is an important thing to assert, because so many people believe otherwise.

Now, I know you love to misrepresent what I've said, like saying that I argued homosexuality in nature means its ok. When I said the opposite, twice, SPECIFICALLY pointing out that i WASN'T saying the argument that homosexuality is found in nature argues for if it is "right" or "good".

Please, I beg of you, read this post in its entirety so you understand what i'm saying and you don't misquote me aga--OCA? Are you there?

OCA?

Come back!

*sigh*

 

[musicman]

Andy:

You haven't disproven ANY PART of Dr. Cameron's findings. All you've done is call him names and play with numbers.

 

[nakedemperor]

Andy:

You haven't disproven ANY PART of Dr. Cameron's findings. All you've done is call him names and play with numbers.

Musicman, what Andy's done is showed you that 3 major (THE major) pyschology and sociology groups have said that Cameron's findings and opinion are not scientific and he is not a legimiate sociologist and psychologist. Moreover, he's shown that an American court of law has stated that Cameron misrepresented data and outright lied-- not in one case or another, but about the exact data you're using to support your ridiculous claims about gays.

If Andy's calling him "names", than lets go over the "names" that the APA, the courts, et al. have called him: "guilty", "not a sociologist", "fraud", etc. etc.

So he's not just "playing with numbers"; he's telling you that a U.S. COURT said the numbers were invalid! What more do you want??

 

[CivilLiberty]

So he's not just "playing with numbers"; he's telling you that a U.S. COURT said the numbers were invalid! What more do you want??

He want to bury his head in the lies, like an ostrich in the sand, hoping the truth won't see him because the lies make him invisible!


Heh.

A