Opposition to Gay Marriage - Any Basis Other Than Intolerance and Bigotry?

[bodecea]

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.


Interesting point.
You compare pedophillia to homosexuality.
One is an illness, the other is not (allegedly).
Ooops.
Then there's the problem of the pedophiles sexually assaulting members of the same sex, which by definition is homosexuality.
Ooopsie again.
Get back on your meds.

I was replying to Grandpa who made the comparison.....but you knew that....that's why you didn't quote him, only me. I know how that selective reasoning works for you.

 

[brono921]

Nice rebuttal.
Now get back in your playpen.

 

[bodecea]

Have fun. When your friends see you coming they're going to say look, here comes the witch...

Is there a reason for you to say such things besides proving the OP right?

If you read the discussion, she said I was required to ignore my wife/partner's feelings and divorce her and live with her because I don't think marriage should be a government function. She also said she had a 15 year partner.

I kept asking her if she ignored her partner's values as she demands I ignore mine, and she repeatedly refused to. It is that I was referring to.

I agree with her on that point....you made that appear like you devalue legal marriage that much. Sorry that your words have consequences that turn around and bite you.

 

[kaz]

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.


Interesting point.
You compare pedophillia to homosexuality.
One is an illness, the other is not (allegedly).
Ooops.
Then there's the problem of the pedophiles sexually assaulting members of the same sex, which by definition is homosexuality.
Ooopsie again.
Get back on your meds.

Liberals do demonstrate how dangerous logic can be when used by untrained hands, isn't it?

The majority of people are straight, the majority of pedophiles are straight. Bam, how to you explain that!!!!! Gotcha!!!!!!!



Wow, I'm so embarrassed....

 

[kaz]

Is there a reason for you to say such things besides proving the OP right?

If you read the discussion, she said I was required to ignore my wife/partner's feelings and divorce her and live with her because I don't think marriage should be a government function. She also said she had a 15 year partner.

I kept asking her if she ignored her partner's values as she demands I ignore mine, and she repeatedly refused to. It is that I was referring to.

I agree with her on that point....you made that appear like you devalue legal marriage that much. Sorry that your words have consequences that turn around and bite you.

Hmm...got it.

 

[logical4u]

Aren't you as a homosexual extremist saying that homosexual marriage should be accepted as normal? Doesn't that strike you as false? A homosexual partner comes from the union of one man and one woman. Declaring the homosexual way to be normal (if everyone did it) would eliminate future generations. Isn't it non-scientific (hence bigoted) to believe that a system that has proven non-productive will produce?

You’re clearly confused.

The Supreme Court has ruled that procreation is not a required criterion as to the right to marry, as opposite-sex couples who can not have children marry all the time.

It is not society’s concern as to whether homosexuals can reproduce; it is not society’s place to make a determination as to what is ‘normal,’ as the Court has also stated.

None of what you’ve noted meets the standard of review necessary to justify preemption of same-sex couples’ right to equal access to the laws.

Blah, blah, blah. I said nothing about the "critieria" for marriage. I said that homosexuals promoting "homosexual marriage" as "normal" while wanting to marry a person from a "heterosexual union" (nothing about marriage there), are not being rational/honest/scientific, etc. You have "equal access" to the laws. You just want to change the laws to elevate your choices by redefining marriage. That is corrupt. Not that you would be interested in keeping society above corruption, you encourage it. When you are old and in a nursing home, then you will lecturing the young on their duty to care for those that couldn't be bothered by procreation. Same old, same old, do as I say, not as I do.

Okay, is a "fundemental" or "civil" right? In my opinion, it is neither…

Incorrect, it is a fundamental right, in that the Court will usually apply strict scrutiny to cases involving preemption of the right to marry. Strict scrutiny may also be applied in that homosexuals are a suspect class, adversely effected by the violation of the Equal Protection Clause:

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Plaintiffs challenge Proposition 8 under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Each challenge is independently meritorious, as Proposition 8 both unconstitutionally burdens the exercise of the fundamental right to marry and creates an irrational classification on the basis of sexual orientation.

THE RIGHT TO MARRY PROTECTS AN INDIVIDUAL’S CHOICE OF MARITAL PARTNER REGARDLESS OF GENDER

The freedom to marry is recognized as a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause. See, for example, Turner v Safely, 482 US 78, 95 (1987) (“[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and marriage is an “expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment.”); Zablocki, 434 US at 384 (1978)…

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf

Wasn't this "judgement" from a homosexual judge (read corrupt) that should have handed the case over to another with less involvement? This isn't finished yet, and here you are passing it off as if all the people just accepted a homosexual judge's agenda as law of the land. Where is the "right to marry" listed in the Constitution (you know, the original law of the land)?

 

[logical4u]

As often as these threads occur here and there, and no matter how many posts they run up,

not once does anyone who's against same sex marriage come up with one substantive reason to justify keeping it illegal.

Is that your opinion?

Where do those that support "homosexual marriage" justify the legalization? Where is the evidence? If it is to be the law of the land, don't you think it should benefit more than the few that are using it to work the system?

 

[logical4u]

If civil marriage has financial benefits, then homosexuals are entitled to them, whether or not you think the benefits are 'fair'.

If they are in a faux marriage, they should get faux benefits.
If homosexuals want to have tax supported 'unions', the people or their representatives will have a say. If they want to keep us out of their bedroom, please tell them to quit bringing their bedroom into the public square. This behavior should not be encouraged, tolerated, okay, but not encouraged.

How does the legality of hetero marriage get the government into THEIR bedrooms?

??

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Wasn't this "judgement" from a homosexual judge (read corrupt)…

Given you have no supportive case law, it’s understandable this is the best you can do.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Marriages are sacred, let the faggots have civil unions, they will have all the financial benefits so they have no excuses, leave marriages to churches and God.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.


Interesting point.
You compare pedophillia to homosexuality.
One is an illness, the other is not (allegedly).
Ooops.
Then there's the problem of the pedophiles sexually assaulting members of the same sex, which by definition is homosexuality.
Ooopsie again.
Get back on your meds.

A male pedophile who butt rapes and sexually molests boys is a faggot, there is no way to separate the gay out of that.

 

[logical4u]

Bottom line its a disgusting,immoral and mentally sickening lifestyle. Akin to the disease of pedophilia. Having said that you should be able to have the same rights traditional couples have. You just don't need to bastardize the meaning of marriage in the process of legalizing your disgusting behavior.

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.

Maybe we should said straight males are akin to pedophilia....it would be a more accurate statement.

evidence?

 

[mattskramer]

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.


Interesting point.
You compare pedophillia to homosexuality.
One is an illness, the other is not (allegedly).
Ooops.
Then there's the problem of the pedophiles sexually assaulting members of the same sex, which by definition is homosexuality.
Ooopsie again.
Get back on your meds.

A male pedophile who butt rapes and sexually molests boys is a faggot, there is no way to separate the gay out of that.

One who molests a child is a child molester.
A man might molest a boy. A man might molest a girl.
Is the man who molests a girl a faggot?

 

[Sheldon]

Anyone who has actually had to deal with pedophiles or their victims should know it's not about the sex of the victim, it's about access. Their attraction is not to male/female; it's to vulnerable children.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.


Interesting point.
You compare pedophillia to homosexuality.
One is an illness, the other is not (allegedly).
Ooops.
Then there's the problem of the pedophiles sexually assaulting members of the same sex, which by definition is homosexuality.
Ooopsie again.
Get back on your meds.

A male pedophile who butt rapes and sexually molests boys is a faggot, there is no way to separate the gay out of that.

One who molests a child is a child molester.
A man might molest a boy. A man might molest a girl.
Is the man who molests a girl a faggot?

A man who molests a girl is a not a faggot, but is still a pedophile, a man that molests boys is a faggot and a pedophile, stop trying to limit pedophilia to heterosexuals. I can believe the liberal spin people are putting on the obvious.

 

[rightwinger]

Given that a gay marriage does nothing to affect my own marriage, I see no reason to object to it

The 14th amendment says the law has to be applied equally to all, it's either marriage for all or civil union for all

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Given that a gay marriage does nothing to affect my own marriage, I see no reason to object to it

The 14th amendment says the law has to be applied equally to all, it's either marriage for all or civil union for all

So do you support incest marriage and polygamy? After all the 14th Amendment supports it, right????????

 

[bodecea]

Funny how MOST pedophiles are straight men...and sadly...a lot of times family members.


Interesting point.
You compare pedophillia to homosexuality.
One is an illness, the other is not (allegedly).
Ooops.
Then there's the problem of the pedophiles sexually assaulting members of the same sex, which by definition is homosexuality.
Ooopsie again.
Get back on your meds.

A male pedophile who butt rapes and sexually molests boys is a faggot, there is no way to separate the gay out of that.

Actually, more girls are molested by straight males....25% of girls are sexually molested by the time they reach 18....and that's NOT by gays.

Straight men should be ashamed of themselves, not policiing their own.

 

[mattskramer]

A male pedophile who butt rapes and sexually molests boys is a faggot, there is no way to separate the gay out of that.

One who molests a child is a child molester.
A man might molest a boy. A man might molest a girl.
Is the man who molests a girl a faggot?

A man who molests a girl is a not a faggot, but is still a pedophile, a man that molests boys is a faggot and a pedophile, stop trying to limit pedophilia to heterosexuals. I can believe the liberal spin people are putting on the obvious.

A man who molests a girl is a straight pedophile.
A man who molests a boy is a gay pedophile.
I am not trying to limit pedophiles to heterosexuals.
There are homosexual pedophiles and there are heterosexual pedophiles.

 

[Harry Dresden]

i disagree.....no MAN will act like Richard Simmons by choice......unless he is Gay
Well, that settles it, science be damned.
Our template is Richard Simmons.
Sheesh.
And liberals wonder why no one takes them seriously..........

why is it so far fetched to believe that at sometime during the formation of said person in the birth canal,that something happened to the fetus that gave it the Mentality of a female and the physical characteristics of a man or vice versa?......
Hmmmm.......good point.
And with that, "There was an old lady who lived in a shoe........."
How old were you when you stopped playing with dolls, anyway?

prove me wrong fuckhead......show me some scientific evidence saying im full of shit.....and also ....learn how to use the fucking quote button.....