SCOTUS: states cannot ban same sex marriage

[Steinlight]

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

 

[Steinlight]

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

How come you can't live and let live? Why do you need to dictate the personal lives of florists and bakers?

 

[Faun]

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

Nah, I'm laughing at you as I watch you claim the Bible means something it doesn't say. Even worse, you pretend like it's your choice not to quote the Bible when we both know the truth is you can't quote the Bible since nowhere in it does it say what you claim.

 

[Faun]

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

How come you can't live and let live? Why do you need to dictate the personal lives of florists and bakers?

If they don't want to bake cakes, they shouldn't be in that line of business. Baking cakes does not go against anyone's religion. They were merely hiding behind their religion to mask their bigotry.

 

[Steinlight]

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

Nah, I'm laughing at you as I watch you claim the Bible means something it doesn't say. Even worse, you pretend like it's your choice not to quote the Bible when we both know the truth is you can't quote the Bible since nowhere in it does it say what you claim.

Yes it does condemn homosexual sex and homosexual attraction, i already cited the verses, only a fool would claim that a relationship based in homosexual sex and homosexual attraction is somehow allowed.

It is a clownish position. You are a clown.

 

[Steinlight]

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

How come you can't live and let live? Why do you need to dictate the personal lives of florists and bakers?

If they don't want to bake cakes, they shouldn't be in that line of business. Baking cakes does not go against anyone's religion. They were merely hiding behind their religion to mask their bigotry.

If someone owns a bakery, it is their business who they decide to make cakes for, not yours, since it isn't your property and you don't own them.

 

[Faun]

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

Nah, I'm laughing at you as I watch you claim the Bible means something it doesn't say. Even worse, you pretend like it's your choice not to quote the Bible when we both know the truth is you can't quote the Bible since nowhere in it does it say what you claim.

Yes it does condemn homosexual sex and homosexual attraction, i already cited the verses, only a fool would claim that a relationship based in homosexual sex and homosexual attraction is somehow allowed.

It is a clownish position. You are a clown.

Nah, only a fool would think the Bible means something it doesn't say.

 

[Faun]

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

How come you can't live and let live? Why do you need to dictate the personal lives of florists and bakers?

If they don't want to bake cakes, they shouldn't be in that line of business. Baking cakes does not go against anyone's religion. They were merely hiding behind their religion to mask their bigotry.

If someone owns a bakery, it is their business who they decide to make cakes for, not yours, since it isn't your property and you don't own them.

And that's where you are wrong. In the state of Oregon, a baker can't discriminate.

 

[Steinlight]

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

How come you can't live and let live? Why do you need to dictate the personal lives of florists and bakers?

If they don't want to bake cakes, they shouldn't be in that line of business. Baking cakes does not go against anyone's religion. They were merely hiding behind their religion to mask their bigotry.

If someone owns a bakery, it is their business who they decide to make cakes for, not yours, since it isn't your property and you don't own them.

And that's where you are wrong. In the state of Oregon, a baker can't discriminate.

I understand that Oregon is not a free society. The law clearly violates freedom of association, which is the foundation of a free society.

People discriminate everyday in whom the decide to associate or disassociate with, the law is arbitrary and tyrannical.

 

[Steinlight]

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

Nah, I'm laughing at you as I watch you claim the Bible means something it doesn't say. Even worse, you pretend like it's your choice not to quote the Bible when we both know the truth is you can't quote the Bible since nowhere in it does it say what you claim.

Yes it does condemn homosexual sex and homosexual attraction, i already cited the verses, only a fool would claim that a relationship based in homosexual sex and homosexual attraction is somehow allowed.

It is a clownish position. You are a clown.

Nah, only a fool would think the Bible means something it doesn't say.

You are the fool here, by denying common sense. It is nonsensical to suggest that the Bible supports gay relationships like a gay marriage when in condemns homosexual lust and homosexual sex, which is what gay relationships are based in. There doesn't need to be explicit condemnation of a practice that didn't even exist in Palestine 2000 years ago. Logical deduction, use it.

But you clearly aren't serious with this argument, and you know it as well.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Well you don't really have to. Just don't associate with them.

Also, I don't really "support" a lifestyle. I support equal rights and privileges for all American citizens because that is what I was raised to believe America stands for.

Not associating with them isn't really an option, you can face very severe legal and financial consequences for refusing to associate with homosexuals, just look at the six figure fine the bakers in Oregon just got for refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding. Or look at the catholic adoption agencies in certain states that had to close down, lest they be in violation of anti-discrimination laws for not adopting to homosexual couples.

Illinois Catholic Charities to close rather than allow same-sex couples to adopt children - Nation - The Boston Globe

Free and voluntary association is illegal under the law in the United States.

So since I cannot disassociate, I will continue to voice my opposition to the direction the culture is headed, as I have to live in the society as well. I won't be silenced.

I don't believe one has a right to a marriage license, and believe in the conjugal version of marriage. So I will continue to advocate that and voice my opposition to the normalization of a lifestyle I think is anti-social.

I am 24, I think things will shift back in a socially conservative direction in my lifetime.

You're 24??!! Holly crap! You don't have much in common with the majority of your peers. That's for sure. Get with it old sport. We are not going back to a society of bigotry and exclusion . Get real dude>>>>Gezeee

Most of my generation are brainwashed idiots that dont have their shit together on any level. They are in prolonged adolescence with shit jobs that just parrot what social media tells them. But not all of us are like this thankfully, a good amount are disgusted by the pc direction of our society.

Its funny how you boomers try to stay young and relevant. The 60s are over old man, and you aren't far away from the grave, and your degeneracy(your "open relationship" and advocating for corporate social fads like gay marriage) won't keep you from it despite what you think.

I might be close to the grave, but you are already in the grave, morally and socially speaking. I am relevant and you are an anachronism in your own time. If you think that we will go backwards to a society that closets homosexuality you are seriously delusional.


At the core of every argument against same sex marriage is the attitude, a belief that gay folks are fundamentally different than other people. There is a refusal to acknowledge the fact that they are real people with real lives and responsibilities and problems like everyone else.

Opponents of equality talk about tradition, about religion, about the law, about procreation, and oh yes, the sex….they love to talk about the sex as though that was all that gay folks do. They bloviate about how kids need a mom and a dad, but cannot explain how banning same sex marriage will result in more children having a traditional home, why that is important, and reject the fact-indeed will not discuss the fact-that denying gays the right to marry harms children.

They promote inane slippery slope to polygamy, incest, bestiality and whatever without any rational basis or logical argument. However, they can never ever talk about the fact that these are human beings who are profoundly affected by discrimination and the denial of the rights and benefits of marriage. They can only deal with the subject using abstract concepts and logical fallacies. If they dare to humanize the subject, even they might come to see how stupid their arguments are and that’s what they fear the most.

And they love to talk about racial equality and how race is different than sexual orientation, as though by doing so they can claim some moral high ground. The fact is that these are people who have a need to hate. In their own self loathing they need to see themselves as better, as more worthy than someone else. My guess is, that the people who claim to be against racial discrimination but who hate gays are the same people who- a couple of decades ago before gay rights came to the forefront- were segregationists, but knowing that they can’t get away with that any longer, have chosen a new target for their bigotry.

No I am not an anachronism. Civilizations rise and fall, and go through periods of decadence and degeneracy. This linear version of history of the progressive, of "social progress", doesn't bare itself out. Social degeneracy and hyperliberalism does not last for long, they are the last gasps of a dying society. A example in a state of anomie, one of nihilism and atomization. The US wont last forever, this liberal global order if you call it that wont sustain itself financially and socially in the long run. You are on the wrong side of history if you look at any empire, and make no mistake, America is an empire. When this economic and social order collapses, people will revert to more traditional values sets, they always do.

The fact is, those in my generation who hold these nihilistic views only hold them because that is what media and school tell them to do. If right wingers, conservative, christians, traditionalists, whatever you want to call us, controlled the institutions, they would agree with us. 90% of people are complete followers and follow the cultural memes of the institutions. Also, a good percent of people my age don't agree with pc, they just don't care or fear repercussions. The true believers are very few in number.

It is pitiful that you had to live a life abandoned from tradition, in order to keep a false sense of youth, with your cuckold "open relationship". You aren't young in spirit or relevant. You are a holdover from the 60s who time is coming to an end. Your views are just a flash in the pan as far as civilization goes. Right wing traditionalism, nationalism, faith, blood and soil are the human state are the natural state of man. Your rebellion against the natural order will not succeed.

Homosexuals are not like heterosexuals, as the HIV numbers, the sexual partner count, the open relationship rate, the meth use rate indicate. They simply aren't the same, and are not "equal". This sounds nice, but it isn't the reality of the situation.

How can you oppose polygamy or incestuous marriage. If they are all consenting adults, and marriage is a right, who are you to deny them this right and on what grounds?

Did I say anything about opposing polygamy and incest?

 

[Faun]

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

Nah, I'm laughing at you as I watch you claim the Bible means something it doesn't say. Even worse, you pretend like it's your choice not to quote the Bible when we both know the truth is you can't quote the Bible since nowhere in it does it say what you claim.

Yes it does condemn homosexual sex and homosexual attraction, i already cited the verses, only a fool would claim that a relationship based in homosexual sex and homosexual attraction is somehow allowed.

It is a clownish position. You are a clown.

Nah, only a fool would think the Bible means something it doesn't say.

You are the fool here, by denying common sense. It is nonsensical to suggest that the Bible supports gay relationships like a gay marriage when in condemns homosexual lust and homosexual sex, which is what gay relationships are based in. There doesn't need to be explicit condemnation of a practice that didn't even exist in Palestine 2000 years ago. Logical deduction, use it.

But you clearly aren't serious with this argument, and you know it as well.

Yet more you know nothing of. Just as there is no condemnation of two people of the same gender being together in a non-sexual manner; there was no Palestine 2000 years ago. Your entire argument is a figment of your imagination.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Well you don't really have to. Just don't associate with them.

Also, I don't really "support" a lifestyle. I support equal rights and privileges for all American citizens because that is what I was raised to believe America stands for.

Not associating with them isn't really an option, you can face very severe legal and financial consequences for refusing to associate with homosexuals, just look at the six figure fine the bakers in Oregon just got for refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding. Or look at the catholic adoption agencies in certain states that had to close down, lest they be in violation of anti-discrimination laws for not adopting to homosexual couples.

Illinois Catholic Charities to close rather than allow same-sex couples to adopt children - Nation - The Boston Globe

Free and voluntary association is illegal under the law in the United States.

So since I cannot disassociate, I will continue to voice my opposition to the direction the culture is headed, as I have to live in the society as well. I won't be silenced.

I don't believe one has a right to a marriage license, and believe in the conjugal version of marriage. So I will continue to advocate that and voice my opposition to the normalization of a lifestyle I think is anti-social.

I am 24, I think things will shift back in a socially conservative direction in my lifetime.

You're 24??!! Holly crap! You don't have much in common with the majority of your peers. That's for sure. Get with it old sport. We are not going back to a society of bigotry and exclusion . Get real dude>>>>Gezeee

Most of my generation are brainwashed idiots that dont have their shit together on any level. They are in prolonged adolescence with shit jobs that just parrot what social media tells them. But not all of us are like this thankfully, a good amount are disgusted by the pc direction of our society.

Its funny how you boomers try to stay young and relevant. The 60s are over old man, and you aren't far away from the grave, and your degeneracy(your "open relationship" and advocating for corporate social fads like gay marriage) won't keep you from it despite what you think.

I might be close to the grave, but you are already in the grave, morally and socially speaking. I am relevant and you are an anachronism in your own time. If you think that we will go backwards to a society that closets homosexuality you are seriously delusional.


At the core of every argument against same sex marriage is the attitude, a belief that gay folks are fundamentally different than other people. There is a refusal to acknowledge the fact that they are real people with real lives and responsibilities and problems like everyone else.

Opponents of equality talk about tradition, about religion, about the law, about procreation, and oh yes, the sex….they love to talk about the sex as though that was all that gay folks do. They bloviate about how kids need a mom and a dad, but cannot explain how banning same sex marriage will result in more children having a traditional home, why that is important, and reject the fact-indeed will not discuss the fact-that denying gays the right to marry harms children.

They promote inane slippery slope to polygamy, incest, bestiality and whatever without any rational basis or logical argument. However, they can never ever talk about the fact that these are human beings who are profoundly affected by discrimination and the denial of the rights and benefits of marriage. They can only deal with the subject using abstract concepts and logical fallacies. If they dare to humanize the subject, even they might come to see how stupid their arguments are and that’s what they fear the most.

And they love to talk about racial equality and how race is different than sexual orientation, as though by doing so they can claim some moral high ground. The fact is that these are people who have a need to hate. In their own self loathing they need to see themselves as better, as more worthy than someone else. My guess is, that the people who claim to be against racial discrimination but who hate gays are the same people who- a couple of decades ago before gay rights came to the forefront- were segregationists, but knowing that they can’t get away with that any longer, have chosen a new target for their bigotry.

No I am not an anachronism. Civilizations rise and fall, and go through periods of decadence and degeneracy. This linear version of history of the progressive, of "social progress", doesn't bare itself out. Social degeneracy and hyperliberalism does not last for long, they are the last gasps of a dying society. A example in a state of anomie, one of nihilism and atomization. The US wont last forever, this liberal global order if you call it that wont sustain itself financially and socially in the long run. You are on the wrong side of history if you look at any empire, and make no mistake, America is an empire. When this economic and social order collapses, people will revert to more traditional values sets, they always do.

The fact is, those in my generation who hold these nihilistic views only hold them because that is what media and school tell them to do. If right wingers, conservative, christians, traditionalists, whatever you want to call us, controlled the institutions, they would agree with us. 90% of people are complete followers and follow the cultural memes of the institutions. Also, a good percent of people my age don't agree with pc, they just don't care or fear repercussions. The true believers are very few in number.

It is pitiful that you had to live a life abandoned from tradition, in order to keep a false sense of youth, with your cuckold "open relationship". You aren't young in spirit or relevant. You are a holdover from the 60s who time is coming to an end. Your views are just a flash in the pan as far as civilization goes. Right wing traditionalism, nationalism, faith, blood and soil are the human state are the natural state of man. Your rebellion against the natural order will not succeed.

Homosexuals are not like heterosexuals, as the HIV numbers, the sexual partner count, the open relationship rate, the meth use rate indicate. They simply aren't the same, and are not "equal". This sounds nice, but it isn't the reality of the situation.

How can you oppose polygamy or incestuous marriage. If they are all consenting adults, and marriage is a right, who are you to deny them this right and on what grounds?

I have to admit it. I have met my match with you. I have nothing more to say. There is no hope of reaching you. I just don't know how you will get by in the modern world. You are really far out there. Here is someone that you can relate to:

Bradlee Dean Warns America That The 'Gay Agenda' Will 'Pervert All Comprehension' - See more at: Bradlee Dean Warns America That The Gay Agenda Will Pervert All Comprehension Right Wing Watch

Anti-gay activist Bradlee Dean claimed that LGBT people “are not ruled by law” on Monday’s episode of his “Sons of Liberty” radio program. Dean criticized the media for spreading the “gay agenda,” and attempting to “pervert all comprehension” and “confuse the younger generations.”

Dean briefly touched on the recent Supreme Court marriage decision, advising listeners that “nothing is good enough” for the LGBT community. “You’re gonna be destroyed by those you tolerate,” Dean warned, before urging his followers to “hold these people responsible because they are sick in the mind.”

His rant also included his theory that society is “using the Bruce Jenners of the world” to distract Americans from God’s teaching. “We’re telling you to wake up!” Dean shouted, before continuing into a tirade against the LGBT community.

Though not a politician himself, Dean has regularly worked with fellow Minnesotan Michele Bachmann. Dean publicly advocates against LGBT rights, and has previously suggested that gay marriage would usher in another Holocaust.

- See more at: Bradlee Dean Warns America That The Gay Agenda Will Pervert All Comprehension Right Wing Watch

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I don't see what is wrong with having tolerance for them. I really do not understand your objection. You can't go back in time.

I don't see why I should tolerate their deviant sexual behavior(which includes the aforementioned open relationships and high rate of HIV, at 20%), or the overall sexual revolution in general. So I don't understand your support for these lifestyles.
CDC 20 of Gay Men Are HIV-Positive but Nearly Half Don t Know It TIME.com

Social norms shift overtime. Societies go through cycles, from more religious to less so, from more conservative to less so. Societies historically do not go in a linear but instead a cyclical manner.

Do you tolerate the very hetero deviant behavior that brought homosexuals to acceptance? Where are the deviant heteros taking your freedoms? Why do you choose gays to make your stand rather than the deviant heteros who caused this all in the first place? Why has this court decision inspired you all to action? Why did you make so many cakes without question for the deviant heterosexual?

I'll tell you why. Because it's all
bullshit.

You don't believe in freedom in any sense of the word.

I do. Just not in your sense.

No, not in any sense.

If I own a bakery, should I be allowed to not serve a gay wedding?

Not if the PA laws in your state say you must.

 

[ChrisL]

Since gay people are not heterosexuals, I do not see how they affect heterosexual norms. There are also straight couples that have open relationships.

I can't help you if you can't see that the liberalization of sexual norms amongst heterosexuals led to greater toleration of homosexuality amongst significant segments of the heterosexual population.

Not 55% of heterosexual couples.

I don't see what is wrong with having tolerance for them. I really do not understand your objection. You can't go back in time.

I don't see why I should tolerate their deviant sexual behavior(which includes the aforementioned open relationships and high rate of HIV, at 20%), or the overall sexual revolution in general. So I don't understand your support for these lifestyles.
CDC 20 of Gay Men Are HIV-Positive but Nearly Half Don t Know It TIME.com

Social norms shift overtime. Societies go through cycles, from more religious to less so, from more conservative to less so. Societies historically do not go in a linear but instead a cyclical manner.

Well you don't really have to. Just don't associate with them.

Also, I don't really "support" a lifestyle. I support equal rights and privileges for all American citizens because that is what I was raised to believe America stands for.

Not associating with them isn't really an option, you can face very severe legal and financial consequences for refusing to associate with homosexuals, just look at the six figure fine the bakers in Oregon just got for refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding. Or look at the catholic adoption agencies in certain states that had to close down, lest they be in violation of anti-discrimination laws for not adopting to homosexual couples.

Illinois Catholic Charities to close rather than allow same-sex couples to adopt children - Nation - The Boston Globe

Free and voluntary association is illegal under the law in the United States.

So since I cannot disassociate, I will continue to voice my opposition to the direction the culture is headed, as I have to live in the society as well. I won't be silenced.

I don't believe one has a right to a marriage license, and believe in the conjugal version of marriage. So I will continue to advocate that and voice my opposition to the normalization of a lifestyle I think is anti-social.

I am 24, I think things will shift back in a socially conservative direction in my lifetime.

If you cannot treat everyone equally, then you should probably not go into the public accommodation business. Discrimination based upon superstition and fear is not going to be tolerated in our modern society. We are not Islam and we don't treat other citizens as second class citizens. That is just not acceptable. A LOT of Americans do not share your belief system.

24!!! Wow! You are just a kid. That's why you don't understand maybe. Anyhow, you are really outdated and old fashioned. This is not the 1950s and we aren't going back.

 

[Flopper]

No. Nowhere in the 14th amendment is it written that it only refers to rights for former slaves. Learn the actual text of the 14th before making such claims.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

No. Nowhere in the 14th amendment is it written that it only refers to rights for former slaves. Learn the actual text of the 14th before making such claims.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

When was it written asshat? Was QUEER NATION even thought about then, and riddle me this Statfuckingnameis, in over 135 years why take so long to even bring this up? You mean in 135 years EVERYONE but a few cocksuckers were unaware of this?

You seem angry and you seem to think you can insult people and it will somehow bother them, but you fail at it miserably. I am well aware of when the 14th was written and later, ratified, and smart people know of the circumstances leading up to its creation, but it was very deliberately worded to cover more than the issues of personal liberty related to slavery. In other words, the people who penned the 14th showed great foresight.

So, instead of trolling, learn to debate like an adult.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

NO, it wasn't worded to cover ANY OTHER issue....if so show me a link to somewhere back in the late 1860's to 1890's where it is mentioned by anyone of any renown! You're full of crap, and deserve insulting because YOU are insulting!

Heil Hitlery!

If the protection clause in the 14th amendment was meant to cover just freed slaves, then it would have been written using such language and not "any person".

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

No. Nowhere in the 14th amendment is it written that it only refers to rights for former slaves. Learn the actual text of the 14th before making such claims.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

When was it written asshat? Was QUEER NATION even thought about then, and riddle me this Statfuckingnameis, in over 135 years why take so long to even bring this up? You mean in 135 years EVERYONE but a few cocksuckers were unaware of this?

You are really fucking dense Zorro. I addressed this issue with you in post 1377 SCOTUS states cannot ban same sex marriage Page 138 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum . You are playing dumb or your really are that dumb. Which is it.?

 

[Steinlight]

Not associating with them isn't really an option, you can face very severe legal and financial consequences for refusing to associate with homosexuals, just look at the six figure fine the bakers in Oregon just got for refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding. Or look at the catholic adoption agencies in certain states that had to close down, lest they be in violation of anti-discrimination laws for not adopting to homosexual couples.

Illinois Catholic Charities to close rather than allow same-sex couples to adopt children - Nation - The Boston Globe

Free and voluntary association is illegal under the law in the United States.

So since I cannot disassociate, I will continue to voice my opposition to the direction the culture is headed, as I have to live in the society as well. I won't be silenced.

I don't believe one has a right to a marriage license, and believe in the conjugal version of marriage. So I will continue to advocate that and voice my opposition to the normalization of a lifestyle I think is anti-social.

I am 24, I think things will shift back in a socially conservative direction in my lifetime.

You're 24??!! Holly crap! You don't have much in common with the majority of your peers. That's for sure. Get with it old sport. We are not going back to a society of bigotry and exclusion . Get real dude>>>>Gezeee

Most of my generation are brainwashed idiots that dont have their shit together on any level. They are in prolonged adolescence with shit jobs that just parrot what social media tells them. But not all of us are like this thankfully, a good amount are disgusted by the pc direction of our society.

Its funny how you boomers try to stay young and relevant. The 60s are over old man, and you aren't far away from the grave, and your degeneracy(your "open relationship" and advocating for corporate social fads like gay marriage) won't keep you from it despite what you think.

I might be close to the grave, but you are already in the grave, morally and socially speaking. I am relevant and you are an anachronism in your own time. If you think that we will go backwards to a society that closets homosexuality you are seriously delusional.


At the core of every argument against same sex marriage is the attitude, a belief that gay folks are fundamentally different than other people. There is a refusal to acknowledge the fact that they are real people with real lives and responsibilities and problems like everyone else.

Opponents of equality talk about tradition, about religion, about the law, about procreation, and oh yes, the sex….they love to talk about the sex as though that was all that gay folks do. They bloviate about how kids need a mom and a dad, but cannot explain how banning same sex marriage will result in more children having a traditional home, why that is important, and reject the fact-indeed will not discuss the fact-that denying gays the right to marry harms children.

They promote inane slippery slope to polygamy, incest, bestiality and whatever without any rational basis or logical argument. However, they can never ever talk about the fact that these are human beings who are profoundly affected by discrimination and the denial of the rights and benefits of marriage. They can only deal with the subject using abstract concepts and logical fallacies. If they dare to humanize the subject, even they might come to see how stupid their arguments are and that’s what they fear the most.

And they love to talk about racial equality and how race is different than sexual orientation, as though by doing so they can claim some moral high ground. The fact is that these are people who have a need to hate. In their own self loathing they need to see themselves as better, as more worthy than someone else. My guess is, that the people who claim to be against racial discrimination but who hate gays are the same people who- a couple of decades ago before gay rights came to the forefront- were segregationists, but knowing that they can’t get away with that any longer, have chosen a new target for their bigotry.

No I am not an anachronism. Civilizations rise and fall, and go through periods of decadence and degeneracy. This linear version of history of the progressive, of "social progress", doesn't bare itself out. Social degeneracy and hyperliberalism does not last for long, they are the last gasps of a dying society. A example in a state of anomie, one of nihilism and atomization. The US wont last forever, this liberal global order if you call it that wont sustain itself financially and socially in the long run. You are on the wrong side of history if you look at any empire, and make no mistake, America is an empire. When this economic and social order collapses, people will revert to more traditional values sets, they always do.

The fact is, those in my generation who hold these nihilistic views only hold them because that is what media and school tell them to do. If right wingers, conservative, christians, traditionalists, whatever you want to call us, controlled the institutions, they would agree with us. 90% of people are complete followers and follow the cultural memes of the institutions. Also, a good percent of people my age don't agree with pc, they just don't care or fear repercussions. The true believers are very few in number.

It is pitiful that you had to live a life abandoned from tradition, in order to keep a false sense of youth, with your cuckold "open relationship". You aren't young in spirit or relevant. You are a holdover from the 60s who time is coming to an end. Your views are just a flash in the pan as far as civilization goes. Right wing traditionalism, nationalism, faith, blood and soil are the human state are the natural state of man. Your rebellion against the natural order will not succeed.

Homosexuals are not like heterosexuals, as the HIV numbers, the sexual partner count, the open relationship rate, the meth use rate indicate. They simply aren't the same, and are not "equal". This sounds nice, but it isn't the reality of the situation.

How can you oppose polygamy or incestuous marriage. If they are all consenting adults, and marriage is a right, who are you to deny them this right and on what grounds?

Did I say anything about opposing polygamy and incest?

You said it was an inane slippery slope to suggest marriage rights for polygamists and incestuous couples. You brought it up to begin with.

So you support the right to marry for polygamists and incestuous couples?

 

[Steinlight]

Your laughing just exposes you as thick headed. The again, your unironic profile picture exposes that as well. It doesn't prove your non-point that gay marriage is somehow allowed in the Bible because it isn't mentioned specifically. The claim that you, a clownish shitlib internet poster are more aware of Biblical teachings than say the Pope on the issue of gay marriage, and got it right and where he got it wrong, is absurd on its face.

It just proves you lack linear thinking skills, and cannot deduce that gay marriage is not allowed, given that homosexual lust and sex are condemned, and thus relationships based in them are as well. Not something to be proud of.

Nah, I'm laughing at you as I watch you claim the Bible means something it doesn't say. Even worse, you pretend like it's your choice not to quote the Bible when we both know the truth is you can't quote the Bible since nowhere in it does it say what you claim.

Yes it does condemn homosexual sex and homosexual attraction, i already cited the verses, only a fool would claim that a relationship based in homosexual sex and homosexual attraction is somehow allowed.

It is a clownish position. You are a clown.

Nah, only a fool would think the Bible means something it doesn't say.

You are the fool here, by denying common sense. It is nonsensical to suggest that the Bible supports gay relationships like a gay marriage when in condemns homosexual lust and homosexual sex, which is what gay relationships are based in. There doesn't need to be explicit condemnation of a practice that didn't even exist in Palestine 2000 years ago. Logical deduction, use it.

But you clearly aren't serious with this argument, and you know it as well.

Yet more you know nothing of. Just as there is no condemnation of two people of the same gender being together in a non-sexual manner; there was no Palestine 2000 years ago. Your entire argument is a figment of your imagination.

Now your argument is getting sillier by the minute, suggesting that gay marriage isn't about sexual attraction between two of the same sex.

Now you are getting caught up in a clever silly argument about whether the region during the time of Jesus was called Israel, Judea, Palestine, Syria, whatever. That isn't the point. The point is, there was no such thing as homosexual marriage in that region at that time. So to suggest they have to explicitly prohibit something that didn't even exist in that place at that time, or they support it, is ridiculous.

 

[Steinlight]

I don't see why I should tolerate their deviant sexual behavior(which includes the aforementioned open relationships and high rate of HIV, at 20%), or the overall sexual revolution in general. So I don't understand your support for these lifestyles.
CDC 20 of Gay Men Are HIV-Positive but Nearly Half Don t Know It TIME.com

Social norms shift overtime. Societies go through cycles, from more religious to less so, from more conservative to less so. Societies historically do not go in a linear but instead a cyclical manner.

Do you tolerate the very hetero deviant behavior that brought homosexuals to acceptance? Where are the deviant heteros taking your freedoms? Why do you choose gays to make your stand rather than the deviant heteros who caused this all in the first place? Why has this court decision inspired you all to action? Why did you make so many cakes without question for the deviant heterosexual?

I'll tell you why. Because it's all
bullshit.

You don't believe in freedom in any sense of the word.

I do. Just not in your sense.

No, not in any sense.

If I own a bakery, should I be allowed to not serve a gay wedding?

Not if the PA laws in your state say you must.

I understand what the law says. This isn't an issue of law, this is an issue of freedom. You are claiming you support personal freedom. Yet you support laws that prohibit free association.