Revised: Objective proof of demonstrable harm ... Marriage/Same sex

[KittenKoder]

That is ... sweet!!!!!!!!!!!!! So true, so perfectly clear.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The people who did the 9-11 attack were ones that, like you, hated freedom and gays. So, do you admit you are another terrorists?

So, 9-11 was 'did' by people who spend an inordinate amount of time debating cultural issues; advancing their reasoning so that it can be compared and contrasted against those who contest it?

Really?

While I am a licensed Pilot... I am a fully practiced in the art of landing and have shown substantial skill in avoiding fixed structures, not to mention a 100% rating in getting my passengers and aircraft back on the ground safely...

What's more, I recognize that while homosexuals are abnormal, sexual deviants; and while I vehemently contest the reasoning which seeks to normalize their abnormality, I have vociferously defended their right to pursue the fulfillment of their lives and noted the responsibilities which they and I both have in our mutual right to NOT infringe upon the rights of others as we pursue the rightful fulfullment of our lives.

So I have NO IDEA on what basis your resting this farce, kitty...

Islamic terrorists see homosexuals as evil... and they see evil as that which should be destroyed... I see homosexuals as suffering under evil and that evil is to be EXPOSED; discredited and rejected... while respecting the human being which suffers under it and their human rights; TO THE POINT where that human being respects me... and my rights.

Of course I see Islamic terrorists as suffering under the SAME evil... and give them the same consideration as I do the homosexual...

The distinction is that MY REASONING... and the ideology on which it rests, does not seek to justify Islamic terrorism, promote it's interests and otherwise redirect responsibility for their actions onto those who oppose them... as you, the homosexual community and the ideology on which you respectively rest, are doing for Islamic terrorists, when you feel that such serves your purpose... which you now come to lament as GAY-HATING murderers...

Does it not strike you as odd, that the two; the homosexual movement and Islamic Terrorism... seem to have a common enemy?

I mean isn't it odd that you come to declare the terrorists are "GAY HATING MURDERERS" based upon their "GREAT SATAN" cliche speaking directly to the normalization of sexual deviancy... even while you're found elsewhere throughout this board declaring these same people as victims?

So in effect, you're defending evil on two fronts... do you not find that just a BIT bizarre; given you indisputable self image that you're a "Good Person?"

You are supporting terrorists, plain and simple.

ROFL.. Am I kitty? Where am I doing that? Through showing the image where Islamic terrorism attacked the US; which I posted as a means to point out what happens when a culture is too preoccupied with thier SEXUALITY to tend to their own SURVIVAL and the standards which sustain such?

Can you be SERIOUS?

You agree with their views and advocate the same reasoning for their violence.

Do I? Where have I agreed with their views? In recognizing that homosexuality deviates from the biological imperative; that such deviates from the biological baseline?

ROFL.., And you're extrapolating from that reasoned certainty that such reasoning condones, thus is complicit in attacking and killing innocent people who are wholly detached from that issue entirely, accept that they exist within the common geography wherein you people are advocating that such deviancy be normalized...

Kitty... and I'm being derious here... if THAT is your point, you are clinically delusional; as there is no potential correlation to be made... meaning that if that is really how ya feel, then you're crazier than a shit-house rat.

You justify their attack.

Never happened... and if you truly believe that it did... you're nuttier than a fruitcake.

Islamic violence is against America, and because we as Americans have freedom, gay people do not attack defenseless and innocent people for disagreeing with them, such as what you have suggested on occasion. They also do not see fit to justify the hatred of others by saying "since the Islamics hate mostly christians by default, perhaps if we killed off all the christians they would stop attacking us."

Well... look, you're either shitfaced or you've lost most of your jacks...

Get back to me when you can string a coherent thought...

 

[KittenKoder]

Nothing makes it clearer than that, PI. That is you, 100%.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

You are supporting terrorists, plain and simple. You agree with their views and advocate the same reasoning for their violence. You justify their attack. Islamic violence is against America, and because we as Americans have freedom, gay people do not attack defenseless and innocent people for disagreeing with them, such as what you have suggested on occasion. They also do not see fit to justify the hatred of others by saying "since the Islamics hate mostly christians by default, perhaps if we killed off all the christians they would stop attacking us."

Islamic fundamentalist terrorists and PubliusInfinitum both agree that gay people are immoral and harm society.

ROFLMNAO...

Ahh HAH! I knew SOMEONE would manage to verbalize it!

Well done sis...

So there ya have it kids... Islamo-fascism is against the normalization of homosexuality... so naturally... if you're a good leftist, you'll have to agree that normalizing homosexuality is a GREAT IDEA!

Of course, there's the species of reasoning which says that "Normalizing Debauchery is the #1 recruiting tool of terrorists... and was used LONG BEFORE liberating Iraq, Abu Gharib and naked Muslim Pyramids... and was given as the #1 reason which justified 9-11"

Now to put my position in simple terms... I am against the normalization of debauchery and terrorism...

I think that a healthy culture is one which recognizes that standards for public behavior should represent a threshold which is higher than the minimall behavior which can sustain a viable culture; and that standards for acceptable public behavior decidely exclude consideration for normalizing PRIVATE BEHAVIOR.

I believe that nature has designed the species for a sustainable sexual behavior and where such is noted in public standards of behavior, those standards should be limited to excluding such from public display and policy which encourages relationships which promote that biological imperative and discourage those behaviors which conflict with that imperative.

And with regard to killing people who disagree... such must be limited to where that disagreement is relative to ones own survival or safety... meaning that where one is of the opinion that another should be killed... the other person is entitled to defend themselves from that individual and their unjustified, crazy assed opinion.

Now FTR: that thinking sets me at diamtric odds, with BOTH the homoseuxal advocacy and the Islamic terrorist.

Now isn't it odd that the two issues... both inherently evil... would find themselves contesting sound reason?

And it should be noted that evil has often been defined as The Absence of Reason...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

 

[KittenKoder]

You are supporting terrorists, plain and simple. You agree with their views and advocate the same reasoning for their violence. You justify their attack. Islamic violence is against America, and because we as Americans have freedom, gay people do not attack defenseless and innocent people for disagreeing with them, such as what you have suggested on occasion. They also do not see fit to justify the hatred of others by saying "since the Islamics hate mostly christians by default, perhaps if we killed off all the christians they would stop attacking us."

Islamic fundamentalist terrorists and PubliusInfinitum both agree that gay people are immoral and harm society.

ROFLMNAO...

Ahh HAH! I knew SOMEONE would manage to verbalize it!

Well done sis...

So there ya have it kids... Islamo-fascism is against the normalization of homosexuality... so naturally... if you're a good leftist, you'll have to agree that normalizing homosexuality is a GREAT IDEA!

Of course, there's the species of reasoning which says that "Normalizing Debauchery is the #1 recruiting tool of terrorists... and was used LONG BEFORE liberating Iraq, Abu Gharib and naked Muslim Pyramids... and was given as the #1 reason which justified 9-11"

Now to put my position in simple terms... I am against the normalization of debauchery and terrorism...

I think that a healthy culture is one which recognizes that standards for public behavior should represent a threshold which is higher than the minimall behavior which can sustain a viable culture; and that standards for acceptable public behavior decidely exclude consideration for normalizing PRIVATE BEHAVIOR.

I believe that nature has designed the species for a sustainable sexual behavior and where such is noted in public standards of behavior, those standards should be limited to excluding such from public display and policy which encourages relationships which promote that biological imperative and discourage those behaviors which conflict with that imperative.

And with regard to killing people who disagree... such must be limited to where that disagreement is relative to ones own survival or safety... meaning that where one is of the opinion that another should be killed... the other person is entitled to defend themselves from that individual and their unjustified, crazy assed opinion.

Now FTR: that thinking sets me at diamtric odds, with BOTH the homoseuxal advocacy and the Islamic terrorist.

Now isn't it odd that the two issues... both inherently evil... would find themselves contesting sound reason?

And it should be noted that evil has often been defined as The Absence of Reason...

Okay Bin Laden.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

That is ... sweet!!!!!!!!!!!!! So true, so perfectly clear.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Nothing makes it clearer than that, PI. That is you, 100%.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Islamic fundamentalist terrorists and PubliusInfinitum both agree that gay people are immoral and harm society.

ROFLMNAO...

Ahh HAH! I knew SOMEONE would manage to verbalize it!

Well done sis...

So there ya have it kids... Islamo-fascism is against the normalization of homosexuality... so naturally... if you're a good leftist, you'll have to agree that normalizing homosexuality is a GREAT IDEA!

Of course, there's the species of reasoning which says that "Normalizing Debauchery is the #1 recruiting tool of terrorists... and was used LONG BEFORE liberating Iraq, Abu Gharib and naked Muslim Pyramids... and was given as the #1 reason which justified 9-11"

Now to put my position in simple terms... I am against the normalization of debauchery and terrorism...

I think that a healthy culture is one which recognizes that standards for public behavior should represent a threshold which is higher than the minimall behavior which can sustain a viable culture; and that standards for acceptable public behavior decidely exclude consideration for normalizing PRIVATE BEHAVIOR.

I believe that nature has designed the species for a sustainable sexual behavior and where such is noted in public standards of behavior, those standards should be limited to excluding such from public display and policy which encourages relationships which promote that biological imperative and discourage those behaviors which conflict with that imperative.

And with regard to killing people who disagree... such must be limited to where that disagreement is relative to ones own survival or safety... meaning that where one is of the opinion that another should be killed... the other person is entitled to defend themselves from that individual and their unjustified, crazy assed opinion.

Now FTR: that thinking sets me at diamtric odds, with BOTH the homoseuxal advocacy and the Islamic terrorist.

Now isn't it odd that the two issues... both inherently evil... would find themselves contesting sound reason?

And it should be noted that evil has often been defined as The Absence of Reason...

Okay Bin Laden.

 

[Valerie]

You're a liar... the link goes back to post #94; directed to you and the aforementioned, now long discredited poser...

Yes, I am all about the personal freedom... the bed-rock, immutable human rights which provide for such and the inherent responsibilities which sustain it.

Look Val... I can see that you cling to a self image wherein you see yourself as a real sharpy... and while I'm sure that you're right about that; you'd be doing that self image a big favor by getting to the point.

Wow. Does this BS usually work for you around here?

It goes back to post #121, not that it matters. Is it so difficult to show where you responded to my post which pointed out a flaw in the premise of your OP?


Here's the link to your {well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument, or as close as you can manage}, response in post #94. Bravo for getting me to go find it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-5.html#post1213417


You're all about the personal freedom? That's good to hear. Let's call it a concession. Common ground, if you will. Progress.

Now, consider the actual marriage laws as it relates to your OP and further as it relates to personal freedom.

Well, if you're being honest and the link I posted in my response to you is not going back to post #94, then there is a distinct technical issue, which I suspect is a result of some malfeasance on the part of a tach-savy member or a renegade mod...

I simply copied and pasted the perm-link and have tried it repeatedly since you stated that it went to another post and it went directly back to post #94 each and every time; which is why I copied and pasted the body of the text, in my last response.

Now with regard to your would-be point...

Marriage is a union between one male and one female... It serves the purpose of providing, to the extent that is possible, for a stable environment wherein they procreate and raise their offspring through the influence of both genders...

And while such does not provide for perfection; it provides for the best potential average... which will be destroyed, where such is skewed through redefining the scope to include the clinically abnormal, sexual deviant... mono-gender coupling.

Marriage doesn't provide anything except a license for a legal union. There is no threat to male / female procreation!

All sorts of relationships already exist in our society. If you believe in personal freedoms, you surely do not wish to out-law such unions, do you? Gay people are law abiding, tax paying citizens who deserve their personal freedoms.

So do you feel that excluding them from the legal union called "Marriage" then they will somehow magically become less gay? Expecting the word marriage to provide a "stable environment" is unreasonable and your ideas about your environment are being projected by your fears of instability.

Individual freedoms deserve equal protection under the law, whether or not you call their relationships "Marriage" -- It is ignorant to suggest you can condition people from who they love and are attracted to as life partners and somehow feel justified in treating them as second class citizens. That is not justifiable under our constitution.

It is incorrect to equate acknowledging this reality as if it is an evil normalization plot that will somehow cause the downfall of society where we endorse the legalization of pedophilia. That is nothing but a blatantly unsound fear tactic.

 

[KittenKoder]

ROFLMNAO...

Ahh HAH! I knew SOMEONE would manage to verbalize it!

Well done sis...

So there ya have it kids... Islamo-fascism is against the normalization of homosexuality... so naturally... if you're a good leftist, you'll have to agree that normalizing homosexuality is a GREAT IDEA!

Of course, there's the species of reasoning which says that "Normalizing Debauchery is the #1 recruiting tool of terrorists... and was used LONG BEFORE liberating Iraq, Abu Gharib and naked Muslim Pyramids... and was given as the #1 reason which justified 9-11"

Now to put my position in simple terms... I am against the normalization of debauchery and terrorism...

I think that a healthy culture is one which recognizes that standards for public behavior should represent a threshold which is higher than the minimall behavior which can sustain a viable culture; and that standards for acceptable public behavior decidely exclude consideration for normalizing PRIVATE BEHAVIOR.

I believe that nature has designed the species for a sustainable sexual behavior and where such is noted in public standards of behavior, those standards should be limited to excluding such from public display and policy which encourages relationships which promote that biological imperative and discourage those behaviors which conflict with that imperative.

And with regard to killing people who disagree... such must be limited to where that disagreement is relative to ones own survival or safety... meaning that where one is of the opinion that another should be killed... the other person is entitled to defend themselves from that individual and their unjustified, crazy assed opinion.

Now FTR: that thinking sets me at diamtric odds, with BOTH the homoseuxal advocacy and the Islamic terrorist.

Now isn't it odd that the two issues... both inherently evil... would find themselves contesting sound reason?

And it should be noted that evil has often been defined as The Absence of Reason...

Okay Bin Laden.

Ye sir mister Laden, you do post a lot of spam.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Your link goes back to a post by Bullypulpit.


Let me ask you this, PI...You're sporting an American flag in your avatar.

Do you believe in personal freedom???

You're a liar... the link goes back to post #94; directed to you and the aforementioned, now long discredited poser...

Yes, I am all about the personal freedom... the bed-rock, immutable human rights which provide for such and the inherent responsibilities which sustain it.

Look Val... I can see that you cling to a self image wherein you see yourself as a real sharpy... and while I'm sure that you're right about that; you'd be doing that self image a big favor by getting to the point.

Wow. Does this BS usually work for you around here?

It goes back to post #121, not that it matters. Is it so difficult to show where you responded to my post which pointed out a flaw in the premise of your OP?


Here's the link to your {well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument, or as close as you can manage}, response in post #94. Bravo for getting me to go find it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-5.html#post1213417


You're all about the personal freedom? That's good to hear. Let's call it a concession. Common ground, if you will. Progress.

Now, consider the actual marriage laws as it relates to your OP and further as it relates to personal freedom.

For the record... the link which this member has advanced is NOT the link I provided...

Either she's a liar and intentionally changed the link for the purposes of clouding the argument, or the system which registers such links if flawed... or someone else is manipulating the posts...

I have no way of knowing which it is... but this is the link which I posted and checked numerous times, with each and every time resulting in the browser opening to post #94... of this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-7.html#post1213417

This is the example, spaced to provide the specifics without the URL being changed to a link title:

...usmessageboard.com / law-and-justice-system / 76373 -revised-objective-proof-of-demonstrable-harm-marriage-same-sex- 7. html # post 1213417

This is the link which Valerie posted wherein she demanded it was the one I posted, implying I intentionally misrepresented my reply... AGAIN ... this is spaced to show the specifics of the link, so it can be contrasted with that above:

...usmessageboard.com / law-and-justice-system / 76373 -revised-objective-proof-of-demonstrable-harm-marriage-same-sex- 5. html #post1213417

Now... WHO changed it... is known only to THEM... but the certainty is that WHOEVER did so... it was NOT me... and reason is served that UNLESS such can occur as a function of a technical glitch... whoever did so, did it for the purposes of obfuscation, which can ONLY reasonably be attributed to THEIR opinion that this thread represents a threat to them on some level and such is a threat, which THEY feel that THEY are unable to contest, through this intellectual contest; thus they're 'forced' to resort to subterfuge, deceit and underhanded abuse which is within their means...

Typical of leftism across the board and at every level.

 

[KittenKoder]

You're a liar... the link goes back to post #94; directed to you and the aforementioned, now long discredited poser...

Yes, I am all about the personal freedom... the bed-rock, immutable human rights which provide for such and the inherent responsibilities which sustain it.

Look Val... I can see that you cling to a self image wherein you see yourself as a real sharpy... and while I'm sure that you're right about that; you'd be doing that self image a big favor by getting to the point.

Wow. Does this BS usually work for you around here?

It goes back to post #121, not that it matters. Is it so difficult to show where you responded to my post which pointed out a flaw in the premise of your OP?


Here's the link to your {well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument, or as close as you can manage}, response in post #94. Bravo for getting me to go find it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-5.html#post1213417


You're all about the personal freedom? That's good to hear. Let's call it a concession. Common ground, if you will. Progress.

Now, consider the actual marriage laws as it relates to your OP and further as it relates to personal freedom.

For the record... the link which this member has advanced is NOT the link I provided...

Either she's a liar and intentionally changed the link for the purposes of clouding the argument, or the system which registers such links if flawed... or someone else is manipulating the posts...

I have no way of knowing which it is... but this is the link which I posted and checked numerous times, with each and every time resulting in the browser opening to post #94... of this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-7.html#post1213417

This is the example, spaced to provide the specifics without the URL being changed to a link title:

...usmessageboard.com / law-and-justice-system / 76373 -revised-objective-proof-of-demonstrable-harm-marriage-same-sex- 7. html # post 1213417

You really like talking about gay sex ... hmm ... something wrong here ....

 

[Valerie]

People can go to post # 94 for themselves if they want to, dimwit.

This is what I just posted in case you missed it while you were OBFUSCATING again.




>

Wow. Does this BS usually work for you around here?

It goes back to post #121, not that it matters. Is it so difficult to show where you responded to my post which pointed out a flaw in the premise of your OP?


Here's the link to your {well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument, or as close as you can manage}, response in post #94. Bravo for getting me to go find it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-5.html#post1213417


You're all about the personal freedom? That's good to hear. Let's call it a concession. Common ground, if you will. Progress.

Now, consider the actual marriage laws as it relates to your OP and further as it relates to personal freedom.

Well, if you're being honest and the link I posted in my response to you is not going back to post #94, then there is a distinct technical issue, which I suspect is a result of some malfeasance on the part of a tach-savy member or a renegade mod...

I simply copied and pasted the perm-link and have tried it repeatedly since you stated that it went to another post and it went directly back to post #94 each and every time; which is why I copied and pasted the body of the text, in my last response.

Now with regard to your would-be point...

Marriage is a union between one male and one female... It serves the purpose of providing, to the extent that is possible, for a stable environment wherein they procreate and raise their offspring through the influence of both genders...

And while such does not provide for perfection; it provides for the best potential average... which will be destroyed, where such is skewed through redefining the scope to include the clinically abnormal, sexual deviant... mono-gender coupling.

Marriage doesn't provide anything except a license for a legal union. There is no threat to male / female procreation!

All sorts of relationships already exist in our society. If you believe in personal freedoms, you surely do not wish to out-law such unions, do you? Gay people are law abiding, tax paying citizens who deserve their personal freedoms.

So do you feel that excluding them from the legal union called "Marriage" then they will somehow magically become less gay? Expecting the word marriage to provide a "stable environment" is unreasonable and your ideas about your environment are being projected by your fears of instability.

Individual freedoms deserve equal protection under the law, whether or not you call their relationships "Marriage" -- It is ignorant to suggest you can condition people from who they love and are attracted to as life partners and somehow feel justified in treating them as second class citizens. That is not justifiable under our constitution.

It is incorrect to equate acknowledging this reality as if it is an evil normalization plot that will somehow cause the downfall of society where we endorse the legalization of pedophilia. That is nothing but a blatantly unsound fear tactic.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Wow. Does this BS usually work for you around here?

It goes back to post #121, not that it matters. Is it so difficult to show where you responded to my post which pointed out a flaw in the premise of your OP?


Here's the link to your {well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument, or as close as you can manage}, response in post #94. Bravo for getting me to go find it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-5.html#post1213417


You're all about the personal freedom? That's good to hear. Let's call it a concession. Common ground, if you will. Progress.

Now, consider the actual marriage laws as it relates to your OP and further as it relates to personal freedom.

For the record... the link which this member has advanced is NOT the link I provided...

Either she's a liar and intentionally changed the link for the purposes of clouding the argument, or the system which registers such links if flawed... or someone else is manipulating the posts...

I have no way of knowing which it is... but this is the link which I posted and checked numerous times, with each and every time resulting in the browser opening to post #94... of this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-7.html#post1213417

This is the example, spaced to provide the specifics without the URL being changed to a link title:

...usmessageboard.com / law-and-justice-system / 76373 -revised-objective-proof-of-demonstrable-harm-marriage-same-sex- 7. html # post 1213417

You really like talking about gay sex ... hmm ... something wrong here ....

ROFLMNAO.. SWEET MOTHER that is LAME!

Friends, this is the adult equivalent of "I KNOW YOU ARE... SO WHAT AM I!" defense... and what's more... this is not the first time that this member has offered this intellectual pearl IN THIS THREAD!

She's either shitfaced or insane... meaning that she is presently operating on the intellectual level of a 10 year old; which isn't bad for a leftist... that's only four or five years younger than the President of the US and it's a year or two older than the speaker of the house.

 

[KittenKoder]

For the record... the link which this member has advanced is NOT the link I provided...

Either she's a liar and intentionally changed the link for the purposes of clouding the argument, or the system which registers such links if flawed... or someone else is manipulating the posts...

I have no way of knowing which it is... but this is the link which I posted and checked numerous times, with each and every time resulting in the browser opening to post #94... of this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...ble-harm-marriage-same-sex-7.html#post1213417

This is the example, spaced to provide the specifics without the URL being changed to a link title:

...usmessageboard.com / law-and-justice-system / 76373 -revised-objective-proof-of-demonstrable-harm-marriage-same-sex- 7. html # post 1213417

You really like talking about gay sex ... hmm ... something wrong here ....

ROFLMNAO.. SWEET MOTHER that is LAME!

Friends, this is the adult equivalent of "I KNOW YOU ARE... SO WHAT AM I!" defense... and what's more... this is not the first time that this member has offered this intellectual pearl IN THIS THREAD!

She's either shitfaced or insane... meaning that she is presently operating on the intellectual level of a 10 year old; which isn't bad for a leftist... that's only four or five years younger than the President of the US and it's a year or two older than the speaker of the house.

Yes sir mister Laden ... you already said that when you beheaded those captives ... oh wait ...

 

[Valerie]

> Now, quit calling me a liar you kook.

I've just gone back over the thread and I've accounted for every post... post for post and there's no evidence beyond the previously noted chronic obfuscations...

If you've noticed no one is even bothering to have this discussion with you. And it's not because you make a convincing argument. You skipped my post which points out that your premise is flawed and your subsequent posts are all over the road.

Good luck with that moving target.

LOL...

Whuh?

I didn't see your post, which is why I didn't respond to it; and that you held it up as something worthy of skipping is... well... here it is...

There's a problem with your premise.

Who's asking to "raise their status to normal" ?

Oh, just the whole of the homosexual advocacy; just the entire 'gay marriage cartel; the full force of the ideological left which is demanding such with no less fervor than AGW and Abortion Rights... Just the Democrat Party of the United States... that's all...

Was there anything else?

Would ya like to enquire as to 'who is advocating for Socialism? Or who's producing CO2 in the normal course of their existance? Any other stunning intellectual counter-points boiling away over there Val?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFLMNAO ANOTHER DAY of this thread comes and goes with nothing but spam and obfuscation coming from the advocates of the normalization of the wholly abnormal...

With one fairly cool twist... the Homosexual lobby wants to correlate the contesting of the normalization of the abnormal with Islamic terrorism... based upon the Islamic terrorist would-be hated of the homosexual...

Which is a FEASTIVAL of SWEET IRONY... given that the two evils are absolutely counter to the interests of one another... there is NO GREATER promoter of the interests of Terrorist Islam in the US, than the Homosexual lobby...

I doubt that even the MUSLIM community in the US goes anywhere NEAR the lengths that the Homosexual lobby goes, to protect the interests of the Islamic terrorists, through their ceaseless projection of the Islamic Terrorists as eternal VICTIMS... and nearly without exception, the homsexual lobby is found in bitter opposition to the security and existance of Israel... and Christianity.

AMAZING!

ROFLMNAO... Man, you can't make this stuff up...

 

[KittenKoder]

ROFLMNAO ANOTHER DAY of this thread comes and goes with nothing but spam and obfuscation coming from the advocates of the normalization of the wholly abnormal...

With one fairly cool twist... the Homosexual lobby wants to correlate the contesting of the normalization of the abnormal with Islamic terrorism... based upon the Islamic terrorist would-be hated of the homosexual...

Which is a FEASTIVAL of SWEET IRONY... given that the two evils are absolutely counter to the interests of one another... there is NO GREATER promoter of the interests of Terrorist Islam in the US, than the Homosexual lobby...

I doubt that even the MUSLIM community in the US goes anywhere NEAR the lengths that the Homosexual lobby goes, to protect the interests of the Islamic terrorists, through their ceaseless projection of the Islamic Terrorists as eternal VICTIMS... and nearly without exception, the homsexual lobby is found in bitter opposition to the security and existance of Israel... and Christianity.

AMAZING!

ROFLMNAO... Man, you can't make this stuff up...

Yes mister Laden ... oh, and don't play the "protect marriage" angle anymore either, now it's in the open, you just want to censor what "offends" you, nothing more.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFLMNAO ANOTHER DAY of this thread comes and goes with nothing but spam and obfuscation coming from the advocates of the normalization of the wholly abnormal...

With one fairly cool twist... the Homosexual lobby wants to correlate the contesting of the normalization of the abnormal with Islamic terrorism... based upon the Islamic terrorist would-be hated of the homosexual...

Which is a FEASTIVAL of SWEET IRONY... given that the two evils are absolutely counter to the interests of one another... there is NO GREATER promoter of the interests of Terrorist Islam in the US, than the Homosexual lobby...

I doubt that even the MUSLIM community in the US goes anywhere NEAR the lengths that the Homosexual lobby goes, to protect the interests of the Islamic terrorists, through their ceaseless projection of the Islamic Terrorists as eternal VICTIMS... and nearly without exception, the homsexual lobby is found in bitter opposition to the security and existance of Israel... and Christianity.

AMAZING!

ROFLMNAO... Man, you can't make this stuff up...

Yes mister Laden ... oh, and don't play the "protect marriage" angle anymore either, now it's in the open, you just want to censor what "offends" you, nothing more.

Suit yourself Kitty... you've continually returned to spout irrational gibberish... and I've no more patients for it... you're off to a well deserved rest in the little house.

All the best to the girls...